WATERLOO -- The Greater Cedar Valley Alliance board of directors voted Tuesday to support LS Power's proposed $1.3 billion, 750-megawatt coal-fired power plant in northeast Waterloo.

With one abstention, all other board members present voted to support "the largest economic development project ever proposed in the Cedar Valley, one of the largest that's ever occurred in the state of Iowa," said alliance president Steve Dust.

The alliance, the umbrella economic development organization in the Cedar Valley, recognizes environmental and transportation concerns associated with the project, and believes regulatory agencies and LS Power itself will adequately address those concerns, Dust said.

"We recognize the Iowa Utilities Board, and the Department of Natural Resources and the EPA will require extensive regulation and they (LS Power) are conducting a transportation study that identifies specific mitigations to minimize any impacts along the routes that they use" by road or rail to haul construction materials, fly ash and coal, Dust said.

"And, we recognize they're going to utilize waste water from the city of Waterloo as its primary water source, and use the best conservation management practices in its site development plan," Dust said.

LS Power officials have not ruled out the possibility of using renewable energy sources as plant fuel, Dust said. "We encourage the company to seek opportunities to develop and invest in renewable alternative energy projects as part of the project, and we ask them to discuss those kinds of opportunities as soon as practicable this year," Dust said.

St. Louis-based LS Power and its subsidiary, Elk Run Energy Associates, are proposing a 750-megawatt, coal-fired power plant east of Eagle Ottawa tannery. The plant would be the single largest project in the Cedar Valley's history based on project costs.

Proponents say the plant will employ 1,200 workers at the peak of construction with a $200 million payroll. The longer term effects include a permanent work force of about 100 at an estimated payroll of $7 million annually and generate $3.2 million a year in state and local taxes. They also say the plants are heavily regulated and have to meet stringent environmental standards.

Opponents say the air and water pollution levels and consequent health risks associated with coal-fueled power are still too high, and say more environmentally responsible alternatives such as coal gasification have not adequately been considered -- though company officials say that particular alternative has not been proven to be cost effective at this point. Opponents also say the plant will significantly devalue nearby property. Issues such as the disposal of fly ash have not been adequately addressed, they say. They also have expressed concerns that long coal train shipments will tie up automobile traffic through downtown Waterloo and impede emergency vehicle access and response times. Some experts have said coal-fired plants are a primary contributor to global warming.

Opponents also note the facility will be a "merchant plant" generating electricity for other locales, while supporters say having such a nearby major potential power source will be an economic development asset.

In addition to GCVA, similar resolutions in support of the project have been passed by the boards of directors of the Greater Cedar Valley chambers of commerce in Cedar Falls and Waterloo; the Waterloo Industrial Development Association, or WIDA; and the downtown Waterloo Development Corp.

Contact Pat Kinney at (319) 291-1484 or Pat.Kinney@wcfcourier.com