US DOE draft EIS says all proposed FutureGen plant sites suitable
Washington (Platts)--25May2007
platts.com
Any of the four sites under consideration to host the US Department of
energy's proposed near-zero emissions coal-fired power plant would be
suitable, a draft environmental impact statement released by the agency on
Friday has concluded.
The 1,800-page draft EIS lays out the analysis done on each site of the
environmental characteristics applicable to the so-called FutureGen project.
DOE and its industry partners will select a preferred site for the plant in
September. The plant would be a 275-MW integrated gasification combined-cycle
power plant with carbon capture and sequestration capabilities. The project is
seen as a critical element in DOE's program to develop technology to allow the
continued use of coal with little or no carbon emissions.
"DOE's finalization and release of the DEIS is a major milestone as it
keeps this project moving forward at a fast pace to develop this much needed,
first-of-a-kind, research and development project," Michael Mudd, CEO of the
FutureGen Alliance, the industry consortium putting up the private sector
share of the money, said in a statement. "With the issue of climate change at
the top of the Congress' domestic agenda...FutureGen and its continued
progress towards advancing new technologies such as carbon capture and
sequestration is more important than ever before."
The project is slated to cost $1.8 billion and officials are estimating
that the plant will generate $300 million in electricity sales. DOE is
expected contribute more than than $1 billion toward the project and the
industry group will provide nearly $400 million.
DOE will hold a 45-day comment period on the draft and will schedule
public meetings on the document at each of the sites under consideration for
the plant. They are Mattoon and Tuscola, in Illinois, and in Jewett and Odessa
in Texas. The department hopes to publish the final EIS this summer.
Among the issues the draft considered were water availability, impacts on
air quality, aesthetics and transportation and traffic.
Megan Doern, a spokeswoman for the Alliance, said the draft EIS provided
no indication of which site had the upper hand, adding that considerations
such as state tax incentives and indemnification from legal liability at each
of the sites were not considered in the draft EIS.
--Daniel Whitten, daniel_whitten@platts.com |
