An appeal filed in Hughes County District Court claims that the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission ignored the evidence on global warming when it approved construction of the Big Stone II power plant in July.

The South Dakota appeal, filed by the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Fresh Energy, Izaak Walton League of America and the Union of Concerned Scientists, states that the evidence of the coal-fired power plant increasing carbon dioxide pollution every year by millions of tons was not refuted.

Carbon dioxide is the chief global warming pollutant and the record was filled with testimony from scientific experts that global warming will have a harmful effect on the environment.

“Under South Dakota Law, a new utility like the one formed to build Big Stone II must prove it won’t pose a serious injury to the environment,” said Janette Brimmer, legal director of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy. “Big Stone II didn’t refute our evidence of either the facts of global warming or that the plant will contribute millions of tons a year to the problem. We are saying the public utilities commission’s decision that Big Stone was not a problem for the environment was arbitrary and capricious and wasn’t based on the evidence.”

The appeal was filed late last month and the statement of issues, outlining the facts of the appeal, was filed Friday.

During the testimony before the utilities commission, the four energy and environment groups pointed out that the Big Stone generating plant would send more than 4.5 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. That represented a 34 percent increase over the 13.2 million tons the entire state of South Dakota produces annually. It would produce more global warming pollution than all the cars in the state. Finally, the evidence showed that to stave off the worst effects of global warming we must make large cuts in the amount of carbon dioxide pollution, not permit increases.

The Big Stone II representatives did not refute any of those facts. Instead, they tried to minimize their responsibility, saying their contribution was a small amount compared to the level in the rest of the world.
All three of the public utilities commissioners said in their deliberations they were concerned about the amount of carbon dioxide, but agreed it wasn’t their job to regulate the pollutant.

The groups filing the appeal also presented testimony before the commission that alternatives relying mainly on wind energy would provide the needed power without the pollution, while also creating seven times as many permanent jobs as the coal-fired plant.

Coincidentally, on the same day the appeal was filed last week, one of the commissioners and Gov. Mike Rounds were at a ground breaking ceremony for the largest wind-generation project in South Dakota, 50 megawatts to go with a new 100 megawatts across the border in Lincoln County, Minnesota.

“In particular, the project will yield significant benefits to the local economy in Brookings County with new job opportunities and an expanding tax base,” the governor said.

Arguments in the appeal likely won’t occur until late December or early January with a decision sometime after that.

-end-