Less than three days after the Bush Administration left office, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has overturned the State of South Dakota's approval of the massive BigStone II coal-fired power plant. The EPA's decision comes after the state failed to require state-of-the-art pollution controls for the coal plant that would address concerns about harmful soot, smog and global warming pollution.

EPA decision on Big Stone II, part 1 (pdf, 2.12 MB)

Overview

• Background
• Key Issues
• MERCURY
• CO2 / GLOBAL WARMING
• WATER
• Current Status
• Questions

by Mary Jo Stueve, South Dakota Program Coordinator

Get the full presentation (pdf, 556 Kb)

Plans for the proposed Big Stone II coal plant near Milbank, South Dakota call for using massive amounts of water. In addition to the 3.2 billion gallon surface draw approved last year, co-owners have now filed for another 3.2 billion gallons from groundwater. With concerns about pollution growing and spiraling costs for the proposed coal plant, excessive water demands add another reason to say no to Big Stone II. This huge demand for water could be disastrous for the local area and farmers - as well as Big Stone Lake. For many years, water discharge has exceeded recharge, and experts say that previous underground water levels are not likely to return because of increased demand on a limited resource.

Presentation Overview

Big Stone II Coal Case Study

• Players & Action Arenas
• Key Issues
• Power-Ploys & Counter-Ploys
• Media Matters
• Lessons Learned

by Mary Jo Stueve, South Dakota Program Coordinator

Get the complete presentation (pdf, 712 Kb)

Problem

Otter Tail Power Company, in conjunction with several other power companies, is proposing a major new source of air and water pollution for South Dakota and Minnesota. Otter Tail plans to more than double the output of the existing coalburning power plant at Big Stone by building a new $1.6 billion plant on the same site . Big Stone II. Coal pollution is a threat to our health and environment. Investing in a costly new coal-burning power plant wastes money and takes South Dakota away from safe, clean renewable energy from wind.

Toxic Coal Pollution

Get the full report (pdf, 133 Kb)

You will need to have the Adobe Acrobat Reader properly installed to view PDF documents. You can get it free from Adobe.

Problems with Big Stone II

• It's destructive: Big Stone II and global warming
• It's expensive: impact of emerging global warming laws on costs of Big Stone II
• It's not needed: wind-based alternatives can meet energy needs better
• It's a lost opportunity: wind power brings far more permanent economic benefits to the region

by Barbara Freese, Union of Concerned Scientists presented at SoDak Park Supper Club on the South Dakota shores of Big Stone Lake at the September 28th, 2006 Public Education Forum.

by Greg Rislov, Commission Advisor to the SD Public Utilities Commission, SDEIA Board Educational Meeting June 9, 2006 presentation.

Get the complete presentation (pdf, 1.1MB)

What are the sources of mercury pollution in the region?

1. Energy: coal-burning power plants
2. Taconite processing (MN only)
3. Purposeful use:
   • Municipal solid waste combustion
   • Volatilization of disposed products
   • Smelters that recycle cars, appliances

Mercury pollution from coal plants

Coal plants are the largest source of mercury pollution in Minnesota and South Dakota.