Xcel Energy proposes alternate energy plan to reduce carbon emissions in Upper Midwest

Xcel Energy released an alternate energy plan for the Upper Midwest last week that would slash carbon emissions by more than 85 percent by 2030 compared to 2005 levels, guided by major additions of wind, solar, energy storage, and natural gas options.

Another version of the Upper Midwest Energy Plan was proposed to regulators last year. This new edition would slash carbon emissions further through actions such as carving out the natural gas-fired combined cycle Sherco plant in Becker, Minn., and exchanging it for four smaller natural gas facilities in separate locations throughout the region. These facilities would operate significantly fewer hours annually than the proposed Sherco plant and thus produce far fewer emissions while still providing reliability for the system when wind and solar resources aren’t up to the task.

“Our new plan that we’ve proposed today meets the shared goals of our company, customers, communities, and stakeholders to lead the clean energy transition by affordably reducing carbon emissions while maintaining reliable electricity for our region,” Chris Clark, president of Xcel Energy for Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota, said. “As we continue driving toward our 100 percent carbon-free vision, we’re taking advantage of low-cost renewable energy, new technology, and new ways of ensuring reliability for our region to deliver industry-leading carbon reductions.”

That low-cost renewable energy will include 250 MW of additional energy storage, coupled with more than 2,600 MW of wind and 3,100 MW of solar energy. In line with the original plan, this alternative would still move to close all coal plants in the region by 2030. The Monticello nuclear plant would continue to operate until at least 2040.

Paying for this may also be less of an issue under the new proposal: Excel noted that its new plan has a lower projected cost than the original. For customers, this alternative should save approximately $600 million overall. The original plan also would have cut a lessened 80 percent amount of carbon emissions.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on the plan sometime later this year.