NIMBY
I had an opportunity last week to tour the site of the new Oak Creek power plant.
First thought: WOW! This is really a huge project. When finished, the plant will be a little bit larger than the biggest coal plant currently in Wisconsin. To get an idea of how big it will be, take a look at the Pleasant prairie plant as you're headed south to Chicago.
I asked a lot of questions, because I've worked in the coal power generation industry before. I was curious about many of the design decisions that were made.
One question that I asked was intended to be somewhat confrontational. The WE Energies slide show talked about how they constructed over sixty acres of wetlands on this project. I wanted to know if this was done to gain emissions credits or if it was just another WE Energies PR ploy. The answer, strangely, was neither. The construction permit required them to replace all wetlands disrupted by building three times the amount. They displaced 20 acres, and built 80 for a net gain of 60. Think about that! Environmentalists should be chomping at the bit to have more power plants constructed if it means we're tripling natural habitat.
Also, to the people of Oak Creek (I'm looking at you Sam Johnson) who were concerned that this power plant would be an eye sore: you won't see it unless you're fishing in the plant effluent. The plant will be about 28 stories tall, but it's built into the bluff. The bottom portion of the plant, maybe 1/3 to 1/2, won't even be visible above the bluff. And, the slope continues to rise from there. With the trees and hills on the power plant site, I don't think anyone but the neighbors on the road immediately north of the plant even have a chance of seeing it. That's less than a dozen or so houses, and it won't be obstructing anyone's view of anything.
I hope to get another tour or two as this plant comes together. I'd really like to see their new coal storage facility in action. That thing's going to be pretty sweet!
First thought: WOW! This is really a huge project. When finished, the plant will be a little bit larger than the biggest coal plant currently in Wisconsin. To get an idea of how big it will be, take a look at the Pleasant prairie plant as you're headed south to Chicago.
I asked a lot of questions, because I've worked in the coal power generation industry before. I was curious about many of the design decisions that were made.
One question that I asked was intended to be somewhat confrontational. The WE Energies slide show talked about how they constructed over sixty acres of wetlands on this project. I wanted to know if this was done to gain emissions credits or if it was just another WE Energies PR ploy. The answer, strangely, was neither. The construction permit required them to replace all wetlands disrupted by building three times the amount. They displaced 20 acres, and built 80 for a net gain of 60. Think about that! Environmentalists should be chomping at the bit to have more power plants constructed if it means we're tripling natural habitat.
Also, to the people of Oak Creek (I'm looking at you Sam Johnson) who were concerned that this power plant would be an eye sore: you won't see it unless you're fishing in the plant effluent. The plant will be about 28 stories tall, but it's built into the bluff. The bottom portion of the plant, maybe 1/3 to 1/2, won't even be visible above the bluff. And, the slope continues to rise from there. With the trees and hills on the power plant site, I don't think anyone but the neighbors on the road immediately north of the plant even have a chance of seeing it. That's less than a dozen or so houses, and it won't be obstructing anyone's view of anything.
I hope to get another tour or two as this plant comes together. I'd really like to see their new coal storage facility in action. That thing's going to be pretty sweet!
3 Amendments:
I don't think Sam Johnson is looking back... Cuz he's dead.
What a shame. He didn't live to see his dream dashed to tiny little pieces.
They displaced 20 acres, and built 80 for a net gain of 60. Think about that! Environmentalists should be chomping at the bit to have more power plants constructed if it means we're tripling natural habitat.
Call me a skeptic, but I'd wait until I saw the results over a couple of years.
This sounds a lot like the much-touted Georgia Pacific claims of replanting their forests on a 2-to-1 ratio.
Sounds great, except that it takes a 50-to-1 ratio of replanting in clearcut areas to get any significant regrowth.
You can't simply move Mother Nature - she's usually where she is with the neighbors she has for a reason.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home