Thursday, April 17, 2008

So much for the Minnesota River...


American Rivers has issued a report listing the Minnesota River as the 5th most endangered river in the nation. As the report states this is primarily due to the proposed Big Stone II (yes, there is already a Big Stone I plant in operation) coal fired power plant, which will be built on Big Stone Lake, the headwaters of the Minnesota River. The primary problems with locating this power plant here is the copious water consumption and increased mercury deposition in the Minnesota River valley. Not to mention the fact that “clean coal” is nothing more than a myth, much like the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny (sorry kids). This issue is compounded because the Big Stone II plant will be located on the South Dakota side of the Minnesota-South Dakota boarder.

From the mining process to the burning in power plants, the environmental decimation that follows in the wake of the coal industry will be remembered as a blight left on future generations. With fish Minnesota consumption advisories covering most bodies of water in the state with sufficient testing, it is hardly prudent to increase the deposition of mercury in the Minnesota River Basin. With the substantial increase in water withdrawal from the headwaters of the Minnesota River, current impairments to water quality in the Minnesota River will be amplified.

Our Federal and State Government has spent millions of dollars working to improve water quality in the Minnesota River Basin, and much of those gains will be wiped out by an ill-advised scheme as this. The press and the Minnesota state government have also been shamefully silent on this issue. Apparently the citizens of the Minnesota River Basin are providing the leadership our “leaders” seem to be neglecting. We should be thankful we have groups such as Friends of the Minnesota River Valley, CURE and Coalition for a Clean Minnesota River to work in our best interest to stop this foolish endeavor. In a time when permits for new coal plants are being denied on environmental and economic grounds, why is this even being considered? Our leaders need to take a small political risk and stick their necks out for the well being of their constituents.

No comments: