In a new paper released today, analysis by Sierra Club shows that Minnesota Power could save customers millions of dollars by retiring both the Clay Boswell coal plant and replacing that power with a clean energy portfolio that includes wind, solar, storage, energy efficiency, and demand response technologies.
The report comes at the time when Minnesota Power is preparing to submit their Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) on February 1st. All electricity providers in the state are required to put together a plan that outlines how they will meet their customers’ energy needs for the next 15 years; an IRP is a long-term energy plan, and community engagement is critical to ensure that public needs are at the center. Utilities typically submit IRPs every couple years, but it’s been over 5 years since their last one!. Today’s report (which you can read online here) highlights an opportunity for Minnesota Power to both focus on reducing climate-harming emissions and reducing costs for ratepayers, two critical components of its upcoming long-term energy plan.
Not interested in wading through graphs of comparative energy prices? Here are some key takeaways from the report:
The cost of operating the Boswell coal plant continues to grow. In 2016, average production cost jumped from $16/MWh to $23/MWh as a result of higher fuel prices, but the plant did not operate less as a result. While other plants were cutting back on production to save costs, Boswell continued chugging along, business as usual. Since 2016, Boswell has continued to operate full steam ahead, even at times when it would have been cheaper for Minnesota Power to cut back on energy production at Boswell and shift to other energy sources.
Replacing the Boswell coal plant with clean energy solutions would provide Minnesotans with electricity that is less expensive, equally reliable, and with a smaller environmental footprint. Our analysis shows that a clean energy portfolio would replace the coal plant in a cost effective manner if built by 2029 at the latest. It could be cost-effective sooner.
Plant workers and communities deserve to know when the plant will close so that they can begin planning. In continuing to drag its feet and putting off a retirement plan, Minnesota Power is stringing along workers and communities that need support transition. Economic transition will be undoubtedly challenging; so Minnesota Power needs to put plans in place now for supporting workers and developing local, family sustaining clean energy jobs.
Clean energy solutions are already cost effective today, and the costs of clean energy will continue to drop moving forward. It is inevitable that both existing coal plants and new gas plants will be outpaced by clean energy, including the Boswell coal-fired power plant and any gas-fired power plant, like Minnesota Power’s proposed NTEC plant. In addition to the ample environmental, climate and health reasons to transition to clean energy, the economics are clear: The wisest decision for Minnesota is to move to clean energy as soon as possible.
Take Action
Tell Minnesota Power to address the climate crisis by committing to a just transition to 100% clean energy.