Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Longmont council approves expedited letter supporting PRPA permit for aeroderivative turbines
Summary
The Longmont City Council voted to send a letter of support to Platte River Power Authority (PRPA) asking Larimer County to approve a land-use permit for new aeroderivative turbines that PRPA says are needed as redundancy for renewable generation shortfalls.
The Longmont City Council voted to approve a letter of support asking Larimer County to grant a land‑use permit for aeroderivative turbines on Platte River Power Authority land.
Mayor Joan Peck moved the council send the expedited letter after explaining the turbines are intended as redundancy to prevent blackouts when renewable supplies or market purchases are not available. The mayor said the turbines would be gas‑fueled under current market conditions and may be “hydrogen capable” in the future if that fuel becomes commercially viable. Council discussion centered on whether Longmont was commenting as a jurisdiction or as an owner of PRPA; Peck said the city was commenting in the capacity of an owner of the utility rather than to direct Larimer County’s land‑use decisions.
Council member Matthew Popkin said he supports the concept of having dispatchable backup capacity but expressed concern that PRPA’s Integrated Resource Plan did not justify the proposed 200‑megawatt threshold for the aeroderivative turbines. He said his hesitation was about the scale, not the principle, and therefore he could not support the letter at that time. Other council members pressed staff and PRPA clarifications discussed in prior meetings, including a request that the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) review the plan; Peck said NREL declined to engage directly after finding the issue contentious.
After discussion the council voted to approve the letter. The motion was moved by Mayor Joan Peck and seconded (record of seconder in the transcript). The council recording of the outcome stated, "That carries 6 2 1 with Councilor Popkin opposing." The transcript wording of the final tally was ambiguous; the council announced that the motion carried with Councilor Popkin recorded as opposing. No ordinance or further action was taken at the meeting; the letter was intended to be submitted to PRPA and Larimer County prior to PRPA’s hearing on April 21, 2025.
Why it matters: The letter is an immediate, administrative step to support PRPA’s request to Larimer County. If Larimer County issues the permit, PRPA plans to site turbines on land it owns to provide dispatchable backup that PRPA says will enable higher penetration of solar and wind resources and reduce reliance on older “peaker” units that take longer to start and may rely on coal. The decision in Larimer County and any resulting legal challenges may affect the timing and configuration of PRPA’s resource buildout.
What remains unresolved: Council debate revealed disagreement about the scale (the 200‑MW figure) and whether additional technical review had justified that size. The transcript shows councilors asked for and discussed prior PRPA analyses and outside reviews; no further formal direction to staff was recorded.
