Natural gas opponents call on PSC to block largest piece of We Energies’ $2B plan

Dozens of people are calling on state utility regulators to block key pieces of a more than $2 billion plan to build new natural gas infrastructure in southeast Wisconsin.

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin held a pair of public hearings Tuesday, allowing state residents to weigh in on We Energies’ plans to build a roughly $1.2 billion natural gas plant and a more than $456.3 million liquefied natural gas storage facility in Oak Creek. 

The new natural gas plant in Oak Creek would essentially replace aging coal units at the South Oak Creek power plant. Two of those units came offline last year, and the remaining two are scheduled to come offline this year. 

During Tuesday’s hearing, opponents shared concerns about negative health and climate impacts of burning fossil fuels and the potential impact of the projects on electric bills. Supporters argued the projects are necessary to meet future energy needs and support economic growth.

Jodi Koehler, who testified Tuesday against the plan, said We Energies’ fossil fuel investments would “devastate Wisconsin’s clean air for decades.”

“Our motto is ‘Forward,’ but a fossil fuel plant is a dangerous leap backwards,” she said. “Natural gas is not clean energy.”

We Energies has framed the natural gas plans as necessary to meet rising energy demands from industrial development in the region, including multiple planned power-hungry data centers in southeast Wisconsin. A natural gas plant emits about half of the CO2 of a coal-burning plant, though some studies have shown that when gas leaks are taken into account, the difference is much less pronounced.

The Oak Creek gas plant will produce more than 1.3 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year, while a planned Kenosha County gas plant will produce around 590,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions, according to environmental reports from the PSC.

The investments in Oak Creek represent the largest chunk of the utility’s more than $2 billion plan to build natural gas infrastructure in southeast Wisconsin. The plan also includes a roughly $300 million natural gas plant in Kenosha County and a more than $200 million gas pipeline in Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee Counties. 

The coal-fired Elm Road Generating Station on the company’s Oak Creek campus is expected to be converted to natural gas in a separate project, as We Energies’ parent company works to stop using coal by 2032.

Racine resident Gloria Randall-Hewitt, who testified against the fossil fuel plans Tuesday, said the projects carry a hefty price tag and will harm the environment.

“Not only are these new plants not needed, but they are the opposite of what We Energies should do if they truly are concerned about providing energy to possible new very large energy customers,” Randall-Hewitt said. “The logical move would be for We Energies to build battery storage, not new methane gas plants.”

While many comments were against the projects, union members did speak in support of the We Energies’ plan, saying the Oak Creek power plant project would create 800 construction jobs.

Dan Whiteaker, a member of the Carpenters Local 231 union in Pewaukee, told regulators the economic impact would go beyond just construction jobs.

“[When] you work a 12- to 14-hour day, you’re going to find the closest place to grab something to eat and something to drink after work,” he said. “With the infrastructure happening along the I-94 corridor, building this plant will provide the needed energy to sustain its growth.”

We Energies has also pledged to invest more than $9 billion in renewables by 2029. The company says natural gas was crucial to meeting demand spikes last August, when heat indexes reached more than 100 degrees. 

“It is critical to have quick-start gas plants available and running when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine,” said Brendan Conway, a spokesperson for We Energies, in a statement. “It goes beyond keeping the lights on — it means keeping factories, offices, schools, churches and hospitals running and safe during any and all weather conditions.”

But testimony from an outside expert on behalf of the nonprofit Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin found that We Energies may have correctly identified an increased capacity need in its system but “exaggerated this need beyond what is reasonable.”

“The commission should consider approving only a portion of the proposed generation capacity now, while approving the remainder requested only as certain conditions are met,” said consultant Edward Burgess in his testimony, filed March 18.

Ahead of Tuesday’s hearing, environmental advocates held a press conference in Oak Creek. They said pollution from gas plants causes negative health effects, citing a study that found the Oak Creek and Kenosha County gas plants could result in billions of dollars in health and economic costs over 30 years. 

The deadline to submit written comments to the PSC about the Oak Creek gas plant and the natural gas storage facility is April 7.

Editor’s note: The Citizens Utility Board of Wisconsin is a sponsor of WPR. This story was updated to reflect that the deadline to submit comments about the Oak Creek gas plant was extended.