CONCORD – A group of commercial ratepayers filed a state Supreme Court appeal yesterday aimed at requiring the Public Utilities Commission to review the cost of mercury reduction equipment at the state's largest coal-fired power plant.
The work at Public Service of New Hampshire's plant in Bow was supposed to cost $250 million when a law mandating it passed in 2007. Since then the price has nearly doubled, to $457 million. When finished, the work will cut mercury emissions by 80 percent.
Stonyfield Farms President Gary Hirshberg, who leads the ratepayers group, said the decision to make the investment was the right one at the time. But he said that in the two years since, costs have surged and a wide array of alternatives has emerged.
"Our ratepayer group does not believe the New Hampshire Legislature intended to approve the scrubber, no matter what the cost," Hirshberg said. "This is not a damnation of this plant yet. We don't know enough."
He wants the PUC to determine the true cost of keeping the plant up to date, to evaluate alternatives and then to decide if the project should proceed.
PUC declined a request to review the project this fall. It said the law ordering the work stated explicitly that the installation is in the public interest.
PSNH spokesman Martin Murray said the work should continue to move ahead toward construction next spring.
"We don't see any necessity for delay with what was a legislative mandate,'' he said.
Lynn Tillotson, PSNH technical business manager, said the company has already signed contracts for half the project. The $457 million price tag is set, engineering is complete and preliminary groundwork has begun. Work on a foundation and smokestacks is set to begin March 1, Tillotson said.
A study the ratepayers funded concluded it may cost from three to six times as much as PSNH estimates to continue running the plant, because of other changes that may follow. PSNH says the cost of the mercury work will add three-tenths of a cent per kilowatt hour, or $1.65 a month to a bill for 500 kwh.
Kenneth Colburn, principal of Symbiotic Strategies and a former state air resources specialist, said higher regulatory thresholds for mercury reductions, new CO2 standards, cooling system changes and the cost of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiatives will compound the expense of keeping the 40-year-old plant in service. The final bill for improvements to the Bow plant could hit nearly $3 billion, he said.
Sen. Harold Janeway, D-Webster, said he is sponsoring a bill to require PUC review. He said it makes sense to take another look, given changes in costs and information since the law passed.
"We don't invest today based on what we knew two years ago," he said.
Lisa Shapiro, economist with Gallagher, Callahan and Gartrell in Concord and PSNH consultant, said it may not be realistic for the ratepayer group to cite all possible extra regulatory costs as reason for delay.
If the eventual cost is $2 billion for PSNH's single plant, the national cost would be close to $1 trillion, said Shapiro, who is also chair of the New Hampshire Retirement System. CO2 standards would affect every power plant, no matter what fuel it uses, she said.
Hirshberg's group said PSNH needs to look to renewable sources of energy and alternative fuels to replace coal. Shapiro answered that work on the Bow plant does not prevent a gradual shift toward cleaner technology or more emphasis on conservation.
"It doesn't have to be an either/or situation," she said.
Source: unionleader.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment