National & Minnesota Report
Tundra, is a word one would normally hear on a nature show about Alaska or the Article Circle. Project Tundra employs technology to capture and store carbon in an effort to reduce the carbon footprint of the coal-fired Milton R Young power plant located near Center, North Dakota.
One of the project leaders is Minnkota Power Cooperative, operates the plant and delivers its energy production to 11 energy power cooperatives in communities across northern Minnesota and North Dakota. Together, Minnkota and its members provide not-for-profit electricity to 150,000 consumers including schools, farms, and small businesses.
In spite of the aggressive push to end coal-based electrical production on some are trying to return carbon into the ground and sequestrate on the site of the power plant. One reality is clear, America’s electrical grid is in trouble. The number of power plants that provide electricity upon demand are closing more rapidly than they are being replaced. It is important to address this situation because the continued reduction of the electrical capacity’s base-load will seriously harm the economy, lower standards of living, and threaten public health, especially in rural areas.
Of course, its obvious, Americans also faces another crisis: the threat of global climate change, which is greatly effected greenhouse gas emissions from the coal-fueled power plants. But, these facilities produce the majority power on our grid in Minnesota and its neighboring states. Project Tundra, seeks an innovative approach to try and address the impacts of carbon emissions.
In 2015, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change the United States and nearly 200 other countries agreed, nations must work together to keep the increase in global average temperature at or below 1.5ºC – or else risk even greater public health risks, not to mention greater strain on power grid capacities.
Thus we as Minnesotans face a conundrum. There is a nearly universal agreement among scientists, the ambitious climate-safety goals of the Paris Agreement cannot be achieved without widespread deployment of new technology to reduce and, ultimately, eliminate human-produced greenhouse gases.
Yet as the United Nations Assembly pressed for in 2023, the necessary “energy transition” away from fossil fuels must occur “in a just, orderly, and equitable manner.” The immediately closing coal plants simply because of what they are, would adversely impact local economies which depend on them. A completely disruptive to an already strained electric grid, and inequitable to already marginalized communities already struggling to access affordable, reliable electricity.
So, what is to be done? More specifically, what can be done here in Minnesota to protect the communities that depend on coal-fired plants, the consumers who rightfully expect electricity when they need it, and above all the climate — the health of which is critical to the future health of all of us?
Over the last three years, a bipartisan group of policymakers in Congress have provided critical incentives for carbon capture and storage, which in simplest terms is a way to capture greenhouse gasses and store them deep underground, rather than releasing them into the atmosphere.
This technology will allow states, communities, and operators to keep enough coal-fired power plants operating to meet baseload demand, while significantly reducing their greenhouse gasses and other pollutants, such as sulfur dioxides and soot.
As a cosponsor of the Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage Tax Credit Amendments Act, Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN), stated her thoughts on the reasons behind her colleagues’ willingness to risk criticism from the extreme wings of both parties to move the technology forward.
“The science is clear … (that) climate change is real, it’s caused by humans, and we need urgent action to address it,” Smith said, but that action must be taken with an eye toward other challenges, goals, and values important to her constituents.
“Carbon capture and storage is a crucial technology for reducing emissions from biofuels, steel, and other industries important to Minnesota,” Smith said, and apparently her cosponsors felt similarly. “You can see from the Senate coalition supporting this legislation that what’s good for our environment and good for our economy is bipartisan, as it should be,” she added.
Project Tundra promises benefits far beyond those it will bring to its financial and technology partners, or even to the local communities in eastern North Dakota and Minnesota that depend on Minnkota for reliable and sustainable electricity.
Project Tundra can serve as the springboard for carbon capture and storage and is an example of the innovation of the Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage Tax Credit Amendments Act and anyone with a stake in the region’s and the world’s economic and environmental futures should seriously consider the project’s virtues.