Futuregen Alliance Cost Restructuring Encouraging

Press Release

U.S. Rep. Timothy V. Johnson said he is encouraged by the latest proposal from the FutureGen Alliance to take on a larger share of the financial commitment for the clean coal-to-energy plant slated for Mattoon.

In a letter Thursday to Energy Department Under Secretary C.H. "Bud" Albright Jr., the Alliance offered to increase its share of the project costs above the current budget, post-project repayments to the government, and partial bank construction financing.

"One benefit of this new approach is that the final taxpayer investment in the project would be no greater than what it was on the day President Bush first announced the project," wrote Michael J. Mudd, chief executive officer of the FutureGen Alliance. "We are confident that this new approach will resonate with those interested in FutureGen's success."

President Bush's initial commitment from taxpayer dollars was $800 million when the project was first announced. The U.S. Department of Energy and the FutureGen Alliance originally agreed to a 74/26 split in costs, with the federal government assuming the lion's share. The estimated project cost is now $1.8 billion over the 14 years of the project.

When the Alliance announced on Dec. 18 that Mattoon was its chosen site, Department of Energy officials said that projected cost overruns required a reassessment of the FutureGen design.

Rep. Johnson, who has worked on behalf of FutureGen since 2003, said the Alliance's movement on cost-sharing showed flexibility and creativity in advancing this long-planned initiative. Rep. Johnson has been working to arrange meetings between the Illinois delegation and the Department of Energy and also the White House and said he is hopeful those can begin when Congress reconvenes next week.

"This Alliance's movement on this issue gives us momentum and strengthens our resolve to get this project back where it belongs," Rep. Johnson said. "I am strongly opposed to the notion of breaking up this project into pieces as has been suggested by the Department of Energy once they found out Mattoon was the chosen site. Would they have suggested that if a Texas site had been chosen? In my opinion it is a breach of faith with the people of Mattoon and Illinois, not to mention the people in Texas and every other location that competed for this plant, to try and change the rules of the game at this point. As recently as November, the DOE was saying it anticipated site selection before the end of the year. The site was chosen in a thorough, impartial and scientific screening process involving some of the best minds in the business.

"It is a matter of good government and good energy policy that we proceed expeditiously," Rep. Johnson said. "This project promises great economic benefits not only to Mattoon and Central Illinois, but a huge boost to the coal industry and to the cause of clean energy. The promise of clean coal technology that helps free us from the leash of foreign oil is at hand. It is consistent with the President's own goals and the Alliance should be commended for all it has done and continues to do to make this happen."

Source