Milton Young coal plant has a lifespan of only about 5- 10 more years (maybe 20 depending on whom you ask). Already, it is losing money. If you build Project Tundra, the amount of electricity it puts out will be cut in half, making Milton Young even less economically viable. (Not to mention the increased operation costs, which hurt the plant’s economic viability even more)
Currently we have very little ability to store energy: energy must be used at the time of generation.Coal is a very inflexible method of power generation. It is not able to ramp up or down, as needed when solar and wind energy production varies. Sometimes when utilities produce more energy than they need, they sell the excess energy at a loss.The excess energy is often blamed on renewables for being intermittent. It is equally true, however, that their excess energy is due to coal being inflexible
(Additional note: Senators Hoeven and Tina Smith might not recognize that Project Tundra is a bad investment but they do recognize that it will no longer meet the requirements of the 45 Q tax credits. Instead of shelving the project their solution is to lower the efficiency requirements of the tax credit.by
co- sponsoring US Senate Bill 407 Even when it comes to subsidies Project Tundra is a bad investment.)
Check out the links in the petition to learn more about why Project Tundra is a bad investment.