19 Comments - GoBearsss - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 10:26 am: They may not have selected a site in the President’s home state of Texas, but they did selected a site in the home state of President Obama. Don’t worry…. this will get funded. - Ghost - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 10:37 am: The timing is still suspect. The grumbling may have accord slightly before Illinois got its private signals, but long after Illinois had obtained support from a number of other States; and most likely after there were internal signals to the Govt that Illinois was ahead. Given the presence of Texas in this porject, and the Presidents direct ties thereto, it is highly highly suspect that this is anything more then political gamesmanship. A blue State got the project, so now the President is going to use his authority to tank the fed support? I notice the feds are not concerned about Haliburton’s cost overruns. - GoBearsss - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 10:39 am: You are right, Ghost - cost overruns, of all excuses. That made me laugh out loud when I first heard it. - MTP - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 10:54 am: Construction isn’t even supposed to start until 2010. They may not get the funding from Bush, but that’s irrelevant to the issue in about 12 months. With any Democratic administration, and Durbin as #2 in the US Senate, the funding prospects have to appear very good. Even with a GOP administration, none of the GOP candidates running are as closely aligned with Texas, or the local energy interests of that state as Bush or Cheney. Winning site selection was always the first step of a long process. Now its about securing funding — and this is an easy bone for the next President, regardless of party — to pick up and throw to show he’s got bona-fides on a number of hot issues: from decreasing reliance on foreign oil to going green. - Michelle Flaherty - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 11:06 am: Go to Texas and ask people about all the wonderful econommic benefits of the superconducting super collider. Oh, that’s right. It was never built. Cautionary tale perhaps? - Name/Nickname/Anon - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 11:10 am: While it is possible that the federal government COULD play straight politics with this, I think in the end they are going to be unwilling to kill a promising technology on a political basis alone. I find it more likely that legal pressure will be applied by environmental groups on the federal government, state of Illinois and FutureGen itself to kill the project. I think the Sierra Club and other are probably the more likely obstacle. - cermak_rd - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 11:18 am: I don’t know that Sierra et al are going to be that maniacal about this project. It’s not like Mattoon is located in a one of a kind endangered environmental area, it’s pretty much agricultural land so the ecology has already been entirely altered by humans. Mattoon has always been fairly energy friendly. As a child, I lived in town, and we had an oil pumpjack right down on the corner of our block. It was capped a few years back due to its depletion. Heck if you look at the corn & bean fields in the area you’ll see pumpjacks still rocking along. - Name/Nickname/Anon - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 11:34 am: Cermak - I wouldn’t consider Springfield to be an endangered environmental area either but Sierra Club went after the new power plant there like Fitz went after Ryan. Until they essentially extorted a ridiculous wind-power and monetary concession out of the city (a special shout-out to Mayor Davlin for his total capitulation) Sierra Club was perfectly content to use lawsuits to stall construction as long as possible. Sierra Club has a long standing animus towards anything coal…I hope they will choose to give this a chance. Realistically, I think it will end up being a legal fight. - questions about the project - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 11:45 am: I wish I had a dollar for every time an Illinois political or administrative official uttered the term “clean coal technology” over the last 30 years. I could probably retire. There have been numerous clean combustion proposals that either didn’t get off the drawing board or the utilities didn’t want to invest in the new technology. FutureGen will not make economic sense unless the total environmental costs of burning coal are incorporated into the price of electricity through a pollution tax or new set of clean air regulations that motivate the power generators to replace their dirty power plants with cleaner facilities. I also wonder if it would be better to take the huge federal subsidy for this project and use the money to help low-income residents and seniors buy a more energy efficient refrigerator, air conditioner or other appliance. This way we could help people reduce their energy consumption and save money. Just wondering about how our limited federal dollars could be best put to use. - enviro fan - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 12:14 pm: I doubt the Sierra Club will challenge this project because the carbon emissions will be captured and pumped into the ground. Also, their IL leaders are tied to the hip of the Governor and his staff. The group knows he needs FutureGen to help with his political fortunes downstate. I predict the group will give the Governor a pass and look the other way when it comes to the waste and pollution that will be generated in producing the coal for the project. - Springfield Resident - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 12:33 pm: To Anon 11:34: I think the Sierra Club deal with our local utility worked out pretty darn good. The utility is supporting the development of wind power to help offset the greenhouse gas emissions from its new power generating unit. The older units at the site will be upgraded to run more efficiently to reduce their emissions. Plus the utility agreed to improve its energy efficiency services for residential customers, which will help people save money when electricity prices go up to pay for the new unit. Best yet, the new unit is currently under construction, which is more than you can say