Prairie State Energy Campus
| Prairie State Energy Campus | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Country | United States |
| Location | Lively Grove Township, Washington County, near Marissa, Illinois |
| Coordinates | 38°16′40″N 89°40′4″W / 38.27778°N 89.66778°W |
| Status | Operational |
| Commission date | 2012 |
| Owner(s) | Prairie State Energy Campus (consortium) |
| Thermal power station | |
| Turbine technology | Coal |
| Power generation | |
| Units operational | 2 |
| Nameplate capacity | 1,600 MW |
Prairie State Energy Campus is a 1,600 megawatt base load, coal-fired, electrical power station and coal mine near Marissa, Illinois southeast of St. Louis, Missouri. Prairie State Energy Campus (PSEC) features low levels of regulated emissions compared to other coal-fired power stations, capturing sulfur from high-sulfur coal mined nearby instead of transporting low-sulfur coal from elsewhere.[1][2][3]
Ken Bone, a power plant worker who asked a question during a 2016 Presidential debate, is employed at Prairie State. He is a Control Room Operator.[4]
Project
Proposed and led by Peabody Energy Corporation, the project is jointly owned by public electric utilities with Peabody initially retaining 5% ownership.[5] It is operated by Prairie State Generating Company, LLC. The first 800 MW generator went online in June[6] and the second in November, 2012.[7] The project's Lively Grove underground mine is expected to produce 6 million tons of high sulfur coal per year.[8]
PSEC stated it will be "among the cleanest major coal-fueled plants in the nation"[9] through use of pollution mitigation technology, producing as low as one-fifth the levels of regulated pollutants as typical U.S. coal-fired plants.[2] Noting that projected emissions nevertheless include 25,000 tons of soot and smog-forming pollutants yearly, the Sierra Club and other organizations unsuccessfully sued to stop the EPA granting an air permit.[10]
According to the Chicago Tribune, PSEC will be the "largest source of carbon dioxide built in the United States in a quarter-century."[5] The company projects a 15% reduction in carbon dioxide (CO
2) pollution compared with other coal-fired power plants based on its use of efficient supercritical steam generators and no emissions from transporting coal.[11]
Judging that regulatory limits on carbon emissions are not likely in the near future, Peabody chose not to employ a more expensive integrated gasification combined cycle design that could more easily be retrofitted with carbon capture technology.[12] The Environmental Protection Agency first proposed limits in March 2012. The limit of 1000 lbs CO
2 emissions per megawatt-hour electricity would require future coal-powered generating stations to capture approximately half of their CO
2 output. The limit would not apply to existing and under-construction generating stations, including PSEC.[13]
Costs
PSEC started delivering electricity in 2012 at prices well above market rates.[6] Some of its investors resell the energy at a loss, some raise consumer rates, and two backed out of the project.[6] PSEC's original $2 billion estimated cost attracted municipal electric utilities to invest and to sign 28 year contracts. However, as of early 2010 the estimated cost had increased to $4.4 billion, requiring investors to borrow more money and raising the projected cost of electricity to undesirable levels.[5][14] Peabody in response capped construction costs at "approximately $4 billion" excluding some costs such as coal development and transmission lines.[14][15] In January 2013, with many municipalities adversely impacted by the high prices, the SEC subpoenaed information from Peabody.[16] In a bid to exit its share of the Prairie State project, the City of Hermann, MO filed a lawsuit in March, 2015 against the Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility Commission and the Missouri Public Energy Pool, claiming that its share of $1.5 billion in debt issued to support Prairie State imposed an unconstitutionally high level of debt on the city.[17]
Peabody divested its 5.06% stake in the project in 2016, accepting $57 million for its original investment of nearly $250 million. The buyer was Wabash Valley Power Association, a Midwest cooperative.[18][19]
See also
References
- ^ Tomich, Jeffrey (January 5, 2010). "Prairie State fuels debate: Coal-fired power plant will bring jobs but symbolizes fight over climate change". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
- ^ a b "US: Prairie State coal-fueled power plant advances". EnerPub Energy Publisher. Archived from the original on 10 July 2011. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
- ^ Poe, William (April 2004). "King Coal Mounts a Comeback". St. Louis Commerce Magazine. Archived from the original on 9 November 2009. Retrieved 6 October 2010.
- ^ Herzog, Katie (October 14, 2016). "Ken Bone: "If I was Energy King …"". Grist. Retrieved October 20, 2017.
- ^ a b c Hawthorne, Michael (July 12, 2010). "Clean coal dream a costly nightmare". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 19 September 2019.
- ^ a b c Tomich, Jeffrey (June 17, 2012). "Delays, cost overruns blemish Illinois coal project". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved August 23, 2012.
- ^ "Moving Energy Forward: Prairie State's Unit 2 of Power Plant Goes Live" (Press release). Prairie State Energy Campus. November 2, 2012. Retrieved March 17, 2013.
- ^ "New Illinois Mines Could Boost State's Production". Coal Age. 24 March 2011. Retrieved 23 May 2011.
- ^ "Clean Electricity from Coal". Prairie State Energy Campus. Archived from the original on 29 January 2009. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
- ^ "Prairie State/Peabody". Sierra Club. Retrieved 18 October 2017.
On October 25th, 2006, the Sierra Club, the American Lung Association and the American Bottom Conservancy joined in a petition to the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit challenging the air permit for a proposed 1500 megawatt coal-fired plant.
- ^ "PSEC Overview". Prairie State Energy Campus. Archived from the original on 15 July 2011. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
- ^ Romero, Simon (May 28, 2006). "2 Industry Leaders Bet on Coal But Split on Cleaner Approach". The New York Times. Retrieved 6 October 2010.
- ^ Schoof, Renee (Mar 28, 2012). "New EPA pollution rules won't apply to Lively Grove". Belleville News-Democrat. Retrieved April 11, 2012.[permanent dead link]
- ^ a b Hawthorne, Michael (July 24, 2010). "Prairie State coal-fired plant to cap costs". Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 5 October 2010.
- ^ "Prairie State and Bechtel Announce New, Fixed-Cost EPC Agreement Providing Greater Economic Stability" (PDF) (Press release). Prairie State Generating Company, LLC. July 22, 2010. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 7, 2011. Retrieved 2010-12-30.
- ^ Tomich, Jeffrey (March 11, 2013). "For tiny town, gamble on coal plant becomes a fiscal crisis". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved March 17, 2013.
- ^ Barker, Jacob (March 30, 2015). "Hermann, Mo., sues power commissions over Prairie State coal plant". St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Retrieved April 1, 2015.
- ^ Tate, Curtis (January 22, 2016). "Peabody sells stake in Illinois power plant for fraction of investment". McClatchy DC Bureau. Retrieved October 29, 2017.
- ^ "Peabody Energy Completes Sale Of Interest In Prairie State Energy Campus" (Press release). Peabody Energy. May 19, 2016. Retrieved October 29, 2017.
External links
- Prairie State Energy Campus company web site