“ISO-New England estimates that some 7,000 megawatts of electricity from higher-polluting coal- and oil-fired plants will be retired in the near future – creating a need for [NTE’s] cleaner, more efficient power,” Eves said. “To halt the Killingly project at this point would compromise power supply and reliability not just for the state of Connecticut but the entire New England region,” he said.
A coalition of activists is waging war against a gas-fired electric power plant to be built in Killingly, a forested town nestled along the Rhode Island border. The climate change protesters have held rallies and demanded a moratorium on gas-fueled plants, including this one. They have warned that new fossil fuel-powered plants will doom global efforts to keep temperature hikes at a sustainable level. And they called on Gov. Ned Lamont to stop the plant — although it’s not clear he has that power. Despite the uprising, the plant is close to construction, its developer said, and there is likely nothing anyone can do to stop it.
he new Sky Global Power One power plant west of Houston in Rock Island uses new technology from General Electric that stacks together natural gas-fired generation sets. The project includes six of GE’s “J920
The owner, NTE Energy, has obtained Connecticut Siting Council approval to build the 650-megawatt facility capable of powering 500,000 homes. NTE earlier received permission from the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. A crucial air permit is in hand and only a few routine permits are still needed. The electricity grid operator, Holyoke, Mass.-based ISO New England, which controls the regional energy market, awarded power contracts based on a determination that the region will need the Killingly plant to turn on and run.
“We anticipate construction will begin this spring,” said Tim Eves, an NTE Energy managing partner. “The company is initializing the construction financing and will begin construction shortly thereafter.”
Still, the opposition persists and the battle is really bigger than one gas-powered electric plant in rural Connecticut. It’s the local version of what Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg is waging with her student strike, global rallies and doomsday warnings about what will happen if greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are not drastically reduced. On the other side is President Donald Trump, a climate-change denier who is systematically gutting federal environmental regulations and putting new ones in place that favor developers, the carbon-based energy industry and general business interests. “How many power plants do we need in Killingly?,” Not Another Power Plant asks in bold letters on its Facebook page. “This should not happen,” NAPP says, answering its own question.
Banking on appeal
Perhaps the last chance — slight as that may be — to stop the Killingly plant lies in an appeal filed in state Superior Court by NAPP that seeks to overturn the siting council’s approval. At its core, the appeal claims the council erred when it split NTE’s application, leaving for another day the issue of a larger gas pipeline needed to fuel the facility. A recent brief filed by NAPP noted that NTE “made it clear” that “its proposed project would only succeed at producing electricity if Eversource receives a permit to replace an existing underground natural gas pipeline with a new one.” The brief said the pipeline work will require disrupting environmentally sensitive areas in the eastern portion of the state, including land trusts and conservation areas. NAPP is asking the court to “vacate” the siting council’s approval and require the council to seek “information regarding the environmental impact of the new pipeline.” The siting council heard the same arguments during its deliberations and rejected them The problem with the appeal, an NTE official said, is the pipeline already exists and the required expansion is considered a “routine upgrade.” The line runs from the Algonquin Interstate Gas Pipeline to Killingly. Roger Reynolds, an attorney with the Connecticut Fund for the Environment, remained hopeful the plant could still be stopped. “There are many more approvals that this plant needs and many more opportunities to have it stopped,” Reynolds said Eves said the company expects the appeal and other challenges will fail. “The Connecticut Siting Council has rejected the argument put forth in the appeal, which was raised numerous times during the siting certification hearing process,” Eves said.
Zero carbon
The Killingly gas plant has placed a governor entering his second year in office in an awkward spot. Lamont sees himself as a friend of the environment and has signed an executive order declaring the state will use only carbon-free energy by 2040. It’s an ambitious goal made even more difficult by the fact that another carbon spewing gas plant is being built — and built to last for decades. This is not lost on climate activists. A group of 13 state lawmakers, including Sen. Will Haskell, D-Westport, said in a recent letter to Lamont that the Killingly plant would pump 2.2 million tons of carbon dioxide into the air annually, or about five percent of the state’s total. Others say the only way to reduce Greenhouse gases — including carbon dioxide, which fuels global warming and ultimately climate change — is to build renewable and cleaner energy sources, such as wind farms, solar arrays and hydrogen fuel cells. The Sierra Club, Connecticut Fund for the Environment and other groups recently chided Lamont over what they called a contradiction in his zero-carbon goal and lack of action against the Killingly plant. “We believe the construction of (the Killingly plant) is inconsistent with the climate and clean energy goals established by the General Assembly and of your administration,” the activists wrote in a letter to the governor. They said that between 2018 and 2019, Connecticut added nearly 1,500 megawatts of natural gas generation, representing 15 percent of the state’s total. That represents a lot of additional carbon for a state on a carbon-free diet. “We urge you to impose a moratorium on new fossil fuel-fired power generation in Connecticut until the state formalizes a robust approach to evaluate applications for new energy generation,” the activists wrote. The Lamont administration did not respond to a request for comment on the governor’s position regarding gas plants or a moratorium.
Capacity and gas plants
So why build another gas plant? The decision is spread among numerous agencies, including DEEP, state electric regulators and the ISO New England. Mathew Kakley, an ISO New England spokesman, said all sources of power — renewable and fossil fuel based — are considered. “The Killingly plant did compete with other resources and secured an obligation as part of the most recent forward capacity market auction,” Kakley said, referring to long-term contracts. Some argue that the region does not need the additional electricity, but the ISO maintains the plant’s output is in line with future capacity projections. Eves said the additional power will be beneficial to the region. “ISO-New England estimates that some 7,000 megawatts of electricity from higher-polluting coal- and oil-fired plants will be retired in the near future – creating a need for [NTE’s] cleaner, more efficient power,” Eves said. “To halt the Killingly project at this point would compromise power supply and reliability not just for the state of Connecticut but the entire New England region,” he said.
bcummings@ctpost.com
