Our Pitiful Electric System

This article was in the St. John Source today about plans to burn petcoke to produce electricity. You can see this article and others at www.stjohnsource.com.

Comments -- We are in a very sunny, very windy area or the world, with access to ocean currents and hydro-thermal energy. What in the world are we doing trying to justify burning of petcoke?

Anyway, here is the article. The people supporting petcoke are beyond belief.

========================================================

Pet Coke Fight Moves to Senate
By Bill Kossler — February 24, 2010

Proponents and opponents dug in their heels Tuesday at a Senate hearing on the pros and cons of planned waste-to-energy and petroleum-coke-powered electric plants.
Last summer, the V.I. Water and Power Authority and V.I. Waste Management Authority entered into agreements with Alpine Energy Group (AEG) for the construction of two power plants - one on St. Croix's south shore by Hovensa and one in Bovoni on St. Thomas.
The plan is to reduce energy costs in the territory by replacing expensive oil-fired generators and solve the territory's mounting waste problems by generating power from pelletized municipal refuse and cheap petroleum coke—a waste by-product of the Hovensa oil refinery.
The issue before the Senate is whether or not to approve leases to AEG on government land on St. Thomas. But the day-long hearing of the Economic Development, Energy and Technology Committee covered the broader question of the advisability of using petroleum coke and not the lease agreements. WAPA, WMA and AEG officials argued the plan saves money, provides base power production necessary to permit solar and wind to be included in the mix and was the only solid, real proposal by a company actually likely to deliver. Environmentalists were inalterably opposed to petroleum coke on principal, speaking little of price or practicality.
Though his agency is not a party to the contracts, Planning and Natural Resources Commissioner Robert Mathes testified strongly in support of the AEG plan, arguing that closing the existing landfills was a much more pressing environmental problem.
“Ask yourself: isn't it better to know that a waste-to-energy facility will undergo rigorous permitting and comprehensive monitoring than continue to live with unregulated dumps that are ticking environmental time bombs?” Mathes said. "How many Crucians remember the many years when a smoky and acrid odor would literally overwhelm the senses upon deplaning at Hamilton/Rohlsen airport? And how many St. Thomians, especially the Bovoni and Bolongo Bay residents, recall the odor and fly problems that persistently affected their communities for decades? "
Steffen Larsen, a renewable energy activist whose home is entirely powered by solar and wind energy, argued WAPA rejected what he portrayed as a much cleaner and cheaper proposal for burning trash to generate power from a company called Bioenergy Inc.
According to Larsen, that company's proposal was leaked to him by unnamed WAPA employees. WAPA was not disclosing the details of the 13 or so proposals that were not selected, Larsen said.
"I will leave you to wonder why," he said. Later, Larsen held up pictures of President Barack Obama and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, saying the decision on AEG was a choice between the two.
When asked by Sen. Louis Hill why Bioenergy was not selected, WMA Director May Adams Cornwall said her agency rejected a proposal from Bioenergy in 2007 because the technology was unproven and the company's management raised some red flags. To meet WMA's conditions, the technology had to have a track record of at least five years of ongoing operation inside the United States. Instead, it had never been used in the United States at all, though there was some use in Europe, she said.
"To compare, AEG's fluidized bed technology has been in successful use for over 30 years," she said. According to Cornwall, WMA was also concerned about the management structure of the company and "unsatisfactory" answers submitted to WMA questions.
"It seemed their own representatives were not agreeing with one another in the presence of my staff," she said.
WAPA Executive Director Hugo Hodge Jr. said similar concerns eliminated Bioenergy from final consideration at WAPA, including offering to supply specific power plant equipment that was long obsolete, apparently not knowing much about the industry.
"It is a bad signal if they are offering way-old technology that does not even exist anymore," he said. As to the technology, he said it looked interesting but was too high a risk.
"On the mainland, a utility can take that risk with technology because they have the larger grid to fall back on," he said. "On a small island, we don't have that grid as backup."
Michael Baron of the St. Croix Environmental Association argued the plan should be scrapped in favor of wind.
""Experts … say that utility-scale wind power to WAPA could take just two years after their wind studies are complete," said Baron. "So while we plan to build dirty petroleum coke plants, we could have clean energy from renewable sources in the same three-and-a-half years as the Alpine scheme," Baron said. He would use the word "scheme" nine more times in the course of his five minutes of testimony.
Wind and solar are both intermittent and by their nature cannot provide the base power production needed by residents, Hodge reiterated in response.
"Once we have met this core requirement, we can then add solar and wind to fill in our requirements as available," he said.
Sen. Nereida "Nellie" Rivera-O'Reilly pursued a line of questions about how ash from the plant would be stored and disposed of. AEG Vice President Don Hurd said the ash would be sold or given to cement makers on- and off-island and if it could not be sold, AEG was bound by its contract to ship all of it out of the territory. Before being shipped off, the ash would be stored out of the wind and weather in metal silos with vacuum systems to keep dust in, according to Hurd.
Hill, Committee Chairman Craig Barshinger, Sen. Sammuel Sanes and others questioned Hodge and the other testifiers extensively on whether there was any way to only use trash and eliminate the pet coke component. Hodge said the territory did not produce enough trash to provide for a major part of WAPA's base-load power production.
Trash could indeed be brought in from elsewhere, reducing the need for pet coke. But having a long-term agreement in place with Hovensa for the pet coke made the entire project's finances steady and predictable, enabling lenders and investors to sign off on contracts to finance building the plants, while there was no guaranteed source of trash at a predictable price upon which investors could rely, he said.
More generally, many alternatives being suggested captured the imagination, but were not based on real science, numbers or actual viable proposals, Hodge said.
"They are all options, but not unless someone submits an actual, concrete bid," he said. "OTEC [ocean thermal energy conversion] is one I have a great feeling for myself. But it is not proven. There is no model running anywhere right now .… Ocean-current generation I think is a great idea; it can work. But there are problems with environmental fouling of the propellers."
In sum, Hodge said he wants to support an entirely green, alternative power system, but the actual science, dollar figures and proposals from viable companies all pointed toward the AEG agreement, with wind and solar added into the mix once the grid is upgraded and the base power supply is secure.
"We have to at some point be honest with ourselves," he said.
The hearing was an information-gathering session, with no lease or bill under immediate consideration. No votes were taken. Present were Sens. Hill, Barshinger, Sanes, Rivera-O'Reilly, Usie Richards and Neville James.