Jan 30, 2008 - 06:27:21 CST
Over 20 years ago, I worked as a reliability engineer for GE on an integrated gasification combined cycle power plant in Schenectady, N.Y. The output was electrical power rather than synthetic gas because the gas was to be burned in a high efficiency gas turbine/steam turbine combined cycle electric power plant. The only difference between the IGCC plant and the proposed South Heart plant is that the South Heart plant feeds a natural gas pipeline instead of an electrical grid. In my opinion, that is a lot more efficient way to transport our energy for sale out of state.Over 20 years ago, the Department of Energy chose to "demonstrate" coal gasification with a World War II-era technology plant in North Dakota. Short term, it was perhaps a failure; however, long term it is a resounding success. When the price of energy increased enough, even the WWII technology plant was economically feasible. GE folks thought DOE should have used a more modern gasification technology and didn't give the demonstration much chance for success. I think DOE simply wanted to use a "mature" technology.
I'm not surprised that Great Northern Power Development is short on plant design details this early in the game; however, from what I've read, they say they will provide those details when they are available in a firmed-up design of the plant. Mary Hodell said, "GNPD spokesman Neal Messer opened (last Wednesday's) meeting with the line, 'This is the first of many public meetings.'" That's all we can expect.
Certainly their plans have changed since their last public meeting four years ago. After all, it's a gasification plant rather than an old inefficient steam power plant. It's environmental impact should be much lower in every way. Most important, perhaps, is the ability to efficiently separate CO2 for sequestration, probably in oil fields, as a valuable byproduct.
I live 25 miles downwind of the site, but, if it's designed right, I have little fear of a change in my environment. It should be a clean, efficient source of synthetic gas from North Dakota's most abundant energy source: lignite coal. It's about time.
ha wrote on Jan 30, 2008 3:33 PM:
Economent wrote on Jan 30, 2008 9:49 AM:
The environment that will change will be the social environment. As everyone starts to make large incomes they will begain to act as if they are better then others which gets a bit annoying. But that will pass in time as well. The parks will be much nicer and the community will prosper financially as the plant money brings in more money from other business ventures. How many people in the areas you mentioned would want those plants to close? Your answer is very few. "
Next door wrote on Jan 30, 2008 8:03 AM:
Dont you get it? GNPD has NO info yet, this early in the game, yet they are trying to get their mining permit and zoning change. Thats the point. Yeah- its early in the game. So, WAIT until you have the answers THEN go get the permits.
Fact is, life and the envirronment will change- ask anyone from Center, Underwood, Beulah area. It will. And that is one thing NO one in the immediate area around the plant wants to have happen. 25 miles will still be affected...but your water is going to be fine- think about the ranchers NEXT door. Have some compassion. "oh I will be fine, so its ok"- when the mine expands and you are affected, who is going to care? "
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.