Report: ‘Clean energy’ viable source for Navajo Nation
Wind farms are being touted as a viable alternative to coal-fired power plants. [courtesy photo]

By Kathy Helms
Diné Bureau

WINDOW ROCK — Investing in renewable energy development and energy efficiency could provide more jobs and economic benefits for the Navajo Nation than building the proposed Desert Rock Energy Project, according to an economic analysis released by Diné Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment.

The 168-page report, prepared in consultation with Ecos Consulting of Durango, compares “clean energy” alternatives such as solar and wind power to the proposed 1,500 megawatt plant to be built near Farmington by Sithe Global Power LLC and Diné Power Authority.

Coal plant impacts

The report assesses economic factors such as short- and long-term employment, financial risks, environmental and health impacts, potential costs of carbon pollution, and profitability for the tribe.

“As far as solar and wind technology, the Navajo Nation has the potential and has the resources to make these projects viable,” Dailan Long of Diné Care said earlier this week. “The Navajo Nation could be a leader in renewable energy development, so this is what we’re pushing. Our job is to make this happen.”

Long said the alternative report is a “descriptive road map” for companies to look into and see how they can develop their projects on the Navajo Nation, “and it’s a chance for us to really sit down with the tribal council members and our Navajo representatives and say, ‘Let’s talk about this.’
“We’re saying no to Desert Rock, but we’re also saying yes to something else.”

Sithe media liaison Frank Maisano of Bracewell & Giuliani said Thursday there’s no doubt that renewables are going to play an important role in developing a diverse fuel mix for the region.

“They will play a huge role and they can be a significant revenue source, they can be a significant job source, and they can be a significant power source. But renewables alone cannot carry the load that is intended for out there.

“Secondly, to deny the fact that the Navajo sit on 200 years of coal and to not use that to the benefit of the Navajo people is another significant reason why the Navajos need to do a coal plant as well as renewable projects,” Maisano said. “It’s not one or the other. It’s a matter of the right mix of both.”

He said Sithe is building two solar projects in Nevada as well as the coal-fired Toquop plant. “These are part and parcel of having diverse options. It’s not about blocking one. It’s about having the ability and diversity to do each of these and take full advantage of the opportunities that are presented.”

Maisano said that while renewables can generate a significant revenue stream, “I think it’s probably wildly optimistic to think that they can do as much right now as affordably as coal.”

Job report

Diné CARE’s Jan. 12 report, “Energy and Economic Alternatives to the Desert Rock Energy Project,” unveiled last week during Environmental Justice Day in Santa Fe, found that developing clean energy would create 80 percent more construction jobs and five times as many long-term operation and maintenance jobs compared to employment figures for Desert Rock.

The report further determined that clean energy would provide greater indirect job creation and economic multipliers within the regional economy.

“Wind, solar and energy-efficiency technologies, which are cost-effective, reliable and available, would provide greater Navajo economic development and lower cost electricity than Desert Rock, with fewer negative consequences and more sustainable benefits,” said Ecos’ Chris Caldwell, co-author of the report.

“Burning coal to produce electricity is not even the best, let alone the only form of economic development for the Navajo Nation,” he said.

The proposal from Sithe, DPA, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs to build the Desert Rock plant “has been insufficiently examined as a possible economic development option, the report says, in that it does not give sufficient considerations to alternatives to mining and burning coal.

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement devoted approximately two of its 1,500 pages to an analysis of alternative sources of energy and determined that their use would not meet the purpose and need for the project or were otherwise not feasible.

The interior Southwest — made up of Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado and Nevada – is home to 33 existing coal plants that produce approximately 319,000 gigawatt hours of electricity and 400 million tons of carbon dioxide annually. Another 19 plants have been proposed.

The Draft EIS for Desert Rock does not discuss the cumulative environmental impacts that would result from some, most, or all of these projects being approved, the report says.

“As a result, individual EIS documents for each project could assert that their individual contribution to air quality and climate change problems is modest by itself, and the federal government could choose to approve many or all of them.

“Only later would it become apparent that their total energy production greatly exceeds the regional need for new power, their total emissions cause major portions of the Southwest to drop out of compliance with air quality regulations, and that their total CO2 emissions would make compliance with individual state and regional climate stabilization targets impossible,” the report states.

It recommends the Draft EIS be revised to assess cumulative impacts of the current coal plant proposals on the drawing board. Those include two plants each in Arizona and New Mexico, six each in Colorado and Nevada, and three in Utah.

In terms of CO2 emissions, the proposed 13,017 megawatt capacity of the 19 plants would be equivalent to putting 16 million new cars on the road.

Maisano said the Desert Rock permit “is the strictest permit ever for a coal-fired power plant. We have gone beyond what the permit will present,” by agreeing to additional reductions in mercury and a 110 percent sulfur reduction.