Skip to main content

Colorado · Tri-State Generation & Transmission

Craig

Key facts

3Coal unitsof 382 tracked nationally
1.3 GWCapacity0.7% of the tracked fleet
47 yearsAge of oldest unitcame online in 1979
5 MtCO2 in 20250.6% of fleet-wide emissions
1,024 tSO2 in 2025
22.5 lbsMercury in 2025
3,780 GWh2025 net generation0.5% of tracked generation
$84.2M202c cost to ratepayers

In 2021, clean power produced energy 38.4% more cheaply

How this is calculated
Annual savings with clean power in 2021$53.8M≈38.4% cheaper than running this plant — estimated from its capacity at a 42% capacity factor.
Gap
$10.9/MWh
Difference
+38.4%
Cheapest clean power alternative
local solar

Units (3)

ExpandTypeStatusRetirement
C1Dry bottom wall-fired boiler4461980 (46yrs)Operating12/25/2026 (was 12/2025)
C2Dry bottom wall-fired boiler4461979 (47yrs)Operating9/2028
C3Dry bottom wall-fired boiler4461984 (42yrs)Operating12/2029

Documents & sources

Health cost of the 202(c) orders

Every figure below is for one year of this plant running — not a total for its lifetime, and not tied to how long the 202(c) orders last. They are what one more year of operation costs the people living downwind of Craig.

$2.2M–$2.8M

Health damages

In 2023 dollars.


469 daysSchool days lost
4 daysWork days lost

Figures are rounded for readability; exact modelled values are shown below. See the full methodology here.

Source: EDF ran EPA’s CO-Benefits Risk Assessment (COBRA) screening model on this plant. COBRA is a screening tool, not a full air-quality model: it works at the county level and covers health impacts from fine particles and ozone only — it does not estimate health harms from mercury or other air toxics.

DOE Coal Plant Mandates

Take action on coal pollution

Tell decision-makers to stop propping up coal pollution at the expense of your health and your wallet.

Take action on coal pollution (opens in a new tab)