Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Hold The Mayo: Study Says DME Cant Repay Loan

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
This is from a site called,"SUSTAINABLE MN". i can't get the link to work . It came up on the first page of a Google search for, "Rochester coal trains." There are other entries on the site concerning the DM&E coal train controversy. Stopping the Coal Train: Plan Would Flood the Midwest With Coal If a proposal currently before the Surface Transportation Board (STB) is approved, an extra 100 million tons of coal per year may soon be moving by rail through south-central Minnesota. Certain to bring increased noise, dust, and pollution to local residents, the plan would likely also have significant impacts on air quality and global climate by enabling Midwestern power plants to tap into a cheap source of coal. The Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation (DM&E) filed an a application with the STB in February 1998 seeking authority to construct 281 miles of new rail line through Wyoming, South Dakota, and Minnesota, including new lines near Mankato and Owatonna. In addition the company proposes to rebuild 598 miles of existing track. The purpose of the plan, known as the Powder River Basin Expansion Project, is to provide Midwestern electric utilities easy access to coal mines in northeastern Wyoming. According to DM&E, the expanded rail will supply power plants in the Midwest with 40 million tons of coal in its first year and 100 million tons annually within 10 years, approximately 10 percent of the nation's current demand. The delivered coal will cost $5 to $10 per ton less than eastern coal, amounting to a 19-38 percent price reduction. ME3 has urged the STB to consider the impact of increased coal utilization by electric utilities in its analysis of the environmental impacts of this proposal. DM&E contends that displacing eastern coal with lower sulfur coal from Wyoming will reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) pollution, but there is no compelling evidence that this will occur since emissions of SO2 are already capped by the Clean Air Act. Low-sulfur coal would benefit Midwestern utilities by allowing them to avoid purchasing higher-priced scrubbers, but it is likely that SO2 emissions will remain just below the cap. Only a tightening of the cap would lead to further reductions in SO2 emissions. DM&E's plan could lead to a significant increase in coal burning by supplying currently under-utilized coal plants with cheaper fuel. The lower-priced coal will further exacerbate the gap in cost between out-dated coal generation technologies, which are exempt from the new performance standards under the Clean Air Act, and other energy sources such as high efficiency natural gas power plants or wind energy. While the Clean Air Act should prevent increases in sulfur dioxide emissions, other pollutants produced when burning coal coal are either not capped or completely unregulated, including nitrous oxides (NOx), particulates, mercury, and greenhouse gases. "Most environmental costs are ignored by the market, a perversity which makes shipping coal from Wyoming to Eisenhower-era coal plants in the Midwest cheaper than building modern technology for the 21st century," remarks Michael Noble, ME3's Executive Director, adding that an investment in Great Plains wind energy comparable to the rail project's $1.2 - $1.4 billion price tag could go a long way towards providing the Midwest with clean power.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag