PRESS RELEASE

* American Lung Association of New York State * Citizens Campaign for the Environment *  Environmental Advocates of New York * NYPIRG *  Sierra Club – Atlantic Chapter * Pace Energy and Climate Center * Western New York Climate Action Coalition

June 10, 2008

ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS CALL ON NY GOVERNOR TO DITCH PLANS FOR COAL POWER PLANT

State Should not Invest in Dirty, Ineffective Technology in Time of Fiscal Crisis

(ALBANY, NY)—Environmental groups and others today criticized Governor David Paterson’s support for a proposed coal-burning power plant for Jamestown, New York. The Governor announced plans for increased state investment of up to $6 million in the “clean coal” facility this morning. Earlier this year, the state earmarked in the budget only $400,000 for the Jamestown project.  

The groups criticized the Governor for increasing state investment in unproven technology during a time of fiscal crisis and endorsing the Jamestown plant prior to the completion of required studies. The groups include the American Lung Association of New York, Citizens Campaign for the Environment, Environmental Advocates of New York, NYPIRG, Sierra Club – Atlantic Chapter, and the Western New York Climate Action Coalition.  

“This power plant is ill-advised from both environmental and economic points of view and does not deserve to go forward,” said Walter Simpson, the co-founder of the Western New York Climate Action Coalition and leader of a coalition of groups opposed to the plant. “By acting before the completion of the State Environmental Quality Review Act process, the Governor is putting the cart before the horse. He is also acting before an $800,000 New York State Energy Research & Development Authority-funded study to examine the geological and legal issues associated with carbon capture and storage in the Southern Tier region has begun, let alone been completed. The State would be far better served if the Governor waited for these studies prior to making a decision to spend millions of taxpayer dollars on this project.” 

Opponents to the Jamestown project are concerned that state funding would require additional public expenditures in future. These could include subsidies to cover the extra power production costs associated with this plant, given that as much as 30 percent of its output will be required to operate the oxy-fire carbon capture and storage technology.  

This substantial “parasitic load” will increase the already high cost of electricity produced by this plant by as much as 40 percent. Additional public subsidies will be required if the state indemnifies the project and agrees to cover liability issues associated with permanent carbon capture and storage.  These subsidies could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars over the 50 year operating lifespan of the plant.

“It’s irresponsible for the state to move forward with the Jamestown coal project without completing the required studies,” said Blair Horner, NYPIRG. The Jamestown plant must still complete a State Environmental Quality Review Act analysis, including a new final environmental impact statement plus new permit applications to the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Without such analyses, the Governor cannot be sure that the project is consistent with state environmental laws and is thus legally justified.  

Total construction costs for this project now appear to top $300 million for a 43 megawatt plant that will have an effective output in the range of 30 MW. This amounts to $10,000 per KW, an almost unheard of cost for generation capacity. 

“In this time of fiscal crisis, investing in an unproven and dirty technology flies in the face of common sense, not to mention New York State’s clean energy goals,” said Rob Moore, Environmental Advocates of New York. “This $6 million could be better used to invest in proven energy efficiency technology and could reduce energy use in up to 5,000 New York homes. The federal government has already cut off its investments in ‘dirty’ clean coal technology and the state should follow their lead.”  

Environmental organizations opposed to the Jamestown coal plant have pointed out that 80 percent of Jamestown’s electric needs are currently met by low-cost hydropower from the New York Power Authority. Thus, the City’s self-generation needs, now met by an older coal plant which needs to be shut down,  represent only a small factor of its overall load. Environmentalists maintain that this small load can be met more cleanly and less expensively by a combination of energy efficiency and renewable energy development.  

“The proposed Jamestown coal plant electricity output can be generated though clean, safe renewable technology and energy efficiency,” said Brian Smith, Western New York Program Director for Citizens Campaign for the Environment. “Investing millions of tax dollars in unproven, highly questionable technology is unwise,” Smith concluded. 

The proposed plant is not needed at all and would be the first new coal-fired power plan built in New York in more than 25 years. New York should be showing the world how to generate electricity from clean energy resources not investing in coal.

-30-