Home    News    May 2002

News from the Keweenaw Peninsula Posted May 7, 2002 Text © 2002 Katie Alvord for Keweenaw Now Photos © as noted

Proposed Trans-Superior Cable would hit Keweenaw Peninsula

By Katie Alvord

THUNDER BAY, ONT. -- As part of "bold new expansion plans" announced this spring, an electrical utilities group in Canada hopes to lay a power transmission cable across Lake Superior from Thunder Bay, Ontario, to the Keweenaw Peninsula.

A press release circulated by Northwest Energy Works, a group of six Ontario utilities including Thunder Bay Hydro, says these plans call for "exporting power from Thunder Bay to Pigeon River, Ontario, and then east under Lake Superior to the Keweenaw Peninsula."

Lake Superior along the Keweenaw Peninsula's north shore, photographed here in a view of Great Sand Bay near Eagle Harbor, will be the destination of an underwater power transmission cable if plans of an electrical utilities group in Ontario, Canada, materialize. A projected petroleum coke power plant in Thunder Bay, Ont., would produce the electricity, which would reach the Keweenaw's north shore at a still undetermined location. (File photo © 2001 by Michele Anderson.)

According to officials, this would be the first major high-voltage electrical cable under Lake Superior. Smaller cables and pipelines already underlie the Great Lakes for shorter distances in a number of locations.

The cross-lake cable would transmit electricity from a proposed 1120 megawatt power plant in Thunder Bay. The plant, owned and operated by U.S.-based SynFuel Technologies, would be fueled by petroleum coke, a byproduct of oil refining. Officials hope to break ground this fall, and start generating power 18 to 24 months later. And they hope to have the trans-Superior cable installed before the plant starts operating.

Plans for the plant hit a snag at the end of April, when SynFuel owners found land taxes too high at the chosen site, on Fort William First Nation land just outside Thunder Bay. Newspaper reports indicate SynFuel is looking for a different location, although Fort William tribal leaders still hope the plant can be built on their land; and the parties are negotiating.

The proposal comes as Ontario deregulates electricity markets province-wide. As of May 1, 2002, Ontario power consumers can choose their suppliers; and the province's hydroelectric generating interests are being sold off and privatized.

Deregulation has generated a surge in power plant construction proposals and increased interest in exporting some of Canada's inexpensive energy to the power-hungry United States.

"The market for generation is opening," said Larry Hebert, general manager of Thunder Bay Hydro and leading spokesperson for the Northwest Energy Works project.

Cable will require new overhead lines

Once on land, electricity transmission would continue toward points south, likely via high-voltage overhead power lines.

"The goal is to get down to the Michigan and Illinois markets," said Hebert.

To reach these markets, new overhead power lines would likely be needed, said Dave Valine, manager of substation engineering for Wisconsin Public Service, which owns UPPCO (Upper Peninsula Power Company). Right now, the Upper Peninsula doesn't have the electrical infrastructure to take that power and disperse it, Valine explained.

"If they're going to do this, they're going to have to build a lot of overhead wires," he noted.

Bringing power to the Keweenaw Peninsula itself is not a goal, but Hebert said the cable could distribute power to the region if there were a market. He noted that the availability of additional inexpensive power could fuel more economic development here.

"Both mining and logging take tremendous amounts of power, so if you have cheap sources of it and plenty of it, then you can get that kind of development," he said.

The exact location at which the underwater cable would hit the Keweenaw will not be determined until the completion of engineering studies, Hebert added. At whatever point the cable transitions from water to land, a transformer station would be constructed. Hebert also expected that the cable would use direct current (DC), and would require a conversion station to switch to alternating current (AC) at whatever point the market for power commenced.

Much of the total Cdn$9 billion total project cost would pay for transmission lines, which run about Cdn$1 million per mile over land and slightly more under water. The current total does not include the cost of any property settlements that may be necessary. The proposed power plant would cost about Cdn$1.9 billion.

Project developers hope to benefit by funding the project with Canadian dollars and selling electricity for more valuable U.S. dollars. Currently one dollar U.S. is worth about $1.50 Canadian.

Army Corps, DEQ permits needed

"Laying the cable is probably the easiest part," he added.

Hebert also expects an easier time with permitting in Michigan than in other states. 

"Michigan officials seem to be more transmission-friendly than either Wisconsin or Minnesota at this time," he explained.

In Michigan, the project would require approval  from both the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).

From the Corps, the project would need a permit issued pursuant to the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Section 10, explained Rich Gutleber of the agency's Marquette office. A wetland permit may also be necessary, he added.

"If wetlands are affected onshore, they'd be required to get a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act," Gutleber explained.

He noted the Corps would issue or deny applicable permits based on a number of considerations.

 "We would be looking at the impact to the public's use of these waterways," Gutleber said. "Just laying a cable on the bottom is pretty innocuous in terms of impacts." 

The biggest concern, he added, would be the possibility of anchors snagging the cable. If the cable is laid in a trench, then concerns about disturbing habitat are raised.