for other proposed coal-burning projects in the state. Mayor Davlin did the smart thing and many residents appreciate that our city is taking the lead to be more environmentally responsible. - Name/Nickname/Anon - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 12:40 pm: “The group knows he needs FutureGen to help with his political fortunes downstate.” That ship has sailed. A hundred FutureGens wouldn’t move Blago’s numbers a tenth of a point downstate. - Name/Nickname/Anon - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 1:07 pm: “Mayor Davlin did the smart thing and many residents appreciate that our city is taking the lead to be more environmentally responsible.” What Mayor Davlin did was lock the residents of Springfield into an agreement that forces purchase of wind power at a rate that will almost certainly be above market prices. Offsets are nothing but a excuse to justify a bad deal on the part of the city. For a coal-plant to run most efficiently you have to run near the top-end of capacity. Base load coal power plants generally only run derated when there is a problem with the unit. Unless you are at peak market you could easily find yourself buying wind power at above market value and then selling the excess offset coal-fired production back to the open market at below market rate. This is not a good deal for Springfield although it was admittedly a pretty good deal for the Sierra Club. - DumberThanYouThink - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 4:04 pm: Whew here is today’s move that should confirm our motto — think how hard people will laugh when they see we are urging someone else to keep a commitment… …Blaggodiots Press Release: Governor Blagojevich urges Bush Administration to keep commitment to FutureGen CHICAGO – One day after the FutureGen Alliance selected Mattoon as the site of the $1.4 billion plant, Governor Rod R. Blagojevich sent a letter to U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman urging him to follow through on the commitment to fund FutureGen — what will be the cleanest fossil fuel-fired power plant in the world. After the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) raised concerns about the project in media reports late yesterday, Governor Blagojevich requested a meeting with Secretary Bodman to discuss how to move the project forward so East Central Illinois communities can benefit from the economic boost, and so the whole nation and the world can benefit from the landmark clean coal innovations. - Papa Legba - Wednesday, Dec 19, 07 @ 7:39 pm: Blago urging someone else to follow through on a commitment. You did make that up for a laugh, right? - VanillaMan - Thursday, Dec 20, 07 @ 9:21 am: So it appears that there is still this belief among many that we can once again expect the federal government to launch us to towards new technologies if given enough money. Exactly what in the past 40 years could give people this impression? Today’s governments couldn’t build a Hoover Dam, or a TVA, or get someone on the Moon. Today’s governments are not filled with leaders who understand that to reach tremendous goals, they will need to drop their partisanship and pettiness. They would need to re-evaluate just what the federal government is supposed to do - build bridges into the next century, or play Robin Hood for social programs. There is only so much energy and money within a government, and if it expends the majority of that energy and money by providing housing, food, and other social needs once met by a free market, then there isn’t enough time, energy or money for these massive technological projects. So over the past 40 years we have witnessed dams breaking, levees failing and bridges falling. We witnessed government gridlock over social issues. We have witnessed partisanship to an extreme. As a result, we have witnessed the failing of our governments. Promise all they wish, I do not believe that in the current era of government, there is the leadership or will necessary to pull off big government programs anymore. We will probably see Iraq with a functioning democracy before we see the Freedom Tower built to replace the World Trade Center. We will probably see Afghanistan develop before we see any results from the “Clean Coal” technologies being promised this week from the federal government. Our governments are that broken. - Anon - Thursday, Dec 20, 07 @ 9:38 am: How out of touch can you be to say that cost increase is not realistic. Just ask someone building an ethanol plant or anything for that matter…the price of oil/energy is higher for one, plus the price of copper, steel, etc has doubled. shame on doe for looking out for the tax payer! - Truthful James - Thursday, Dec 20, 07 @ 9:45 am: Fossil fuel (and oil is a type of fossil fuel) and the internal combustion engine are not the long term answer. Futuregen is a great but temporary money sink. On another thread we have gone over the great new developments in fission energy, including the pebble bed technology, the use of thorium (plentiful and less radioactive), helium cooling (replacing water and the the transference of radioactivity to steam emissions and to the cooling water), and now this micro reactor using lithium which could be used to provice electricty (5 cents/kwh to individual large apartment buildings: http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news-toshiba-micro-nuclear-12.17b.html This will be available, according to Toshiba, for marketing to the United States in 2009. - Jeff - Thursday, Dec 20, 07 @ 10:56 am: I am posting this just 20 miles from one of the Mattoon’s competitors, which was Penwell, Texas ….. Yes, there is disappointment here that we were not selected ….. but there is also optimism that we might yet have a ‘Futuregen’ of our own, a private/corporate venture ….. I think concerns over costs are valid ….. Living in Texas, we are mindful of what can happen to a major government/corporate project when costs skyrocket ….. we saw first-hand what happened to the superconducting suppercolllider ….. and the price tag for FutureGen is already twice what it was a couple of years ago, and they haven’t even broken ground on it. Thanks for the opportunity to share your foum. Jeff McDonald ArchaeoTexture Midland, Texas Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.