West's Biggest Power Plant Provides Water As It Contributes To Drought

A single power plant is responsible for a giant chunk of Arizona’s pollution, and critics say it can be pinpointed as a key culprit behind the drought in the West—where, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor, 75 percent of the region is experiencing abnormally dry weather.

The Navajo Generating Station, the West’s biggest power-generating facility, is also responsible for getting water to key urban centers. It provides energy to move mass quantities of water around the region, making water available for urban growth.

“The power generated enables a modern wonder. It drives a set of pumps 325 miles down the Colorado River that heave trillions of gallons of water out of the river and send it shooting over mountains and through canals. That water — lifted 3,000 vertical feet and carried 336 miles — has enabled the cities of Phoenix and Tucson to rapidly expand,”ProPublica reported.

But critics say these developmental gains have come at a major cost. By itself, the plant is responsible for nearly 30 percent of Arizona’s emissions from energy generation, according to the report.

“Every hour the Navajo’s generators spin, the plant spews more climate-warming gases into the atmosphere than almost any other facility in the United States. The Navajo station’s infernos gobble 15 tons of coal each minute, 24 hours each day, every day,” the report said.

Critics frame the plant as a cause of drought. Burning coal at the plant sends a plume of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, lead, and other metals from the plant into the air. “That malignant plume — containing 16 million tons of carbon dioxide every year — contributes to causing the very overheated weather, drought and dwindling flows of water the plant’s power is intended to relieve,” the ProPublica report said.

The plant is the nation’s third-largest emitter. It was built because of the sheer amount of energy needed to transport a massive quantity of water. ProPublica’s Abrahm Lustgarten explained these factors to Public Radio Tulsa:

About 300 miles south of Page along the Colorado River, the river sits in a small reservoir called Lake Havasu, and from Lake Havasu there's a couple of intake pipes that move the water out of the river, about 10 percent of the flow of the river, carry it up a total elevation gain of about 3,000 feet and across 336 miles through the cities of Phoenix and Tucson into the central part of the state of Arizona. Moving that much water up that much elevation gain requires an enormous amount of energy, and to acquire that energy the federal government basically built the Navajo Generating Station in the early 1970s.

The EPA signed on to a deal last year allowing the plant to operate until 2044. Will circumstances ever change?ProPublica’s assessment:

The plant’s environmental toll is sure to fuel arguments for its eventual closing. For now, it has been granted a reprieve from complying with the Obama administration’s new Clean Power initiative, which requires Arizona to reduce its carbon output by 52 percent. But the Environmental Protection Agency has said that it expects to work with the Navajo tribe to reduce emissions separately from Arizona’s mandate, and will likely revisit that issue in the future. The plant will also soon be subject to a new federal environmental review process triggered by its renewed lease on Navajo lands. To date, though, the [plant] has always found a way to survive as an essential piece of the infrastructure needed to tame the wild Colorado River.

Supporters of the plant argue it provides enormous benefits to its customers, as well as economic benefits to the Navajo Nation, since it resides on Navajo land and is a major employer for members of this group. Proponents also defend the plant against claims that it has an exorbitant environmental impact, arguing that the plant is a major emitter because it's large, not because it's inefficient.

"Although NGS is a large power plant, it is also very efficient. NGS produces fewer emissions for each ton of fuel used than many of the other coal-fired units in the nation," the plant website says. "When compared to other coal-fired power producing units, the units at NGS perform better than 852 units in terms of SO2 emissions, 510 units in terms of NOx emissions, 656 units in terms of CO2 emissions [measured in lb/MMBtu]." Those figures are based on EPA data for NOx and SO2 emissions at 944 coal-fired power producing units and CO2 emissions at 941 coal-fired power producing units.

The plant website also disputes claims that it is has had an unusual impact on public health. 

"While various media reports claim that NGS contributes to health issues, these claims are unsubstantiated and are inconsistent with air quality data measured at local monitoring sites. Ambient air data collected at these sites shows that air quality in the area meets all of EPA's health-protective National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which suggests that emissions from NGS do not create health risks for residents living in the area," the website says. 

To read more about the consequences of drought, visit Water Online’s Water Scarcity Solutions Center.