The Arkansas Public Service Commission’s approval of $408 million worth of upgrades at Gentry’s Flint Creek coalfired electrical power plant represents good news for Northwest Arkansas.
But the continuing commitment to coal as fuel for generating power does not mean that other clean, renewable sources of energy It was good news when the Arkansas Public Service aren’t preferred for the Commission approved future. In fact, finding improvements to Gentry’s renewable energy Flint Creek power plant to sources that produce keep it in operation. However, less pollution than coal opponents to the work have a is imperative. point, too: We need to move
The PSC, after away from coal as an energy months of fi lings and source. arguments, recently gave the OK to the owners of Flint Creek to install new scrubbers and other equipment to reduce the level of greenhouse gas emissions. The Flint Creek location, owned by power companies American Electric Power and Southwestern Electric Power Company, burns 7,200 tons of coal a day to produces 528 megawatts of electricity. That electricity is the cornerstone the region’s base load power supply.
The scrubbers and other equipment must be installed for the plant to comply with new, more stringent federal emissions standards. However, the Sierra Club and other environmental groups wanted something else.
Opponents, led by the Sierra Club, asked the PSC to reject the plan, arguing that the high cost of the improvements weren’t justified if other cleaner options could be developed. One suggestion was to convert the plant to burn natural gas — a cheaper, cleaner alternative — to generate power. Another was to tap into wind generation farms in other states to find power.
The Sierra Club contended that further dependence on coal would be short-sighted as well as environmentally detrimental, since coal is believed to be one of the main contributors of the greenhouse gasses that lead to human-caused climate change.
AEP and SWEPCO countered that while they are working on finding alternatives to coal, its important that the electrical grid’s power sources remain stable.
They also said that upgrading the plant, rather than converting it to another fuel source or closing it, was the least expensive alternative in the long run.
The local business community sided with the power plant owners due to concerns over the stability of the grid if Flint Creek was taken offline for conversion or shut down altogether. The plant is also a significant economic engine in the region — especially in western Benton County — employing nearly 70 people with an annual payroll of $3.9 million.
The work on the approved plan should be complete in about four years. The extra expense will also lead to a rate increase for SWEPCO customers in the region, something the PSC will take up at a later date.
Current estimates indicate the increase will be around $3 per month. That won’t be assessed until the work is done.
While we disagreed with the Sierra Club’s opposition to this plan, we do concur that safer, cleaner, renewable fuel sources must be a priority, not only for local communities, but for the companies that produce electricity. Coal may be a plentiful resource now, but it is finite. Plus, it contributes to climate change. Renewable, clean energy sources must be the solution for the future.