Logan resident Jessica Murray said she had never felt prouder of the democratic process than she did in January when the Logan City Council, after hearing more than 30 members of the public speak against the idea, rejected a contract that would have committed the city to purchasing fossil fuels for decades.
And she had never felt more disappointed, she said, than when she learned the council would be revisiting the decision — at a reduced scale — which it did in a Tuesday meeting.
“I’m here once again to urge you to make the right choice,” Murray said before an energized crowd of about 75 during the public comment portion of the meeting, “and reject a 30-year investment in fossil fuels, even if it’s a reduced commitment.”
With two of the main coal-fired power plants the city purchases its power from shutting down in coming years, the council has been trying to find a reliable, around-the-clock power supply. City officials say that between January and Tuesday’s meeting, no other options have been found, which is what led them to reconsider.
Murray was one of 24 people who spoke out Tuesday against the city’s plan to invest in 15 megawatts from a planned natural gas plant in Power County, Idaho — half of the 30 megawatts initially considered — as a solution to the city’s looming baseload power gap.
Many criticized the city’s continued reliance on fossil fuels, emphasized the impact on future generations and called for greater investment in renewable energy sources.
“The current administration is trying to walk our country back years in terms of climate mitigation and adaptation,” Murray said, “but we do not have to be part of this. This is our city, our economy, our health and future.”
Despite this, the council voted to move forward with the deal.
Four individuals spoke in favor of the project, including Scott Nelson, a controller at Schreiber Foods. He argued that a stable power supply is essential for local businesses and that renewables alone cannot yet meet the city’s energy needs.
At one point in 2022, he said, Schreiber’s had to purchase power on the open market due to power shortages, which resulted in a $90,000 monthly surcharge for the business.
“We’re going to be shutting businesses down,” Nelson said.
The city’s director of light and power, Mark Montgomery, said he explored every possible renewable energy option to fill the power gap that could hit the city as soon as its first coal plant shuts down in 2029. The second plant, originally set to close in 2032, now has a tentative closure date of around 2042 due to the lack of reliable baseload power alternatives.
Baseload power is the minimum amount of electricity needed at all times, no matter the time of day or year, Montgomery said. It’s the constant level of energy used by things like homes, refrigerators and businesses.
And, he added, it must be available 24/7 — every day of the year — to meet this consistent demand.
“And renewables,” Montgomery said, “solar, batteries and wind — they stop when the sun goes down and when the wind doesn’t blow. They don’t contribute to that very lowest minimum amount of power that we need.”
He said coal, natural gas, nuclear, hydro and geothermal are the only power sources capable of providing baseload power. However, right now, natural gas and coal are the only options available to Logan.
Montgomery said he has signed up for half a dozen geothermal power projects in recent years, only to be ignored by the projects a week later. While he has heard talk of nuclear power as a potential option, he said it wouldn’t be available for another 15 to 20 years.
“It’s coming, and it’s going to be awesome when it comes,” Montgomery said, “but until it does, I’ve got to have something.”
Not factoring in future growth, the city needs 18 megawatts of power to replace the energy lost from the expected coal plant closures. Despite this, the council voted to invest in only 15 megawatts of the project, which will be financed over 20 years and available for the city to purchase, potentially, for more than 30 years.
Council member Ernesto Lopez was the only one to vote against the project, stating that he wanted to explore other options.
“I do fear that if we wait until we have more red air days in the summer, or in the winter,” Lopez said, “so many of them that everybody is knocking on our doors to say, ‘Hey, we need the clean energy now, because we have bad air days,’ it’ll be too late.”
The council’s discussion was met with outcry from audience members. Patrick Belmont, vice chair of the city’s Renewable Energy and Sustainability Advisory Board, who has been a vocal advocate for an alternative solution, stormed out in protest.
“I will see myself out,” Belmont yelled from the back of the room. Referring to climate change, he added, “This is costing people’s lives, driving millions of people out of their homes. They lose everything. I’m leaving.”
