The Tale of Two Ashland Projects by pxt10903

VIEWS: 11 PAGES: 15

									The Tale of Two Ashland Projects




           David Donovan
      Manager, Regulatory Policy
Bay Front Operations

 35 full-time employees
 Wood purchases of  $5.0 million in 2008
 $20 million+ local economic impact
 Generates an average of 325,000 MWh/year
    Helps meet Wisconsin’s RPS
 Beneficial use of fly ash to construct “pad
 sites” to aid local farmers, ranchers, others



                                                 2
  Fuels at Bay Front


 Waste wood

 Natural gas

 Coal

 Shredded tires




                       3
Bay Front Gasification Project

 Need for long-term plan for Bay Front
 Financial and environmental considerations
 Convert remaining coal-fired boiler to use
 biomass gasification technology
 Project allows plant to use 100% biomass
 Approximately $58 million
 Adds 200,00-250,000 tons of biomass per year




                                                 4
Biomass Gasification Process




                               5
Major Environmental Improvements

 NOx: 60%
 SO2:   80%
 Particulate Matter:   80%
 Avoids 100,000 tons coal per year
 Avoids 200,000 tons CO2 emissions per year
 Reduction in mercury emissions




                                               6
Regulatory Process

 Feb. 2009 – Filed Application with PSCW
   Certificate of Authority vs. CPCN
 March-April 2009 – MPUC, NDPSC applications
 Spring-Summer 2009 – Environmental
 Assessment
 Fall 2009 – Public hearings
 Fall or Winter 2009 – PSCW decision




                                                7
Customer and Community Impact

 Eco-municipality goals of Chequamegon Bay
 Retain fuel costs in Wisconsin
 Support local economic development
 Achieve carbon management goals
 Meet renewable portfolio standards
 Support local agricultural industry




                                              8
Ashland Lakefront Project




                            9
10
History of Ashland and the Site

 Wood processing activities            1884-1939
 Manufactured Gas Plant operation      1885-1947
 Ashland County                        1939-1942
 City of Ashland (landfill and WWTP)   1942-now




                                                    11
Project History

 WDNR site evaluation               1994
 NSP characterizes MGP site         1995-1997
 Site proposed for listing on NPL   Dec. 2000
 Listed on NPL                      Sept. 2002




                                                  12
Ashland Lakefront Project

 Schroeder Lumber
    Occupied the site from 1901 to 1939.
    Harvested more than 50,000,000 board-feet of logs
     per year.
    Operated sawmill, lath mill and planing mill at this site.
    Produced finished lumber, creosoted treated railroad
     ties, piles for dock construction, roof shingles and
     cedar posts.
    Shipped wood from pulp mills to Fox River Valley.
    Employed hundreds of people at the site, paying some
     of the best wages in the area. A $1-million company
     in 1901.
                                                                  13
Ashland Lakefront Project

 City of Ashland
   Wastewater treatment plant
   Municipal and construction debris landfill
   Construction of the marina

 Canadian National Railroad




                                                 14
Ashland Lakefront Project

 Remedial investigation completed   2007
 Feasibility study completed        2008
 Framework document signed          2008


What’s next?
Who pays?

                                            15

								
To top