E-Mail
Print
tool name
closeA year after Power4Georgians applied for permits to build and operate a new coal-fired power plant in Washington County, the state Environmental Protection Division is still deliberating.
Originally, EPD officials had said they might have permits ready for public comment by the end of 2008, but it has taken a bit longer. The agency plans to hold a public meeting in Sandersville, probably in March or April, said Thomas Smith, public affairs coordinator for the EPD’s air protection branch.
At the meeting, the EPD would share information with the public about the permit requirements that are being considered before issuing a draft. Once draft permits are created, a public hearing and public comment period would be held before a final decision about permitting the plant.
Power4Georgians, the company behind the project, is a consortium of 10 electric cooperatives that would divvy up the 850 megawatts of power to be produced daily at Plant Washington. The company says it will bring 130 jobs to a county that has lost much of its employment base in recent years as the kaolin industry eroded.
Dean Alford, whose company, Allied Energy Services, is developing Plant Washington, said Power4Georgians has tweaked the design to accommodate EPD comments but has made no major changes.
“EPD is being very thorough, and they’re asking all the right questions,” he said. “We hope the public meeting will be in the near future.”
POWER4Georgians needs at least six environmental permits for the plant: an air pollution permit, groundwater and surface water withdrawal permits, a water discharge permit for used water that goes back into the Oconee River, a permit for the storm water running off from the plant, and a permit for storing the solid waste such as gypsum and fly ash generated by the plant.
COAL ASH AND GYPSUM
Fly ash is a byproduct of the coal-burning process, and gypsum is produced when scrubbers remove certain types of pollution emitted from a plant’s smokestacks. Both materials can be sold for use in other products, although some ash is too low-quality for this use.
Nationwide, attention was turned to coal ash after several large Tennessee Valley Authority coal-ash spills in the past six weeks. The most damaging was from a wet coal-ash pond in Harriman, Tenn., which has prompted congressional hearings.
“We are very, very worried about coal ash,” said Katherine Cummings, president of the Fall Line Alliance for Clean Energy, a local group formed to oppose the plant. “We worry about leakage from the landfill and it being carried on air.” She said she has heard from some Washington County residents for the first time because of their concerns about the ash after the Harriman spill.
The group Georgians for Smart Energy, which formed a few months ago to fight new coal-fired power plants, has issued a statement warning that the Harriman disaster could happen in Washington County. Midge Sweet, the campaign director, said Plant Washington has a similar proximity to aquifers, although not as close to rivers. She said the plant’s permit application is short on details about coal-ash storage.
But Jeff Cown, manager of the EPD solid waste program, said Power4Georgians’ permit application calls for handling coal ash dry. He said the EPD has not yet started examining the design of the solid waste disposal area, which would include specifications such as how high the coal ash could be stacked. The EPD is still evaluating the site’s soil type to determine whether it is suitable for solid waste disposal.
“I haven’t seen a fatal flaw so far,” he said. “We’re close to a draft that would explain the limitations.”
Alford said the plant won’t use ash ponds like the one in Harriman. The ash and gypsum will have a clay-like texture and be transported by truck from the plant to the adjacent storage area, he said. The area where the material is placed would be lined, unlike the old ash stacks and ash ponds at existing coal-fired plants. Alford said the ash would be sprayed with a solution used in the industry to prevent dust.
Alford said the company is required by law to plan for 30 years’ worth of storage space, so 300 acres of the plant’s 1,200-acre site is being set aside for gypsum and ash stacks that could be as much as 10 feet deep and 10 more feet above ground level.
However, Alford said it’s unlikely that much ash and gypsum will be stored there. Power4Georgians is designing its plant to produce commercial-grade ash and gypsum with the intent of reselling it all for use in other products such as cement and gypsum board, he said.
EPA and industry data indicate that most coal-fired power plants resell less than half the ash they generate. In Georgia, older plants either don’t have the scrubbers that produce gypsum or have only recently installed them.
Alford said Washington County leaders would like Power4Georgians to draw a company to open a Washington County facility to process the gypsum or ash near the source.
“Two of the largest gypsum board manufacturers in the state get their gypsum from Nova Scotia, and they’re very excited about the idea of getting it from a closer source,” Alford said. “There’s a lot of interest in what we have.”
PARTICLE POLLUTION AND CARBON DIOXIDE
Local, state and regional environmental groups have lined up against Plant Washington. Locals tend to voice the most concern about the plant’s potential effect on their water supply, while others focus on the effects of coal-fired power plants on smog, soot and global warming.
The EPD does not intend to require limits on carbon dioxide emissions from the plant, Smith said, although that policy has at least temporarily derailed another coal-fired power plant in Early County.
The EPD had issued permits for the proposed Plant Longleaf there, but last year a Fulton County Superior Court judge reversed the air permit because it failed to limit carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas.
The judge cited a 2007 Supreme Court decision that identified carbon dioxide as a pollutant under federal law.
The case is being reviewed by the Georgia Court of Appeals, which is expected to render a decision no later than July. In the meantime, the major power company behind the Longleaf Plant, Dynegy, pulled out of the project.
If the appeals court upholds carbon dioxide limits, then other power plants and industries would likely be required to limit their carbon dioxide emissions too. Alford and business leaders throughout the state have heralded this outcome as a potential calamity for economic development even as environmental groups hail it as a step forward.
Alford said Power4Georgians is participating in a carbon offset program regardless of the outcome of the court case. The company has contracted with a “carbon tree bank,” a company that scientifically quantifies and tracks the amount of carbon taken up by pine forests that are preserved on behalf of Power4Georgians’ co-ops.
The Telegraph archive and the Associated Press contributed to this report. To reach S. Heather Duncan, call 744-4225.
@Nyx.CommentBody@