Overview of the biomass power industry
· Biomass Accountability Project: Report: Biomass Electricity: Clean Energy Subsidies for a Dirty Industry
· Environmental Working Group report: “Clearcut Disaster” details implications for forest cutting and carbon emissions from biomass under proposed federal renewable electricity standard
Pollution emissions from biomass burning
Health organizations speak out against biomass
· American Lung Association letter urging federal renewable energy legislation not promote biomass power
· American Lung Association statement of concern about emissions from the proposed Russell Biomass plant in MA
Actual emissions from biomass plants
· Comments showing that emissions from proposed Domtar/We Energies biomass plant in Rothschild, WI, would significantly increase air pollution; company does not want to spend the money to install really effective emissions controls.
· Comments on Hu Honua biomass burner proposed in Pepe’ekeo, Hawaii – facility will be a significant source of pollution
· Comments demonstrating that plans to “sort” construction and demolition waste are inadequate to achieve a “clean” fuel supply.
· EPA page: Emissions Standards for Boilers and Process Heaters and Commercial / Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators (“Boiler rule”)
Responses to a proposed construction and demolition burner in Springfield, Massachusetts
· Comments demonstrating that plans to “sort” construction and demolition waste are inadequate to achieve a “clean” fuel supply.
· Letter from Dept of Health in MA on how rates of childhood asthma, and high blood lead levels, are double those of the state as a whole.
· Decision by MA to commission a health impacts study of the effects of burning construction and demolition waste: scope of work
Carbon emissions from biomass
Biomass is not carbon neutral
Massachusetts response to conclusion that biomass power is not carbon neutral
· Letter from Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs letter to MA Department of Energy Resources, stating that Manomet study findings justify the state restricting eligibility of biomass power for the state’s renewable portfolio standard; sets conditions
Comments on role of biomass in state-level climate action plans
Biomass emissions mean that "reductions" in greenhouse gases under a federal RES exist only on paper
· Environmental Working Group report: “Clearcut Disaster” details implications for forest cutting and carbon emissions from biomass under proposed federal renewable electricity standard
Threat that biomass power represents to integrity of RGGI
· Comments on NY biomass sustainability standard, finding it is not sufficient to establish biomass as a low carbon or carbon neutral fuel:
Doing biomass carbon accounting wrong has serious consequences
· Searchinger et al “Fixing a critical climate accounting error” that lays out the fundamental rationale why increasing forest harvesting for fuel will dramatically increase carbon emissions
· Harmon-Searchinger-Moomaw letter to Washington State legislature on why Washington State Department of Natural Reosurces got biomass carbon accounting wrong
Absurdity of biomass as Best Available Control technology (BACT) for CO2
· Comments showing that carbon emissions from proposed Domtar/We Energies biomass plant in Rothschild, WI, are far greater from biomass boiler than natural gas boiler.
Responses to EPA’s requests for input about how biomass emissions should be counted
Biomass availability, or lack thereof
Washington State
· Letter to Washington State legislature, explaining how WA State DNR got biomass carbon accounting wrong and how biomass fuel demand in the state will soon outstrip the supply of “residues” (this letter references the proposed 65 MW Adage biomass plant in Mason County; plans for this plant have since been withdrawn)
o Letter from WA State Lands Commissioner Goldmark to Mason County commissioners, expressing concern that there is not enough wood to fuel proposed Adage plant.
Vermont
· Letter to Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont in response to his sponsorship of biomass briefing on Capitol Hill, expressing concern about the massive emerging wood demand in Vermont by biomass plants and wood pellet plants
Southeast
· Review of Abt et al study that purported to show availability of biomass fuel in Southeast, but which relied on using pulpwood from paper industry to make up fuel defecits
National
· Environmental Working Group:Report on the forest cutting and carbon emissions implications of biomass power under the federal renewable energy standard proposed in the American Clean Energy and Security Act (the “Waxman Markey” bill of 2009)
· Documentation that biomass facilities currently use “whole tree chips” for fuel; Duke Energy statements on need to use whole trees because logging residues are insufficient.
Yes, the biomass industry uses whole trees for fuel
· Pre-hearing testimony from Duke Energy to the North Carolina Utilities Commission on why the utility will curl up and die if whole trees aren’t classified as eligible biomass
Financial and policy incentives for biomass energy
· USDOE: Database of state incentives for renewables and efficiency (also has information on federal programs)
· Biomass Accountability Project: Report: Biomass Electricity: Clean Energy Subsidies for a Dirty Industry
Articles from the UK
Article: UK Independent: “Who says it’s green to burn woodchips?”
Article: London Times Online: “Britain cuts down forests to keep ‘green’ power stations burning”
