|
February 2011 - Volume 2, Issue 2 |
|
|
|
BIOMASS BUSTERS is a project of the Biomass Accountability Project, Energy Justice Network, Biofuelwatch, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, and Save America's Forests.
Co-Managing Editor, Meg Sheehan Co-Managing Editor, Rachel Smolker Editor & Journalist, Josh Schlossberg
For
submissions, feedback, PDF copies, or to become a distributor please
contact us at biomassbusters [at] gmail.com or find us on Facebook. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From the Editor |
Rachel Smolker, Co-Managing Editor
The
movement that has grown in opposition to biomass incinerators has grown
so strong, and so fast, that it is getting hard to keep up! A few days
ago, an old time climate activist friend remarked with some envy: "this
biomass issue seems to be the place where the REAL organizing is going
on lately, with people pulling together from the grassroots up!" With
things looking bleak on so many other fronts, we definitely need to
treasure our successes and acknowledge our movers and shakers. Just some
examples from our grassroots: Cara Beth Jones from Concerned Citizens of Crawford County and Pat Berna from Concerned Citizens of Scott County have been key in opposing Liberty Green Renewables' plans for biomass power in Indiana! Their
efforts are supported along the way with help from some of our legal
experts: Meg Sheehan and Mick Harrison, and those in the medical
professions, like Bill Sammons. We have a truly awesome community of
dedicated and skilled people--a bright spot on the landscape of
environmental activism! Read on for more!
CORRECTION: January 2011 issue should have credited Janine Gates, www.janineslittlehollywood.blogspot.com, as a source for 'Biomass Moratorium in Washington.' |
State Lines |
Oregon Paper Mill Won't Burn Biomass (source: Albany Democrat-Herald, Jan. 7, 2011) A proposal by Adage--a joint venture with nuclear power producer Areva and Duke Energy--to convert a closed International Paper mill in Millersburg, Oregon into a biomass power incinerator has fizzled. Adage
reportedly has plans to build five more biomass power incinerators in
the U.S., including a 50-megawatt facility in Mason County,
Washington. In March, citizen backlash against a proposed 55-megawatt biomass power incinerator in Gretna, Florida caused Adage to cancel the project.
Anti-Biomass Coalition to Lobby D.C. Biomass Accountability Project
has organized a panel of medical, scientific and financial experts for a
Congressional briefing in February to educate lawmakers on the negative
health, climate, and economic impacts of biomass power
incineration. Massachusetts
environmental attorney Meg Sheehan will discuss the financial impacts
of tax subsidies for biomass power and Dr. Mary Booth, also of
Massachusetts, will demonstrate potential climate impacts from logging
forests for biomass.
New Hampshire Incinerator Fined (source: Nashua Telegraph. Dec. 22, 2010) The
50-megawatt Northern Wood Power Project at Schiller Station in
Portsmouth, New Hampshire was fined $53,000 for emission above lawful
levels of pollutants for particulate matter, measured on September 11,
2008. Northern
Wood Power Project, one of the largest biomass power incinerators in
New England, was converted from a coal-fired boiler to a "fluidized bed
boiler" that can burn forest biomass or coal. The
state permit allows for 7.2 pounds per hour emission of particulate
matter less than 10 microns in diameter, also known as PM 10. The
permit does not measure the amount of PM 2.5, 1/20 the width of a human
hair. Studies from the American Cancer Society demonstrate that there is no safe level of exposure to particulate matter.
Robot Eats Trees for Electricity (source: 2nd Green Revolution. Dec. 19, 2010) The
Energetically Autonomous Tactical Robot System (EATR) eats wood chips,
dried leaves and other vegetation and is being tested at the University of Maryland. Funding for EATR comes from the federal government's Defense Advance Research Projects Agency.
|
From the Forest |
Biomass Half of "Renewable" Energy December 29, 2010 Biomass and biofuels make up 51.95% of "renewable" energy sources in the U.S., according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration's Monthly Energy Review. Renewable
energy in the U.S. accounts for 10.18% of electrical generation in the
first three quarters of 2010. After biomass and biofuels, hydropower
was 31.5%, wind 10.52%, geothermal 4.65%, and solar 1.38%. Currently, fossil fuels provide 78% of U.S. energy while 11.4 % is from nuclear power. Comparing
the first three quarters of 2010 to the first three quarters of 2009,
biomass and biofuels expanded by 10%, geothermal by 1.8%, solar by 2.4%,
and wind by 26.7%, while hydropower declined by 5.2%.
Ohio to Clearcut 1 Million Acres for Biomass Power Incineration
December 20, 2010 American Electric Power (AEP),
one of the nation's largest power companies, claims that a 200-megawatt
biomass power incinerator--operating at 70% capacity or
140-megawatts--would require 510,000 to 730,000 acres worth of forest
clearcuts on 40 year rotations. AEP Ohio plans to generate 150-megawatts of biomass energy by 2018 and 238-megawatts by 2027.
