(Caution: High speed internet connection recommended for most links below, some are highly detailed documents)

FORE's brief summary

The latest evidence strengthens FORE's conviction that the 150-MW proposal is too large for the area and too costly for the state.

Along with a bigger price tag, the 150-MW proposal as compared to a 45-MW alternative, has bigger, louder turbines; draws 143% more water from Lake Mendota; produces more air pollution, and uses natural gas less efficiently.

In dollar terms over the life of the plant, the 150-MW proposal is now projected to cost state taxpayers $231 million more than the 45-MW alternative.

What’s more, although the 45-MW alternative is a better choice than the 150-MW proposal, even it “should not be construed as an optimal solution for campus utility needs.” [Sebesta Blomberg, FORE Response 7] Professor Ragland has studied the matter extensively and suggested that a 27-MW true cogeneration plant is likely to satisfy campus needs through 2015. [Letters to FPM]

FORE reiterates its support for the design of a fiscally and environmentally responsible cogeneration solution for the campus.

DEIS comments

Here are comments on the DEIS (Draft Environmental Impact Statement) from organizations and individuals that FORE has been working with. FORE acknowledges these and others that are seeking to bring objective analysis to bear on the campus power plant issue.

DOA final consultant report

The final Sebesta Blomberg consultant report was posted on April 26, 2003 at the Department of Administration (DOA) website.

Public comments and questions and MGE/DOA/FPM responses

The UW campus's Facilities Planning & Management (FPM) department updated its webpages on April 25 to include several letters sent by members of the public, as well as responses by MGE, UW, Sebesta Blomberg, and DOA, to sets of questions posed by FORE and the Student Energy Review Group.