My comments to the DEQ on April 14 against the proposed 930 MW coal plant at Consumers’ Karn-Weadock complex in Hampton Township caused emotive reactions from some in the audience late that night.  Hoots and boos opposed my remarks against the draft air permit.  These reactions were based on beliefs created by Consumers in its own interest, and intended to hide important truths.

Consumers did not tell its supporters that its extensive written application to the DEQ stated that neither the new coal plant nor the construction of it would have any measurable or appreciable effect on the local economy.  Yet most of Consumers’ supporters believe that the coal plant would increase their job prospects.

Consumers did not report to its supporters that the coal industry has, in the past 20 years, reduced its human labor force by half.    And it did not tell them how many people from the local area could be expected to get jobs constructing the coal plant and operating it.  Many specialized workers would come from other areas.  

Consumers has not discussed the fact that development of renewable sources of power will bring many times more jobs than coal plants.  Nor did it explain to its supporters that wind turbines employ about four times as many maintenance workers as coal plants for each megawatt of electricity that is produced.

Consumers does not acknowledge that the building of this large, new coal plant will eliminate reason to develop further renewable sources of energy in the Saginaw Valley and the Thumb.  Nor does it mention the fact that the East side of the Saginaw Bay is one of the finest locations for wind turbines in the nation.  It neglects the fact that even under cloudy skies, photovoltaic cells produce electricity at about 40% of their capacity.

Consumers never mentioned the fact that it succeeded, last fall, in changing MI regulatory law to give it a legally guaranteed rate base.  Nor did it explain to its supporters that its own recommendation to raise electric rates couldn’t be refused by the Public Utilities Commission unless the ratepayers protest the proposed raises.  Nor did it explain that it is these two realities that give Consumers one of the very best prospects for success in its application. 

Consumers has not informed its supporters that they are paying for financing the new steel sea wall it is building on the Saginaw River.  Nor has it pointed out that all new expenses at Karn-Weadock can now, under the new law, be easily passed on to you and me, the ratepayers. 

Consumers does not mention to its supporters the fact that its enormous and growing piles of coal ash at Karn-Weadock are leeching toxic ash with poisons such as lead, mercury, arsenic and radioactive elements into our water supply.  Nor does it explain the more than half-dozen secret, un-disclosed variances it has obtained from the DEQ for its environmental failures over past decades.  It makes no comment on its need to negotiate in secret with the DEQ over present deviances.

Consumers have not responded in public to the obvious deficiency in its application to the DEQ regarding the air, soil and water samples it submitted.  They did not come from the east side of Karn-Weadock or from the Saginaw Bay.  All samples submitted for its permit came from west of the complex, up-wind, and up-stream in the Kawkawlin River.  Even DEQ officials acknowledged that these samples are not adequately representative of the pollution being caused by the huge, old Karn-Weadock complex. 

Supporters stated repeatedly, at the public comments hearing, that the new coal plant would replace the older coal-burning units at Karn-Weadock.  In fact, Consumers’ application stated no plans to close those units, despite its published acknowledgement that electric demand in our area is declining.

Consumers has worked and invested for years to promote a new coal plant.  Although its actual expenditures remain undisclosed, the company has clearly spent millions of dollars in development.  Its application with the DEQ runs over 1700 pages in length, is full of technical and financial data, and took years of work by a paid team of engineers and managers.  Beyond this is the repeated and expensive travel, lobbying with government officials at all levels, receptions, T-shirts, baseball caps and a thousand yard signs.

Opposing Consumers locally is Citizens Exploring Clean Energy (CECE), which receives volunteer help from the Sierra Club, the local Lone Tree Council, and Midland CARES.  CECE is a small, but growing group of citizens that began meeting in March of 2008.  This group has no membership fees, no income, no budget.  It meets at the Wirt Library at 6 PM on the second Tuesday of the summer months.  About 15 citizens usually attend the meetings that last crisp one-and-a-half hours.   Education is the primary goal of CECE and its members.  

At the hearings, Consumers’ supporters presented fiction as if it were fact.  One man stated that a friend told him that Bay County had lower incidences of respiratory diseases than other counties.  Information from local departments of health presented by a nurse revealed the opposite, and she was not cowed by the rude insults and catcalls that came out as she strode to the podium.  Later, a retired engineer produced Michigan Department of Health information showing that, in some cases, respiratory diseases and ailments are almost twice as high in Bay County as in comparably sized counties without coal plants.  

A recent newspaper poll indicates that more and more citizens are aware of the abusive nature of Consumers plans for the new coal plant.  Only if they join in opposing compliance by the Public Service Commission can we stop the momentum of big money and big coal. 

Editor’s Reply:

Thanks for your thoughtful letter regarding the fallacies and mis-information propagated by Consumers Energy, along with numerous civic entities, about the myth of clean coal and job creation.

30 years ago Consumers attempted similar tactics with their plans to construct the Midland Nuclear power plant. Despite the efforts of hundreds of concerned citizens, it took then attorney general Frank Kelley to successfully file an injunction against Consumers for rate fraud to suspend the project.

Unfortunately, courageous legislators and government officials are in short supply these days.  Outrage needs to be displayed and direct action employed, especially with these planned coal plants designed to benefit only the narrow self-interest of the financial powers constructing them while further degrading our physical health in the process.

One of the most critical topics The Review intends to address in future issues is the ‘coal-energy/carbon capture myth we are diving into. Carbon credits are designed to make it too expensive for utilities to pollute. If you keep burning coal, you have to capture it somehow. However, there is no easy way to do this and will probably never be because it is so energy intensive that you need to burn much more coal to sequester all that CO2 anyway.

So our brilliant lawmakers came up with the notion of creating another option allowing a utility to simply ‘pay for the credits’. This is great for increasing tax revenues, but does nothing for global warming.

As you touch upon, in Michigan the whole idea of carbon capture is a sham. The state legislature last year enacted a law that guarantees that Consumers and DTE will always have at least 90% of the energy market in Michigan. Even if alternative clean energy can be developed in Michigan, there will be almost no customer base for it.  This is part of the reason LS Energy cancelled plans for the Midland Plant recently.

The law also makes it clear that rates will be approved based upon expenses. So no matter what Consumers spends on boondoggles like this Bay County expansion that is not needed, they will get their money back.

And once again, the public suffers.