From the DEQ, the project would need a permit to lay cable on Great Lakes bottomland, according to Greg Merricle of the Permit Consolidation Unit of the DEQ Land and Water Management Division in Lansing.

Merricle explained that when his office receives an application, they issue a public notice seeking comments from interested agencies, organizations and residents near the proposed project.

"Where the cable comes up onto land, we would notify people on that property and people on either side of that property, but only on the water, not on any backlots," he said.

The projected cable could come up on land on private property such as this private beach area along the north shore of the Keweenaw Peninsula. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) would issue a public notice seeking comments from interested agencies, organizations and residents near the proposed project. (File photo © Michele Anderson)

The public notice would allow 20 days for response, and would not lead to a public hearing unless significant concerns were raised by those initially notified.

With such projects, Merricle said, the DEQ looks for environmental effects such as impacts on bottomland, shoreline and wetlands.

"There are numerous pipelines going that are laying on bottomland throughout the state," he said. 

Merricle used the term "pipeline" to refer to the rigid casing or pipeline that typically is used to protect electrical cable laid on Great Lakes bottomlands. He noted his office receives about 10 applications per year to lay such electrical cable pipelines underwater in Michigan, mostly from the mainland to islands in the Great Lakes.

Environmental concerns

"We have a long history of going around the lakes," she stated.

Nalbone and others have concerns about environmental impacts of cables laid under the Great Lakes.

"Of particular concern to the lake ecosystem is that the cables would have to be buried wherever they might be subject to ice scour," she explained. "In Lake Superior, that would most likely be necessary for the shallow coastal portions of the lake crossing."

Digging trenches for the cable might affect water quality, marine archeology and fish habitat. It could also stress fish populations and/or contribute to fish advisories, disturb contaminated sediments and possibly dig up toxic hot spots under the lake -- depending on the location. In addition, at least one review has suggested the cable could affect electronic navigation instruments.

Great Lakes United would like to see all the Great Lakes closed to further utility transmission lines. (See editor's notes: #1.)

Lake Superior Alliance (LSA) members also see potential problems with the project.

LSA's Bob Olsgard reported everyone in that organization is very concerned about this proposal.

"The construction of high-voltage transmission infrastructure to deliver electric power to places that right now don't get it raises the specter of increased habitat destruction and fragmentation," Olsgard said. "Remote communities all across the north -- from the Keweenaw to Northern Ontario -- could be making better, cleaner choices for renewable energy, providing power and yes, a few jobs -- locally, where they will do the most good." (See editor's notes: #2.)

Steve Scott, the Lake Superior unit manager of the DNR's fish division, based in Newbury, said he wasn't sure whether there might be productivity losses to fisheries as a result of the cable itself.

"As far as these high voltage cables go, we do have a number of them around the Great Lakes already," he said. "There's a pretty big one at the Mackinac Bridge. That one's been in place for a number of years and there haven't been any problems to speak of."

However, Scott did say he'd like to see more studies on potential fish impacts.

"Personally, my bigger concern is the power plant that's supposed to go along with that [the cable]," Scott added. "It's not too far from being directly upwind from Isle Royale," he pointed out.

The projected electric cable would traverse the tip of Isle Royale, which lies between Thunder Bay, Ont., and the Keweenaw Peninsula. This photo of islands along the north shore of Isle Royale was taken from Todd Harbor, looking in the direction of Thunder Bay. (Photo © July 1998 Janet Marr. Reprinted with permission.)

Power plant impacts

The plant will be built in three stages. It will begin generating power at 120 megawatts, then add another 500 megawatts in each of two later stages to reach its full proposed capacity. How far the project goes will depend upon market demand, officials said.

In addition to petroleum coke, which will come from Alberta, the plant might burn wastes such as sludge from sewage treatment plants.

In Ontario, project proponents are touting lower energy costs, creation of thousands of jobs, and the possibility of increased mining development as the project provides more access to electricity in remote areas of the province. The Chronicle-Journal newspaper of Thunder Bay also suggested the proposed power plant might enable construction of a smelter in that city.

Proponents claim environmental benefits for the power generation plant. Media materials circulated by Northwest Energy Works state, "the new generation facility would burn Petroleum Coke which is more environmentally friendly."

However, Patricio Silva, Midwest Activities Coordinator for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), expressed NRDC's concern about new coal-fired power plant projects in Thunder Bay and across Canada. Silva noted the projected Thunder Bay plant would still emit some amount of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen, particulate matter and carbon dioxide.

The first two pollutants contribute to acid rain; particulates have been implicated in heart and lung disease; and carbon dioxide is a major greenhouse gas.

"While not nearly as polluting as a traditional pulverized coal electric generating facility, [the plant] would be no gem," Silva observed.

Editor's Notes:  Read more about the electric cable under Lake Superior on Great Lakes United's Habitat Watch.   See "Region Looks to More Power for More Jobs" in the online version of the Spring 2002 issue of Superior Vision, the Lake Superior Alliance newsletter (p. 10 of pdf file).

Read more about the author of this article, Katie Alvord.

Visit the Keweenaw Now discussion forums to comment on this article.