Diesel plant proposed for Chelsea

The company fighting to build a landmark clean wind power project off Cape Cod is raising eyebrows among friends and foes alike with its latest energy idea: a diesel-burning power plant in Chelsea across the street from the city's elementary school complex that will emit soot and other pollutants.

Energy Management Inc., which is headed by Cape Cod wind developer Jim Gordon, has proposed a 240-megawatt power plant that would operate only on hot summer days and other times of peak energy demand to prevent blackouts across New England. At the company's request, the group that runs the region's power system has begun a study of the idea.

If the plant is built, Energy Management officials said it would use the cleanest technology possible, making it far less polluting than older oil-burning plants. But some city officials and residents briefed on the plan said it is hypocritical for the company to propose a polluting power plant for hardscrabble Chelsea while promoting pollution-free energy on the more pristine Cape.

``We've heard that Jim Gordon is the darling of the environmental movement for good clean renewable energy . . . and here he is proposing more pollution for Chelsea," said Roseann Bongiovanni, vice president of the Chelsea City Council, who attended the meetings. ``Give us the wind turbines."

Energy Management officials said there is nothing hypocritical in the Chelsea proposal, noting they are still doing more than any other energy company in Massachusetts to build a renewable energy plant. Under the name Cape Wind Associates, the company has been trying for five years to build the nation's first offshore wind farm in Nantucket Sound, but the 130-turbine proposal has had fierce political opposition.

``These are two projects that address very different needs of this electrical system," said Dennis Duffy, vice president of regulatory affairs for Energy Management. He said the 30-year-old firm has always been an all-purpose energy company, building and operating gas-fired power plants in the 1990s and more recently, proposing a biomass power plant and wind farm in Texas. ``We're filling a need that has been identified," Duffy said.

Gordon was not available for comment late last week.

Chelsea has one of the worst air pollution problems in New England, in large part because of diesel exhaust from trucks rumbling through city streets and on nearby highways. Any diesel plant, no matter how clean the technology, will spew additional pollution into the air that can contribute to childhood asthma rates that are already among the state's highest, said Bongiovanni.

Duffy said Energy Management originally wanted a 346-megawatt plant on the 6-acre plot on the Chelsea River, but has scaled back the plant to 240 megawatts, enough to provide electricity for about 240,000 homes when running. The plant would consist of two generators -- essentially giant jet engines -- that can start up quickly and inject power into the grid within 10 minutes. Diesel made the most sense, Duffy said, because fuel can be delivered on tankers that use Chelsea's industrial port. Duffy declined to say how often the plant would run, but city officials said the company wants permission to operate it 2,000 hours annually, though they expect it would actually be in operation only between 200 and 500 hours a year.

Emissions from the plant would contain far less sulfur and nitrogen oxide emissions -- which contribute to smog -- than traditional diesel exhaust as well as less soot, Duffy said. Air specialists said the technology the company plans to use would make emissions far cleaner than coal or traditional oil-fired plants, but probably not as clean as burning natural gas. The exact engineering of the plant remains unsettled and would undergo extensive state review before it could be approved.

``The devil will be in the details," said Paul Miller, deputy director of the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, a nonprofit association of state air quality agencies. He said he is deeply concerned about a diesel plant operating on the hottest summer days, when ozone and smog levels are already high.

ISO-New England, the agency that runs the region's power grid, has predicted rolling blackouts as early as 2008 during times of high energy demand if new power plants aren't built. Officials there say they want the kind of plant Gordon is proposing, because it delivers energy quickly. The plants are called peakers because they operate during peak electricity demand, usually on hot summer and frigid winter days. Federal regulators recently approved major new financial incentives to encourage companies to build more of them.

``Peakers provide operating flexibility during emergency situations," said Ken McDonnell, a spokesman for ISO-New England. ``These resources are especially important in the Boston and Southwest Connecticut areas, the major population centers in New England."

Jay Ash, Chelsea's city manager, said he had questions about the plant's potential emissions, but was keeping an open mind. He said it would probably bring in more than $500,000 a year in property tax.

Environmental activists, who have enthusiastically backed Energy Management's wind project, are choosing their words about the Chelsea proposal carefully. But a lawyer for Conservation Law Foundation, one of Cape Wind's biggest supporters, said the advocacy group would have a difficult time supporting any new power plant in Chelsea. ``We are deeply skeptical if this is a good idea," said Eloise Lawrence, staff attorney. ``The last thing Chelsea needs is another source of pollution."

The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, the main opposition group to the Cape Wind project, expressed outrage over Gordon's proposal.

``This is environmental hypocrisy by an opportunistic developer," said Audra Parker, assistant director. ``Jim Gordon . . . is showing his true colors, and that color is not environmental green; it is the color of money."

Beth Daley can be reached at bdaley@globe.com.