—
Here’s a prediction: the Pyrolyzer plant will not be built for one, or some, of these reasons: 1) They will not be able to secure private funding. 2) They will not be able to guarantee the 5.5 cents/kwh rate for very long, and the formula for increasing the price will put Logansport at a disadvantage. 3) They will not be able to secure enough fuel (trash) contracts for long enough to pay off the plant. 4) Logansport will strike a less risky, better deal with Indiana Municipal Power Authority.
You can see for yourself that Pyrolyzer is inexperienced. You can go to the Logansport Municipal Utilities (LMU) website and read the Request for Proposals (RFP), which asks good questions about experience. Section 3.6 says “Describe how many years the respondent and respondent’s team have been involved in financing or developing renewable and/or alternative energy resources.” Section 4.1 says “Fully describe projects that the respondent or respondent’s team have implemented within the last five years …” 4.2 asks about “Annual energy produced …” But Pyrolyzer’s proposal offers only that they have a 37 ton-per-day plant that started up in 2002, and that plant’s longest continuous run was 15 days. Their other, older, plant is for tests and does not run continuously either (page 14). Pyrolyzer cannot give details about their experience with commercial-size, continuous-run facilities because they don’t have any.
About getting enough fuel (trash) to run this proposed giant, the RFP says in Section 5.5 “… Respondents shall include a complete description of the specifications and source(s) of any and all RDF … including availability, sustainability, acquisition and transportation…” Pyrolyzer’s proposal (cover letter) suggests only that “Feedstock will be procured from Chicago, Indianapolis, and Fort Wayne…” This does not answer the question.
The RFP says “Respondents are required to submit proposals that fully comply with the requirements set forth in these Specifications…” (section 4). At this stage we should have Pyrolyzer’s “best and final offer” (RFP section 9), but where are the answers to these and other fundamental questions that the RFP requires?
We should not team up with anyone who cannot demonstrate success with a commercial-sized facility. No matter how much time and money we spend on the consultants to make Pyrolyzer’s proposal look better, no one can give Pyrolyzer experience that they do not have.
We should reject the Pyrolyzer proposal and look honestly and publicly at other options.
Mercedes Brugh
Logansport
Letters
BRUGH: Other options should be considered for LMU
- Letters
-
-
PUBLIC FORUM: Mayor tells residents of positive change
When the residents of Logansport elected me as their new mayor in November 2011, it was truly an honor.
Our city was battling back from a devastating loss of 1,500 jobs in five years, a recession that wasn’t letting up on the household income of our residents, a divided fire protection commitment in our county and an overall sense of loss in our community. -
PUBLIC FORUM: Say thank you during National Nurses Week
Having an unsuspected or immediate need for medical attention can be a traumatic event for just about any person. In our current healthcare system, there are entirely too many unknowns.
-
PUBLIC FORUM: Thanks for making the baseball season happen
With spring and warmer weather (finally!), brings another baseball season. The board and managers/coaches at Logansport Youth Baseball have been extremely busy over the past two years renovating both our fields to provide a quality atmosphere for our players and fans who support our league.
- PUBLIC FORUM: We need more jobs in Indiana and nation
- PUBLIC FORUM: Lincoln Day dinner a big success for Republicans
- PUBLIC FORUM: Thanks for caring about downtown Logansport
-
PUBLIC FORUM: Direction is the best option presented
Logansport is facing a serious problem with our current coal-fired generation plant. New EPA regulations will require millions of dollars to upgrade or shut down. The city and LMU have been exploring options to provide a solution to this looming problem.
-
PUBLIC FORUM: 95 percent an inflated estimate
Who is going to protect us from higher electric rates in the future?
-
PUBLIC FORUM: The reality of a new American Promise
Fracking. We’ve all heard the term lately. Fracking is the process whereby water and other chemicals are injected into the earth to cause underground rock formations to fracture, creating space for oil and natural gas to collect and be pumped to the service.
-
PUBLIC FORUM: This is what you get with a right-to-work state
After reading about the new unemployment rates for Indiana, I just want to send my kudos to our Republican representatives.
- More Letters Headlines
-
PUBLIC FORUM: Mayor tells residents of positive change
Conn. Commuter Trains Collide; 60 Go to Hospital
Coffee Run Leads to Hatchet Hitchhiker Arrest
Fmr. IRS Head Insists No Politics in Targeting
CDC: Fecal Bacteria Common in Swimming Pools
$1 Million in Jewels Stolen at Cannes Film Fest
NM Mom Chases Down Child Abductor
Raw: Crash Sends Car Into Fla. Pool
Raw: Obama Sits Down With Elementary Kids
Raw: Bear Falls From Tampa Tree
Ousted IRS Chief: Errors Not Caused by Politics
Terror Suspect Due in Court in Idaho Friday
Raw: Driver Ejected From Truck, Over Bridge
Could Tobacco Be the Next Biofuel?
Wash. State Releases Draft Rules for Legal Pot
Dying Man's Blinks Lead to Murder Conviction
Officials: Texas Tornado Likely Had 200 Mph Wind
Brothers Arrested in NOLA Parade Shooting
Raw: School Bus Crash Injures Five Children
Quick Response Saved Baby on Phila. Train Tracks
One Million Evacuated As Cyclone Hits Bangladesh
