News: City of Madison

Charter Street plant will cause campus closures

Public weighs in on structure’s environmental impact; planned to be completely coal free by January 2012
Charter Street plant will cause campus closures

Lukas Keapproth/The Badger Herald

Officials said construction of the new Charter Street Heating Plant will necessitate closures of the bike path and East Campus Mall.

The coordinators of the new Charter Street Heating Plant invited the public to voice their opinions after a presentation detailing the project’s environmental impact Wednesday night.

The $250 million project will burn biomass fuel in the form of woodchips and pellet wood transported by rail. The plant’s design includes storage silos, conveyor belts and three boilers that convert fuel into energy.

The intent of the meeting was to address the community’s concerns with the new biomass-burning plant in an Environmental Impact Statement. Concerns ranged from noise to construction to the logistics of operation.

Project coordinator Ben Peotter of Ayres Associates said the three years of construction beginning in August 2010 will affect students through the expected closure of the bike path from Charter Street to West Washington Avenue, the closure of East Campus Mall and noise. Concerns also involved the increased amount of rail cars that will be the primary transportation for biomass fuel.

University of Wisconsin Physical Plant director John Harrod said concern of the material drop-off is no longer an issue because the noise will be contained. He said the cars will travel indoors to a designated building to dump the biomass.

In addition to construction noise concerns, the public had traffic concerns as well. Peotter said construction may close Mills Street and West Dayton Street for three weeks and limit North Park Street to one lane in each direction. Around 80 parking stalls will also be removed.

However, Peotter said the long-term benefits of the plant outweigh the short-term issues.

“The quality of the facility is important to us,” Harrod said. “Our goal is to celebrate the new facility by making it visible to the community so you can see and appreciate the process.”

According to Peotter, the plant will be coal-free by January 2012. He said the plant would support long-term campus growth, increase electrical production and provide a partnership with the university for research opportunities involving other alternative fuels.

“When we’re all said and done, there’ll be no coal,” Harrod said. “That is significant. We’re going to be able to make a significant contribution to the overall environmental quality of Madison.”

Burning biomass instead of coal reduces nitrous oxide, particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions into the atmosphere substantially, according to the Ayers Associates projections.

The new plant will primarily burn biomass, but is capable of utilizing natural gas and oil in emergencies. The current plant burns a mix of materials for fuel, including coal, tires and oil.

Although some members of the public were unsure if biomass is the best alternative for fuel, former UW mechanical engineering professor Ken Ragland said he’s in favor of biomass.

“[This plant] creates a closed loop system, recycling carbon dioxide,” he said. “We want to maximize energy needs with fuel supply. Biomass is an excellent sustainable, environmentally-correct option.”

Peotter said Ayres Associates will consider all of the public’s concerns as the company writes the final draft of their Environmental Impact Statement over the next three weeks.

16 Comments | Leave a comment

user-pic

$250 million tax payer dollars, as well as 3 years of construction labor and energy, thrown away to destroy a cost efficient high energy density fuel power plant and replace it with a cost inefficient low density fuel power plant.

Pay no attention to Economics 101, the University’s mounting budget problems, the huge Wisconsin state budget deficit and Wisconsin’s snowballing debt. The biomass plant is the “environmentally-correct option”. Nothing else need be considered…..

user-pic

It would certainly have been more intelligent to use the plant as a test bed for technologies to reduce the adverse effects of coal power. There is little chance that the USA will be able to eliminate coal fueled electric power plants any time soon.

I wonder how much more expensive the new scheme will be?

Maybe a pebble-bed nuclear power plant would have been the best idea?

user-pic

I like how the biomass will cause a lot more trips by trains. Correct me if I’m wrong, but do these trains run on magic? If so, we wouldn’t have to use more fuel for them to take more trips…

user-pic

There will be more trips by trains, because biomass is less efficient than coal. Hence it requires more biomass than coal to produce the same amount of steam.

user-pic

i hate those fucking trains

user-pic

How I have hated the coal that rained little particles on me as I walked past the plant all these years. I can’t wait for change. And I believe the biomass comes from Wisconsin, rather than from a mountain in another state.

user-pic

Now you will have little particles of “not coal” raining down - but maybe they’ll be lighter to spread the joy over a larger area.

user-pic

After a rain, just wait for the smell of wet biomass to waft across campus.

user-pic

6:32, you didn’t know that trains run on pixie dust? how misinformed are you? haha..that is preciously the type of thing that liberals fail to take notice of all in the name of the “environment”. they also don’t care that the plant will run on trees, but hell no if a logger tries to cut down a tree to build a house or make some paper

it’s much like they forget all the diesel fuel that will be burned throughout the construction of their stupid low-speed rail.

user-pic

Hahah, just another example of ill-thought out policy in the name of being “Sustainable”. What a joke.

user-pic

I read in a different article, that there isn’t enough switch grass or scrap wood in the state of Wisconsin, to meet the demand of the new heating plant. The university is considering purchasing switch grass from the Dakota’s or Louisiana.

user-pic

Maybe they could use cow manure? The whole project has been running on BS anyway.

user-pic

This article explains the shortage of wood biomass and concerns about forests.

http://dailyreporter.com/blog/2009/11/22/bio-fuel-growth-raises-concerns-about-forests/

user-pic

I will be happy to have cleaner air. I live downwind of the coal plant and suffer respiratory and sinus problems aggravated by the poor air quality in the area.

user-pic

So move upwind of the plant, it’s obviously been there longer thasn you have. What’s next for you? Move to the airport flight path and then complain about the plane noise?

Too bad they didn’t change out for nuclear, that would have actually improved air quality.

user-pic

This project is a waste of tax payers money. The heating plant should burn dollar bills, instead of burning biomass.

Leave a comment

To comment anonymously or if signed in, leave name and e-mail blank.

Donate