• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Energy Northwest Mulls $1 Billion Power Plant Project

Posted on: Tuesday, 12 July 2005, 00:00 CDT

Jul. 11--Energy Northwest is pitching a roughly $1 billion 600-megawatt Western Washington power plant that would be primarily fueled by gasified coal and coal-like petroleum coke.

As envisioned, it would be cleaner than a standard coal plant, dirtier than a natural gas-fired plant and more versatile than either and able to switch fuels to whichever is cheaper.

It would come online in late 2011 under the timeline being floated by the utility.

It's a bold move for the 19-member public power consortium, which was formed as the Washington Public Power Supply System in 1957 to build and operate power plants. The proposed project, if it were to go forward, would be its most ambitious since its failed effort to build five nuclear plants in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Only one project was completed and the consortium left behind a $2.25 billion default on bonds for two of them.

Now, with its image mostly rehabilitated -- thanks to healthy bond ratings, its interest in environmentally friendly power plants and its mostly solid reputation as a nuclear operator -- Energy Northwest believes it can help meet new energy demands that may emerge over the next decade.

"We're talking about a significant amount of new electricity being needed," said Dan Porter, an Energy Northwest project manager.

The consortium is considering two undisclosed sites in Western Washington, where a new plant would be closer to power demand centers. It hopes to get the go-ahead from member utilities this summer to begin signing up customers.

Energy Northwest envisions giving public utilities first rights to the output of one 300-megawatt turbine and selling the output of the second to other buyers.

The project, officially called the Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle project, would generate electricity by blending coal and petroleum coke -- a byproduct of oil refining -- and mixing it with water to form a slurry. The addition of oxygen, pressure and the heat they would create ultimately would convert the slurry into a gas that would be used to fuel the combustion turbines.

It's a technology used in only a few demonstration projects in the United States but is more common overseas.

Byproducts include sulfur, which could be sold to aid in the manufacturing of fertilizer or for other uses, a sand-like slag that could be used in road beds or landfills covers and mercury that would have to be disposed of.

While sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions would be comparable to a modern gas plant, carbon emissions would be twice as much, although still less than traditional coal plants.

The project would be built with a covered storage site capable of holding a 30-day supply of coal and petroleum coke, which could be brought in by train.

Environmentalists don't care for the project. Sara Patton, director of the green-leaning Northwest Energy Coalition, said she'd support such plants only as a replacement for existing coal plants.

"Energy Northwest has been doing some pretty great stuff," she said, referring to the utility's activities in wind, solar and biomass energy projects. "I just hope they can see their way to stick with that."

"Coal is really a step backward," said Patrick Mazza, research director of Olympia-based Climate Solutions.

Both acknowledge carbon emissions could become a moot point if a way is found to sequester them underground rather than releasing them into the atmosphere.

That would be the hallmark potential of an emerging technology. And Energy Northwest would plan to spend somewhere near $200 million to make the plant "sequestration ready."

But though research continues, no method has been developed yet to effectively sequester emissions.

"If we were able to work out the sequestration issue, it would generate a significant advantage over even natural gas," said Jeff King, who tracks power plant development for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. But until then, potential customers aren't likely to give that much weight as they decide whether they'd be interested, he said.

If a viable sequestration method were developed, it would cost more to begin using it. Some utilities may be willing to pay more for that, but "the question is how much more," said Energy Northwest spokesman Brad Peck.

The organization has been exploring the project assuming the region's recession-driven power surplus is nearly eaten up, that power demands are increasing at a rate of 2 percent to 3 percent a year, and that the plant's power will be about 30 percent cheaper than power generated by gas plants.

The Northwest Power and Conservation Council, charged with balancing the needs for fish and power in the region, isn't so sure about any of them. Terry Morlan, the council's power planning director, said power demands are increasing by about 1.5 percent a year after dropping by 20 percent in 2000 and 2001.

"We haven't covered that 20 percent by any means," he said.

And King said it's not entirely certain that coal will remain significantly cheaper than gas over time. It's possible high natural gas prices could be reeled in if liquefied natural gas were to enter the market.

The proposed generating station still could run on natural gas if it were cheaper, but not quite as efficiently, Porter said.

He said Energy Northwest is merely fulfilling its mission by bringing new power generation options to its member utilities.

What interest those utilities will have is not clear. Benton PUD Manager Jim Sanders said utilities will want to know whether the Bonneville Power Administration will be able to provide new electricity to meet their growth and whether buying from the proposed project would displace power they already get from the BPA.

Nonetheless "it's a role Energy Northwest should be playing," Sanders said.

-----

To see more of the Tri-City Herald, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.tri-cityherald.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, Tri-City Herald, Kennewick, Wash.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

Source: Tri-City Herald

More News in this Category