Peabody Power Plant Opposition Delivers Petition Ahead Of Forum

PEABODY, MA — Climate advocacy representatives opposed to a long-planned natural gas- and oil-powered surge capacity power plant in Peabody said they hope a June 22 public forum on the project will be a discussion about alternatives to the current proposal.

State Rep. Sally Kerans (D-Danvers) joined representatives from the Massachusetts Climate Action Network, Breathe Clean North Shore and Community Action Works who spoke Friday after delivering a petition with 1,070 signatures to Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Energy Company headquarters in Ludlow asking the utility company to alter or abandon the plans for a fossil fuel-powered plant at the Waters Street substation.

"That's good news," Kerans said of the forum announced Thursday and scheduled in two weeks at Peabody’s Torigian Center. "We welcome it. We welcome the chance for people from both Danvers and Peabody to go and share their concerns.

"We hope that it's a two-way conversation. We hope that the best interest in all of the ratepayers and our climate (are respected)."

MMWEC paused the project, which began in 2015 to meet surge capacity requirements for 13 municipal energy companies across the state — including Peabody Municipal Light Plant and the Marblehead Municipal Electric Light Department — for at least 30 days on May 11 amid growing public concern about the proposed plant that had previously moved through the planning process in relative obscurity.

MMWEC spokesperson Kate Roy told Patch on Friday that the June 22 forum will be a chance for the utility to provide information on "what we've been looking into during this 30-day pause as well as an open question-and-answer discussion."

She said there is no firm deadline for a Board of Directors vote on ending the "pause" — which will be entering its sixth week at the time of the forum.

"We look forward to the discussion and are looking forward to answering any questions that people do have," Roy said.

The opposition groups say any capacity needs can and should be reached through clean energy sources, such as wind, solar and hydro, while the MMWEC says that previous evaluations determined that those sources are not yet reliable enough to meet a surge in demand during extreme heat, extreme cold or other catastrophic events.

"There is a nationwide movement that clearly indicates clean energy technologies can operate reliably at scale," MCAN Executive Director Sarah Dooling said. "More than anything, let's take a pause. Let's revisit some assumptions behind this project. And let's think about different options."

Breathe Clean North Shore representative and Peabody resident Sudi Smoller said: "We want an alternative to gas and oil. We want a utility of the future, not of the past."

Those opposing the plant say it will harm the quality of life and make more susceptible to disease nearby residents of Danvers and Peabody while being in conflict with the state's goal of being carbon-neutral by 2050.

MMWEC has said that the proposal will include a minimal amount of carbon emissions — about 7,500 tons a year — because of the limited hours (approximately 239) when it will run to meet expected surge needs. The utility said the current plan is 94 percent more efficient than similar peaking plants across the country.

"Natural gas is not a bridge," Dooling said. "It's not a bridge. It's still emissions. MMWEC's continued emphasis that this proposed ‘dirty’ peaker is more efficient than existing dirty peakers — OK — but is that where we want to go? Is that the threshold for MLPs that is acceptable?"

Mireille Bejjani, the state organizer for Community Action Works, called the current plans "a false solution to a false choice."

"Are our utilities going to continue to be one of the biggest barriers to meeting our climate and clean energy goals by keeping us hooked on fossils fuels?" she asked. "Or are we going to shift to the energy grid of the future?"

Kerans expressed some optimism that the June 22 forum will be the beginning of genuine dialogue and public engagement on the proposal.

"We're moving in a good direction today," Kerans said. "Many, many people — elected officials, non-elected officials — have questions.

"Let's have that conversation."

Did you find this article useful? Invite a friend to subscribe to Patch.

(Scott Souza is a Patch field editor covering Beverly, Danvers, Marblehead, Peabody, Salem and Swampscott. He can be reached at Scott.Souza@Patch.com. Twitter: @Scott_Souza.)

More Patch Coverage: Power Company Slams Brakes On Proposed Peabody Plant

Peabody Power Plant Opponents Cheer Pause In Project

North Shore Officials, Peabody Light Spar Over Proposed Gas Plant