A Regrettable Choice for Michigan

You may have read that Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm has decided to delay the process of reviewing air permits for the construction of coal-generated power plants in her state.

This is regrettable.

As American automakers shift to manufacturing plug-in hybrids to keep pace with President Obama’s challenge to put a million of these vehicles on the road, Michigan will require a robust supply of baseload electricity.

And renewable resources such as wind and solar alone will not be sufficient to meet that growing need.

Gov. Granholm also set a goal to reduce the carbon footprint associated with power generation in her state. That goal can be best met through deploying new technologies that capture and store CO2, not through mandates that would lessen Michigan’s reliance on affordable, domestic energy resources like coal – which currently provides more than 60 percent of Michigan’s power.

There are currently eight new coal plants being proposed in Michigan. Each of these projects provides an opportunity to create jobs for Michigan workers and ensure that electricity production keeps pace with the state’s projected energy needs. These plants can be retrofitted with advanced technologies to capture and store CO2. In fact, given the time necessary to permit and construct a new power plant today, it’s possible that these technologies would become available for deployment at or very near the time these new plants are put into operation.

Just like the rest of country, Michigan’s future energy needs will be best met by maintaining a diverse portfolio of energy resources. But even with the expanded use of renewables, coal will still need to play a significant role in meeting those needs.

Comments

[Al]

What is Granholm thinking? How is MI supposed to make a comeback if she's going to put restrictions on such a fundamental element of business, not to mention what's going to happen to rates in Michigan.

[lvh]

I am all for clean coal and
I receive your email regularly but I am not convinced Obama is on your
side. I am more than willing
to wait and see.

[Brad Johnson]

I'm confused. Why is ACCCE supporting dirty coal plants? I thought it only supports "clean coal."

[Megan at ACCCE]

Brad,

I’m not quite sure what you mean. Michigan’s proposed plant would be one of the cleanest in the nation, fitted with the newest technologies to reduce harmful emissions.

Placing a moratorium on the building of new plants won’t stop the use of coal to generate electricity—we’ll just be using older, less technologically advanced plants to do it. Even without CCS technology, power plants being developed today are far more efficient and emit far fewer pollutants than the older facilities they are to replace.

[KGrandia]

You write: "These plants can be retrofitted with advanced technologies to capture and store CO2. In fact, given the time necessary to permit and construct a new power plant today, it’s possible that these technologies would become available for deployment at or very near the time these new plants are put into operation."

What year would that be?

[Ralph Short]

It is not only unbelievable that Granholm is delaying the permits it is also noteworthy the main stream media doesn't even bother to mention it.

The reality is Granholm and her fellow travelers are not interested in us being energy independent if it means losing the votes of her environmental leftist base.

I wonder how many voters in Michigan are aware of her duplicity.

[ken]

No such thing as clean coal. This will contaminate everything underground starting with water tables. Dumping anything in the ground to be filtered will be a disaster.

[Megan at ACCCE]

KGrandia,

You rightly point out that carbon capture and sequestration is currently available at the research and demonstration phase. However, the same is true for renewables in a baseload capacity. Today, wind and solar are great sources for peaking power, but simply cannot function as baseload power and thus, cannot replace coal.

The point is that commercially-viable technologies for these energy sources are a very real possibility for the future. And I hope we see them come to fruition—we’re going to need all of our domestic resources to meet our growing energy demand, strengthen national security and keep our commitment to the environment.

[Megan at ACCCE]

Ken,

Could you provide some substantiation for your claim? We're all for a spirited energy debate, but we prefer to work with facts.