Big Stone II won't be built
May 11, 2008
A proposed coal plant in Milbank, South Dakota, near the Minnesota border, was struck down by two Minnesota administrative law judges on Friday, May 9. They said that the Big Stone II partnership didn't prove that transmission lines were needed and didn't show that less expensive conservation measure and renewable energy could not meet demand for additional electricity for South Dakota and Minnesota.
Environmental groups claim that burning coal contributes to global warming and carbon emissions that impose higher costs in the future. Apparently, the utilities that formed the partnership didn't demonstrate that they considered other possibilities to obtain power from renewable resources. And, these groups point to the poor investment in coal-fired plants because pollution cleanup would cost much more in the future.
How does this decision affect the Construction Bulletin area? Obviously, no jobs will be created and our energy demand won't be met. What have I missed? Please tell me the specifices in your local communities.
Posted by Ivy Chang on May 11, 2008 | Comments (0)
