Otter Tail are they telling us the truth?

Environmentalists may be right and the facts remain that Otter Tail may not be environmentally sound. Just look how long it took Otter Tail to clean up the foot of the lake.

Otter Tail is a regulated utility. Any extraordinary expense the company wishes to make must be justified and approved by the Public Utitilities Commission. Things are not always as easy as they would seem.

It is difficult to argue with Environmentalists. Who doesn't want the air and water clean? Who isn't concerned about environnental impact? Eco, green, environmentally friendly--it is the latest fad. You literally see it EVERYWHERE! Speaking out against it and in favor of environmental common sense is seen as politically incorrect, insensitive to children (i.e. future generations), etc.

Environmentalists have done great things to clean up industries. For example, the use of scrubbers is in response to their actions.

However, the group of envionmentalists speaking out against the Big Stone II plant have no suggestions and no baseload alternatives. They simply do not want the plant built here. Once their work is done and paycheck received (from naive donors who feel good about saving the planet), they go back to the East Coast and Twin Cities. I'd like to follow them home. Do they have LCD/plasma TVs which use 5 times more electricity. Is there home constantly air conditioned? Do they have the popular mega-fridges? How much are they practicing conservation?

The statement was is Otter Tail telling us the truth about the environmental effects of a new power plant. Why attack the environmentalist as being East Coast or from the Twin Cities.

If the power plant is so safe then build it where the electicity is needed rather than 1000 miles away and transmit the electricity over environmental danger zones (our lakes).

The real reason is that this plant is not as safe as alleged.

The East Coasters and Twin Citians I previously mentioned are the legal team and voices of the Environmentalists. You introduced them when you started your post "Environmentalists may be right". My point was that give some people a dollar and they'll argue the point from whatever direction you want them to regardless if it is how they truly follow through as they live their own lives.

Why is it not acceptable for me to "attack the environmentalists" but you are able to "attack" Otter Tail by initiating such a post?

The power will not be transmitted even close to 1000 miles away. That is a blatant exageration. The plant is part of the Midwest ISO system, thus it stays in our region. The plant is being built by 5 companies and 2 million of their customers are in MN.

What qualifications do you have to state "the plant is not as safe as alleged"? I surely do not have the knowledge base to say whether it is or is not with safe. I am convinced it is needed.

I also want the transmission lines built with a caveat that local wind projects (CBEDs) must be allowed on the lines and given an acceptable amount of MW space. To me, this would be a win-win for all.

Attack is a little extreme but criticism is healthy and encourages healthy debate. Personalizing the criticism by saying or attempting to label environmentalists as from the twin cities is a personalized attack that does not strengthen the position.

In 1968 the Cuyago River in Ohio caught fire due to pollution along the river. Coal powered plants have long been associated with lung and bronchial issues. Pollution caused by coal powered plants is well documented.

Here are the two issues, One. The fish and animal life along the Minnesota River almost to Appleton is contaminated with Mercury. An examination of the air east of the plant on many evenings is a brown haze. Should we be relying on studies produced by a company or groups of companies that stand to profit over the next thiry years in the millions or even billions of dollars.

Issue 2: This is especially true when Otter Tail for thirty years and millions of dollars in profits did not even fix up the foot of the lake.

I personally do not trust a word said by the people who represent the company that stands to make the most money.

mouthpiece wrote:

Personalizing the criticism by saying or attempting to label environmentalists as from the twin cities is a personalized attack that does not strengthen the position.

This is such a ostentatious thing to write!

mouthpiece wrote:

In 1968 the Cuyago River in Ohio caught fire due to pollution along the river.

MUCH has changed since 1968! I am sure this pollution was caused by more culprits than coal plants!

mouthpiece wrote:

The fish and animal life along the Minnesota River almost to Appleton is contaminated with Mercury.

I've already covered this in my prior post.

mouthpiece wrote:

An examination of the air east of the plant on many evenings is a brown haze. Should we be relying on studies produced by a company or groups of companies that stand to profit over the next thiry years in the millions or even billions of dollars.

:sherlock:Should we instead rely on your visual interpretations? I'm sure the plant is being operated according to governmental standards. Do you really think you can live in a world with zero pollution and still enjoy the standard of living we have all come to expect?

I will no longer reply to these posts. You obviously have your mind made up and are using this forum as a *mouthpiece* for your own interests.

I am not necessarily pro-coal plant. I AM for more generation sources that will ensure reliable power, at reasonable rates, and with doing as little environmental harm as is possible. Big Stone and the new plant seem to be the best options.