Ohio has 7.9 million acres of forestland, 952,500 publicly owned, according to Nathan Johnson, staff attorney for the Buckeye Forest Council. AEP's
desired 238-megawatts of biomass power would require 1,240,932 acres of
40 year clearcut rotations--1/6 of all forestland in Ohio. AEP's Long Term Forecast Report to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio
admits "possible drawbacks" to biomass power incineration and co-firing
with coal include "reduced plant efficiencies due to lower energy
content fuels" and "volatile costs of transportation." The
report states that "biomass has many competing demands, such as the
pulp and paper markets, agricultural industries and the ethanol market,
which can dramatically escalate the market price for the material."
|
Our Health |
American Lung Association Worried About Biomass Incineration [Below
are excerpts from a Dec. 14, 2010 letter by Rebecca L. Ryan, Director
of Health Promotion and Public Policy for American Lung Association in
Vermont, to the Vermont State Legislature's Biomass Energy Development
Working Group.] Burning
wood, like burning any substance, releases toxic chemicals and
particles which affect the environment and respiratory health. In
particular, biomass emissions contain fine particulate matter, sulfur
oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and various
irritant gases such as nitrogen oxides that can scar the lungs. Like
cigarettes, biomass emissions can also contain chemicals that are known
or suspected to be carcinogens, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) and dioxin. For
vulnerable populations, such as people with asthma, chronic respiratory
disease, and those with cardiovascular disease, biomass emissions are
particularly harmful. Even short exposures can prove deadly. A growing
number of studies are pointing to the direct impact of increased
particle pollution levels and an increase in heart attacks. The health
impact of particle pollution is not limited to individuals with
pre-existing conditions. The ALA believes
that we cannot afford to trade our health to meet our energy needs. We
strongly support rapid movement towards clean, safe and renewable
energy to protect our environment and the air we breathe.
|
|
Take Action! |
Write a letter to the editor to your local newspaper
expressing concern that biomass power incineration--which has greater
smokestack emissions than coal--is being given a three year pass and
urging the EPA to protect carbon-storing forests by accounting for CO2
emissions from biomass incinerators. |
|
|
|
Legislation Watch |
EPA Defers Biomass Permitting and Launches Study
January 12, 2011
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will defer for three
years greenhouse gas permitting requirements for carbon dioxide
emissions from biomass power incineration, while conducting an
"independent scientific analysis" on whether or not biomass incineration
is carbon neutral, according to an EPA press release. "In
the coming years we will develop a commonsense approach that protects
our environment and encourages the use of clean energy," said EPA administrator Lisa Jackson. "EPA
has sound scientific grounds for challenging the conventional and
scientifically unsupported view of biomass as carbon-neutral," said Meg
Sheehan, of Biomass Accountability Project. "We trust that the agency is setting a new course that will close the 'biomass loophole.'"
|
|
|
|
Biomass Buster of the Month |
Rachel Smolker -- Hinesburg, Vermont
Dr. Rachel Smolker of Biofuelwatch is one of the leading figures in the anti-biomass incineration movement. Rachel is lead author of The Real Cost of Agrofuels: Impacts on Food, Forests, People and Climate, a contributor to The New Biomassters (with ETC Group), and has contributed to numerous other reports, briefings and articles on bioenergy. Rachel
travels around the United States and the world to talk on issues of
forest preservation, climate protection and environmental justice.
|
|
|
|
Trashing the Climate |
Waste and Injustice Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) www.no-burn.org
No
community is disposable. Yet most incinerator and landfills are
disproportionately sited in marginalized communities--violating the
principles of environmental justice. People
of color and minority communities, people of low socioeconomic status,
indigenous communities and nations, people in the global south and other
populations that often lack political and economic power are
inequitably burdened with pollution from incinerators and dumps. Because of this, GAIA's
leadership understands that we will never win unless we see our
specific mission as inseparable from those of other movements for social
and environmental justice. |
|
|
|
Alternatives |
Solar Hot Water John Patterson www.homepower.com
While
most people are captivated by the high-tech nature of solar-electric
(photovoltaic; PV) systems, in most cases, a solar hot water system will
harvest more energy at a substantially lower cost. In fact, compared to
PVs, solar hot water (SHW) collectors are more than three times as
efficient at producing energy from the sun.
Investing
in an SHW system is a smart solar solution for most homeowners. This
proven and reliable technology offers long-term performance with low
maintenance. And with federal, state, and utility incentives available,
these systems offer a quick payback--in some cases, only four to eight
years.
A
thoughtfully designed SHW system could provide all, or at least a
significant amount, of your household hot water needs for some portion
of the year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|