Rebecca Kling, rebecca.kling@sierraclub.org
DULUTH, MN-- Two gas plant proposals would cost Minnesota ratepayers more for electricity than comparable clean energy portfolios (CEP), as shown in a Sierra Club analysis using a methodology and algorithm developed by Rocky Mountain Institute. In both cases, CEPs would provide the same energy, peak capacity, and ramping characteristics as the proposed gas plants, but at a lower cost, saving ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
Even if both proposed gas plants are built, they will be stranded by CEPs within a decade. That is, building new clean energy will be cheaper than the costs of operating the proposed gas plants in less than a decade. The Nemadji proposed gas plant would be stranded by 2032, while the Becker/Sherburne replacement would be stranded by 2037.
“Frustratingly, some energy providers refuse to consider clean energy portfolios, even when CEPs are less expensive than gas today and will become even more cost-competitive as time goes on,” said Jessica Tritsch, Senior Campaign Representative with the Beyond Coal to Clean Energy Campaign in Minnesota. “Switching to clean energy is also critical to stopping climate change, as we can’t meet climate goals by replacing one fossil fuel, coal, with another, like gas. Energy providers need to get on board with clean energy or get left behind.”
Visit the Sierra Club North Star Chapter page for more information and additional analysis.
About the Sierra Club
The Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with more than 3.5 million members and supporters. In addition to protecting every person's right to get outdoors and access the healing power of nature, the Sierra Club works to promote clean energy, safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying, and legal action. For more information, visit www.sierraclub.org.