Although Ms. Forbes refused to disclose the numbers she used to craft her report (despite requests from the Coastal Journal and many other organizations), the Conservation Law Foundation has reconstructed the research and discovered several critical errors in the report.

Outdated data

Potomac-Hudson used faulty data when comparing the proposed plant’s carbon dioxide emissions to other power plants. When updated using U.S. Department of Energy’s 2007 baseline data for fossil-fueled power plants, Twin River’s main conclusion can be shown to be false.

“The Twin River study inflated CO2 emissions from new natural gas power plants by 37%,” said CLF staff attorney Steve Hinchman. “Using the DOE’s data, the proposed Wiscasset coal gasification plant would produce more carbon dioxide than a natural gas plant plus a refinery in all scenarios.”

The Twin River plant would be the largest global warming polluter in Maine, and would drastically increase our CO2 emissions over current levels.

The Twin River study shows an emission of 2000 pounds of CO2 per MW of power for coal combustion, 1800 pounds for coal gasification, and 1100 pounds for natural gas. However, the DOE baseline shows only 1830 pounds for coal combustion, 1714 pounds for coal gasification, and 797 pounds for natural gas. The actual emissions from Maine’s older natural gas plants was 908 pounds ... significantly less than the Twin River estimate.

It was Twin River’s contention that its coal gasification plant with diesel generation and carbon capture would generate about the same amount of CO2 as a natural gas plant with a small refining process to produce an equivalent amount of diesel fuel.

Incorrect units of measurement

The report also erred in the amount of CO2 emissions that would come from the plant. The actual figure of 5.5 million tons is far greater than the figure Twin River reported, because they were using a completely different unit - metric tons rather than U.S. tons, which is how CO2 is reported in Maine by law. They also lowered thermal input values nearly 3 million mmBtu below what the company had previously stated, and posted on their website.

Significant mathematical error

Most concerning, however, is a major mathematical error for coal production and transport figures. Ms. Forbes modeled an impact of 50,400 mmBtu (million Btu) worth of coal, when in fact the number is 53,000,000 mmBtu as shown during Twin River’s Westport Island presentation. This is an error of three orders of magnitude.

To put the error in perspective, Potomac Hudson modeled about 1/2 days’ worth of coal mining and transportation rather than a full year.

The effect of this error is massive. According to the Potomac-Hudson report, one would have to believe that shipping nearly 1.8 million tons of coal from western Pennsylvania to Maine is about the same as driving a Hummer for one year.

Whether the errors are accidental or not, the report brings serious questions about both Potomac-Hudson’s (and Twin River Energy’s) ability to deal with a question of this magnitude competently.