The state Board of Minerals and Environment voted unanimously Thursday to approve air quality permits for the proposed Big Stone II coal-fired power plant in northeast South Dakota, but a lawyer for opponents of the project said a court appeal is likely.
The new 500-megawatt power plant, which would be built near the existing Big Stone plant, is backed by five utility companies. Costs for the entire project are now estimated at about $1.8 billion, said Dan Sharp, communications manager for Big Stone II.
"It’s a big step for us," Sharp said of the South Dakota air quality permits.
The project now needs only one more regulatory permit, which is Minnesota approval for 112 miles of transmission lines that are necessary to the Big Stone II project located on the South Dakota-Minnesota border, Sharp said. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission likely will decide on the transmission line permit in January, he said.
The air quality permits approved by the South Dakota board involve an operating permit for the existing Big Stone plant and a construction permit for Big Stone II. The board held eight days of hearings in August and September.
Harry Johnson, a lawyer representing the project, said evidence has demonstrated that when Big Stone I and Big Stone II are operating, technical improvements will allow the two plants to generate less pollution than the existing plant does.
Sulfur dioxide emissions will drop substantially, mercury emissions will decrease and nitrous oxide emissions will not rise, said Johnson, of Richmond, Va.
"We know No. 1 that the Big Stone II project is good for the environment and it’s good for the energy in this area," Johnson told the South Dakota board. "The emissions from Big Stone I and Big Stone II will actually improve the air quality."
But William Moore, a lawyer representing environmental groups, urged the board to reject the permits because the documents do not comply with laws and regulations. Further proceedings should be held to fix legal problems, he said.
Moore made his arguments to the Board of Minerals and Environment by a telephone connection and a speaker phone. The Sierra Club and Clean Water Action opposed the permits.
The environmental groups "were not here to delay the Big Stone project or somehow impose unreasonable barriers to building coal-fired power plants. They simply oppose building a new power plant that fails to comply with the law," Moore said.
Moore said a court will overturn the South Dakota air quality permits if they are flawed.
"The board needs to keep in mind this proceeding is not the end of the case," Moore said.
But board members said the conditions set in the permits comply with the law and regulations.
The utilities taking part in Big Stone II are Otter Tail Power Co.; Central Minnesota Municipal Power Agency; Heartland Consumers Power District; Missouri River Energy Services; and Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. Those utilities report serving more than 1 million people in Minnesota, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana and Iowa.
Opponents argue that the coal-fired plant will cause pollution. They support wind, solar and other clean energy sources.
Supporters of the project contend coal-fired plants are needed to meet energy needs until other power sources are developed. South Dakota officials argue that the proposed transmission lines for Big Stone II and other coal-fired plants will help boost wind-generated power by providing a way to get that power shipped to customers elsewhere.
Sharp said construction on Big Stone II can start about a year after all permits are approved.
Print Story
Email to a Friend
