Naperville too reliant on coal? Environmentalists tell council don't renew with utility so quickly

The Naperville City Council chambers were filled to the brim Monday night as residents, environmental advocates, city council members and state representatives gathered for a presentation about the city's reliance on a leading source of greenhouse gas emissions: coal.

Naperville gets nearly 80% of its electricity from coal. Led by The Naperville Environment and Sustainability Task Force, which hosted Monday's discussions, some residents are trying to change that.

The city is locked into an agreement with its power supplier until 2035, but with negotiations to extend that contract looming, advocates are urging the city council to consider other options.

However, they aren't quite sure yet what those options are.

"We have the chance to turn from what we're stuck with right now and come up with something better. We might not know what that is yet, but we also have the asset of time. We can figure that out," Sen. Laura Ellman, a Naperville Democrat, said to the crowd Monday. "Now granted, we've got a lot of thinking to do and a lot of collaborating to do, but we have the time. We have got the utility. We've got the informed and caring public."

Unlike most of the state, Naperville doesn't get its power from an investor-owned utility like ComEd or Ameren. Instead, the city is part of a joint municipal power agency called the Illinois Municipal Energy Agency along with 31 other towns up and down the state, including St. Charles and Winnetka.

Because the agency isn't subject to state regulation as ComEd and Ameren are, it makes its own decisions regarding rates, power supply, transmission, local distribution and service to customers.

It's the power supply that environmental advocates are most interested in.

In 2021, the agency got 45% of its power from the Prairie State Energy Campus power plant, located downstate southeast of St. Louis. Meanwhile, coal-fired generators at the Trimble County Generating Station in Kentucky provided 23% of the power.

"There are many issues with burning coal for electricity," Maureen Stillman, the task force's energy committee chair, said Monday. "The biggest is that coal releases the most carbon into the atmosphere, which is what causes global warming."

Burning coal is more carbon-intensive than burning natural gas or petroleum for electricity, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. For instance, though coal accounted for 59% of the electric sector's CO2 emissions in 2021, it represented only 23% of the electricity generated that year.

Burning coal further emits sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and mercury into the atmosphere.

The process also produces a byproduct called coal ash, a toxic substance that contains heavy metals such as mercury and arsenic. Safe storage and disposal of the ash is paramount to containing environmental and public health risks, and the task has proven to be difficult.

Owned by the Illinois Municipal Energy Agency and eight other membership organizations, Prairie State Energy Campus is the largest coal-fired generator in Illinois.

While other Illinois coal plants will close in 2030 under state law, Prairie State is exempted because it is a publicly owned plant. Rather, it must cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 45% by 2038, and either close or reduce its emissions to zero by 2045.

"Naperville constituents care about climate change and want Naperville to be a leader, not a lagger," task force co-chair Carl VanDril said at Monday's presentation. "We are a leader in so many things. ... That should convey into this space as well."

The Illinois Municipal Energy Agency is expected to approach the Naperville City Council with a 10- to 15-year contract extension in early 2024, but Naperville's transition to clean energy won't be as simple as signing a contract with a different power supplier. That's because the city became a co-owner of Prairie State through its agreement with the Illinois Municipal Energy Agency.

Even if Naperville does not move forward with a contract renewal, it would still be a member of the agency, and it would still be responsible for its joint ownership of the coal-fired assets.

Organizers further acknowledged Monday that Naperville's transition to 100% clean energy will be a slow march, and that the way forward is currently unclear.

"As important as what we want to do, it's how we want to do it. This is almost more important: We engage in constructive collaboration with our city leaders, our elected leaders, the Naperville electric utility, our businesses and our residents," VanDril said. "We don't have the vision in place yet. We can work together toward that vision, and that's a really important dynamic here."

With the decision-making power largely left in the hands of Naperville City Council, task force co-chair Carthy Clarkin said the organization is advocating for the council to put the brakes on contract negotiations and start planning for public hearings on the electricity supply.

Clarkin encouraged residents to continue learning about the issue, sharing knowledge with neighbors and contacting the council.

"This has been the story of how Naperville has a key role in ending our reliance on coal, and you can be part of it," Clarkin said.

• Jenny Whidden, jwhidden@dailyherald.com, is a climate change and environment writer working with the Daily Herald through a partnership with Report For America supported by The Nature Conservancy. To help support her work with a tax-deductible donation, see dailyherald.com/rfa.