Hit the pause button on natural gas plant?

No, say Platte River Power Authority board members. They will stay the course on a new plant that will cost $350 million

by Allen Best

Directors of Platte River Power Authority, the utility that supplies electricity to four municipalities in northern Colorado, had heard exhortations to halt plans to build a natural gas plant while outside expertise was consulted.

“Ditch the new gas plant and give the citizens of the Front Range something to actually be proud of,” said Barbara Krupnik-Goldman.

She and other opponents called for Platte River to get an independent review by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory of their plans to build a 200-megawatt natural gas plant. Estimated cost for the aero derivative turbines is $352.9 million.

Platte River – which provides wholesale power to Fort Collins, Loveland, Estes Park and Longmont – adopted a goal in 2018 of 100% non-carbon energy by 2030. That resolution, however, was footnoted with nine conditions about what would be necessary to achieve the goal.

The utility plans to end burning of coal at its Rawhide plant north of Fort Collins. It also has an interest in a coal plant at Craig, which will also be closing. And it also has plans to join the Southwest Power Pool regional transmission organization, which operates a market for sharing of electricity.

Kevin Cross, who represents several sustainability groups, said the directors should not approve the budget that included an $80.65 million commitment for the new plant. He rejected the idea that construction of a gas plant must begin in 2025, as Platte River wants to do.

“Even if a new gas plant were necessary, there is no reason to rush into the construction process, which is what I fear you are doing,” he said. “Given the impact that building a new gas plant would have on electric rates and on the environment, we believe that the board should do a little more due diligence before voting on additional funding for this project.”

Nearly all electrical utilities in Colorado have decided that they need more natural gas as a bridge into the future even as they close coal plants. Xcel Energy wants to add between 1.5 and 2.6 gigawatts of natural gas capacity as part of its just transition electric resource plan that is before the Public Utilities Commission.

That’s 7 to 13 times as much capacity as Platte River plans.

Tri-State Generation and Transmission wants to add natural gas on the Western Slope. United Power, now independent of Tri-State, is constructing a 162-megawatt gas plant near Keenesburg.

If utilities have learned to integrate renewables at high levels, they worry about the times when wind and solar come up short. Gas can provide that, if it has had its own problems, such as during Winter Storm Uri in February 2022. Supplies of natural gas in that case ran short.

Leslie Glustrom, who closely watches Xcel Energy, concedes the need for some natural gas while energy storage and transmission get figured out. The task, she says, is to avoid overinvesting in expensive natural gas capacity that will not become stranded in coming decades — or even just a decade. She points to the fast-moving advances in energy storage technologies.

Xcel Energy already has great natural gas capacity. In its just transition electric resource plan now before state regulators, it proposes another 1.5 to 2.6 gigawatts of additional capacity. Above, a plant near Hudson. Photo/Allen Best

Twenty years ago, Colorado utilities were convinced they needed to build much larger coal-fired power plants. Xcel did so with its Comanche 3 unit at Pueblo, a $1 billion investment that some people — including Glustrom — now see as a stranded asset. Tri-State during that same time wanted to build an even larger coal plant but was rebuffed by the Kansas government. That rejection can now be seen clearly as a good thing for Tri-State’s members.

However, there’s another twist to this. Xcel says that after a long period of relatively flat demand, the result of productive energy efficiency measures, it expects to see soaring demand, primarily because of data centers but also because of new demand for electric vehicles and for space and water heating in buildings.

“Why the rush to commit to a $350 million+ asset with a 30-year lifecycle,” said Fort Collins resident Peter Eberle in a letter to the Platte River directors. Platte River wants to start construction in 2025 in order to have generation by 2028. United Power, he wrote, expects to have power from its new natural gas plant within 18 months. And he also pointed to the benefits of the regional transmission organization.

“Committing to a $350 million investment years before that commitment is absolutely necessary flies in the face of financial best practice and fiscal responsibility,” he wrote.

Directors were unpersuaded. Gary Hall, the mayor of Estes Park, said he tries to take the long view. “We all share one atmosphere and the oceans and the water. It’s all connected,” he said.

Hall, a director of Platte River, spoke about evolving battery technology and other considerations. And then he landed on his position: Trying to get all renewables by 2030, he said, was too costly and also threatened reliability.

Joan Peck, the mayor of Longmont, then called the question. She suggested she stood behind the decision to go forward with a gas plant but wanted to put it before the board even more directly in the interest of transparency.

She moved that the board direct the staff to put on hold the payment for disputable resources and contract with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory or a similar organization to review Platte River’s integrated resource plan.

The motion failed for lack of a second. Platte River is staying the course on its natural gas decision.

This story was amended. The original story said that Platte River directors in 2018 had adopted a resolution stipulating a goal fo 100% renewables by 2030. The resolution actually identified “non-carbon.”