Friends, foes line up for proposed Idaho fertilizer plant; to break ground in late 2009

Environmental and tribal groups worried about carbon dioxide emissions and community leaders eager for an economic boost have submitted opinions about Southeast Idaho Energy’s (SIE) plan for a $1 billion coal-gasified fertilizer plant near American Falls. The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality’s deadline for public comments about the controversial project closed Nov. 24.

The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, the Sierra Club, Earthjustice, the Idaho Conservation League, and the Greater Yellowstone Coalition officially oppose the Power County Advanced Energy Center, while the American Falls City Council and American Falls School Board are among those to throw their support behind it.

The comment period was extended a month at the request of the Sierra Club and Pocatello resident Greg Helm, who opposes the project. The Sierra Club requested the extra time to verify calculations in SIE’s permit to construct.

SIE, a subsidiary of Refined Energy Holdings of New York, estimates it would need to import about 2,000 tons of coal daily, mostly from Colorado, for the plant, which would use advanced technology to keep emissions reduced. Opponents, however, say the plant would discharge 2.3 million tons of carbon dioxide annually, contributing to global warming.

IDEQ has determined that the plant’s operation under a proposed permit will not cause or contribute to violating ambient air quality standards, nor harm nor affect human or animal life or local vegetation.

During a September meeting, IDEQ officials said the plant’s operations shouldn’t exceed air quality standards for several controlled emissions, including particulates, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide, but it will release significant amounts of carbon dioxide, which is not regulated as a pollutant.

The project will produce up to 500 st/d of anhydrous ammonia, up to 1,800 st/d of granular urea, up to 1,600 st/d of UAN, and up to 500 st/d of sulfuric acid. SIE has decided against producing diesel fuel or generating electricity at the site as originally planned.

Justin Hayes, program director for the Idaho Conservation League in Boise, said the plant’s carbon dioxide emissions would account for nearly 5 percent of total CO2 emissions in the state.

Roger Turner, Shoshone-Bannock air quality manager, said SIE plans to vent the carbon dioxide directly into the air, although company officials have said they hope to eventually pipe the CO2 to Wyoming for enhanced oil recovery. He said the tribes also have concerns about mercury pollution.

“We expect to meet CO2 regulations when they become applicable to our plant,” said John Burk, SIE spokesman. “As you know, there currently are no federal or state laws or regulations concerning CO2. The project is environmentally, financially and technically sound, and we expect to seek financing and break ground late next year.”

School Superintendent Ron Bolinger said he was instructed by the American Falls School Board to send a letter to IDEQ in support of the project because it would increase the school district’s tax revenue significantly and support the American Falls community.

Planned for about two miles west of American Falls near ConAgra’s Lamb Weston potato processing plant, the fertilizer complex daily would gasify coal and coal/petcoke blends to produce ammonia, urea, and UAN. Elemental sulfur, sulfuric acid, and slag byproducts also would be sold.

Bolinger said the school board has drafted a plan to cope with an anticipated influx of new students who would move to the district due to the plant’s construction and operation. Any additional infrastructure needs would be more than covered by extra taxes generated by the plant, he said.

An estimated 1,000 construction workers, many of whom would live in Pocatello and commute, would come to the area. When the plant is running, an estimated 150 full-time workers would be employed there.

Cheryl Robinson, staff engineer with IDEQ’s air quality division, said her department usually responds to public concerns within 15 days after the closing of public comment periods, but because of the volume and depth of comments, that could be longer in this case. If approved, plant construction could start in 2009.