I think it would be quite fitting if those in opposition to plants would be the first ones to have their power shut off.

You again did not address the question! Why are you relying on studies from industries making millions and billions of dollars?

I concur with the present decision of government that Otter Tail is causing more pollution than is necessary. Seldom do I believe that government is correct but I concur with governments position on this one. Industries that stand to profit often times are less than forthright in these types of decisions. Do you want examples?

By the way, if Otter Tail is so environmentally concerned why have they not cleaned up the foot of the lake?

mouthpiece wrote:

I concur with the present decision of government that Otter Tail is causing more pollution than is necessary. Seldom do I believe that government is correct but I concur with governments position on this one.

What decision are your referring to? Please provide links to internet resources.

mouthpiece wrote:

By the way, if Otter Tail is so environmentally concerned why have they not cleaned up the foot of the lake?

I presume you are talking about the electrical structures. I would have to guess it would cost tens of millions of dollars to reroute all of that. I would think that Otter Tail alone does not own it as the Big Stone Power plant is owned by 3 companies, not just Otter Tail. Do you really think ratepayers for all 3 of those companies are going to want their rates to go up to make it "prettier" for those few people in Ortonville that even notice it? Incidentally, until you posted I never even noticed it was there!

In this day of bailouts you take the position that Otter Tail who have literally made thousands of dollars on the power plant does not have a duty to fix the land they polluted because the stockholders do not want to pay for the repairs. Why should taxpayers keep paying for the mistakes of people who profit from the damage they cause?

In this day in age, I want to know how much money the CEO's of Lehman Brothers and AIG have made in the last five years? Why should taxpayers keep bailing out the rich for their mistakes!

You claim that there is little pollution that is causing harm because the government is saying that the power plant is safe. You also point out that the Eahtonka was a great way to reminisce and was good for tourism. The Eahtonka was shut down because the government said it was unsafe! The investment portion of the Eahtonka was shut down because the governement said it was illegal and the Mayor signed the Cease and Desist order.

Why are we relying on government to keep us safe on one hand and on the other glorifying illegal actions?

May I suggest relative to the power plant the government is only saying that there are not enough people in this area to out vote the power plant and the pollution it creates would be extremely harmful if located in Chicago!

My suggestion is that we should be careful what we read by those who can profit.

Approval seems imminent but are we safe.

I would really like the answer to this question from any of our readers,

In Tennessee a ash spill has created all kinds of problems for the locals. A decline in real estate value, concern for children and health issues. I would like someone from Otter Tail tell me that our new power plant prevents these exposures.

See www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2009-01-01-spill_N.htm?csp=34

From the earliest posts it seems that mouthpiece has supported the idea of the power plant, but would like to have some questions answered and the questions seem valid. I too hope that someone from the powerplant will answer the questions.
From our standpoint, we would stand to gain financially from the big stone II being built, more people to come to the movies! But having learned the hard way that these ventures affect more than myself i really have had no opinion about it, because i am not informed enough.
But this summer we did find out something interesting...
Over the years there are maps that show the aquifers in the area, a lot of Grant County is over 2 aquifers, one shallow and one deep. In the mid 1990's the maps were changed to First Occurance maps, there was a long convoluted bunch of reasoning about why, but not being over an aquifer made it easier to allow permits for cafos. When someone tried to get the aquifer maps here they could not, they had to go to Clear Lake to get them. But when the Big Stone II project was proposed, among there information was not the first occurance maps, but the aquifer maps, suddenly ressurected for proof of enough water.
Air is extremely important and so is water, we cannot live without those two things, i don't like the thought that things are manipulated either way as a means to an end.
Also, some doctors refer to the whetstone valley as 'cancer valley', has it always been this way? Or has it only been since the power plant?
So keep those questions coming.

There are many here in our community who support the Big Stone II project. They have weighed the pros and the cons. To my knowledge Big Stone Power and the incoming Big Stone II have put in many hours and much money to be in compliance with state and federal regulations. The people who work there live in our communities and raise their families right here. Their confidence in working and living under the shadow of the plant is evidence to me that they are doing their best to keep everyone safe as far as I can see. I look forward to them coming on The Forums and telling us their side of the story. Much as been written about them but it is better to hear it from them.

Joelle your story about the map exchange is disconcerting. One could possibly surmise that someone might have had an agenda concerning the cafos. The Big Stone II comes out looking like a hero on this one because they were able to get the maps so now they are public. Now that the maps are out there we should see no more problems with needing them if there are any future cafo cases.