Monday, January 31, 2011
EPA draft report to Congress on biofuels’ enviro impact slammed by industry
|
In Washington, the EPA released a draft version of its Triennial Report to Congress on the ecological impacts of increased biofuels production, focused on life cycle analysis, water-soil-air quality, ecosystem impact and the impact of land use change domestically and internationally. The draft report, which can be downloaded here is based on peer-reviewed literature and information through July 2010.
EPA commented “Quantitative assessments are presented, where possible, however, in most cases only qualitative assessments were feasible due to uncertainties and the lack of data and analyses in the peer-reviewed literature.” The report examines corn, soybeans, algae, woody biomass, corn stover, and perennial grasses and looks at ethanol and biomass-based diesel.
The RFA commented “EPA’s failure to provide this report in any context with the environmental degradation done by fossil fuel exploitation and use is irresponsibly misleading. Energy and environmental decisions do not exist in a vacuum.” Growth Energy added, “Clearly this draft report needs a considerable amount of work. There is no consensus on several issues the report authors use as assumptions.”
Download the draft report.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Is BCAP on the chopping block?
|
In Washington, sources indicate that “the interim final rule is at the printer for the federal register” with respect to Section 9003 (Farm Bill) loan guarantees from the USDA, indicating that the new round should be out imminently. The Section 9003 is expected to have funds covering up to $1 billion in new bioenergy loans.
At the same time, it appears that in the talks over budget-deficit programs that the Biomass Crop Assistance program is at risk – being looked at as a “$500 million quick grab”. Supporters of the program are saying that an immediate effort will be required by the friends of BCAP to communicate its benefits in job creation, rural economic development, and the extent to which, by solving potential start-u “chicken and egg” problems in generating affordable feedstock for biorefineries, unlocks investment for biorefineries. “Just as BCAP hits its stride…” mused one of the Digesterati.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Obama sets 80 percent by 2035 clean energy goal
In his State of the Union address Jan. 25, President Obama challenged the nation to join him in setting a new goal that 80 percent of America’s electricity be produced from clean energy sources by 2035.
“Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they're selling,” Obama said prior to announcing his energy goal. “Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all—and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen.”
Bob Cleaves, president of the Biomass Power Association, said the organization is eager to work with the president and Congress to achieve the “ambitious—yet attainable” renewable energy goal.
“Some estimates indicate that biomass power accounts for as much as 50 percent of the renewable energy generated across the country,” Cleaves said. “By our projections, biomass energy will continue to grow in the coming decades, particularly in densely forested regions like the Southeast. Biomass energy is increasingly receiving recognition for its ability to help America meet its renewable energy standards. Just this month, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson stated in a public letter, ‘ … biomass can be part of a national strategy to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, and efforts are underway to foster the expansion of renewable resources and promote biomass as ways of addressing climate change and enhancing forest management.’”
Obama also asked Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars that are currently going to oil companies and use that money to fund innovation in bioenergy development.
“This is our generation's Sputnik moment,” the president said. “Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we haven't seen since the height of the Space Race. In a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We'll invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology—an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people.”
Although he didn't go into any details, it is clear that the president supports renewable energy and believes that it's a way to create jobs and bolster the U.S. economy.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Wisconsin tribal organization plans biomass plant
A proposed waste-to-energy facility in Ashwaubenon, Wis., has run into some local opposition, and while the developing company does not need approval from the municipality, it is going through the public input process as a courtesy and to gather feedback, it said.
Oneida Seven Generations Corp., a subsidiary of the Oneida Tribe of Indians, has rolled out plans to build a 5-megawatt, 60,000-square-foot power plant on industrial property in the eastern Wisconsin village. The property is federal trust land, so the village does not have oversight, but the local opinion of the facility is still important, according to Pete King, project manager.
“The municipality had some recommendations and we made some changes based on those suggestions,” he said. “Although we do not need the municipality’s approval, it’s important to note our facility must receive an environmental assessment (EA) approval from both the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the U.S. Department of Energy.” King added that the EA prepared for the BIA is still under review. “Our trust land is also governed by the federal government via the Environmental Protection Agency. Through those entities, the public can be assured that this will be an environmentally safe and beneficial process.”
The $23 million plant will use 150 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) per day through contracts with private haulers as well as municipalities, King said. The excess power will be sold to Wisconsin Public Service for the local grid. The plant will employ what Oneida Seven Generations calls pyrolysis gasification, where the feedstock is heated and broken down into syngas. If permitting goes as planned, construction could proceed this spring with operation in December of this year, King said.
In assuring the safety of the public, the company has disseminated information explaining that all MSW unloading will be done indoors, inside an eight-inch thick block wall, with landscaping designed to minimize visibility and noise. Construction of the facility will create about 50 jobs, along with another 30 during operation. Oneida Seven Generations has also promised that revenue generated by the project will be used for tribal housing, education, healthcare, infrastructure and other economic development opportunities.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Biomass will power Georgia paperboard mill
By the middle of 2013, a Macon, Ga., paperboard mill will have a biomass power plant that supplies 100 percent of its electricity and steam needs.
Graphic Packaging International Inc. will install the 40-megawatt plant at its mill, including a high-efficiency biomass boiler and turbine generator, according to the company. The Macon mill produces 1,600 tons of paperboard per day. The $80 million biomass project will use 400,000 tons per year of logging residuals, including tops and branches, a fraction of the estimated 3.3 million tons currently available in the Macon area.
“Graphic Packaging is committed to engaging in more sustainable manufacturing processes,” said David Scheible, president and CEO. “This biomass project will not only make use of untapped renewable resources, but it will also add value to the Macon, Ga., community as a whole.”
The plant is expected to reduce the mill’s fossil-fuel based greenhouse gas emissions by about 200,000 tons per year, according to Graphic Packaging. “The objectives of the biomass project are to further the company’s sustainability strategy, reduce energy costs and to improve the profitability of the Macon mill in advance of expected increases in electricity costs,” according to Graphic Packaging.
The company, headquartered in Marietta, Ga., is a subsidiary of Graphic Packaging Holding Co. and provides paperboard packaging solutions for a variety of products to food, beverage and other consumer goods companies. It has a leading market position in coated-recycled boxboard and specialty bag packaging.
Walker scraps biofuel plans
MILWAUKEE (AP) — Gov. Scott Walker scrapped plans Thursday to convert a power plant to run on natural fuels such as wood chips and paper pellets, a move that could save up to $100 million but drew stern criticism from at least one environmental group.
The decision affects the Charter Street Heating Plant on the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus. Its coal-fired burners will be retired next year and were to be replaced with two boilers that run on natural gas and a third that would burn biomass, state officials said.
However, Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch said only the natural-gas burners will be installed.
“We have decided not to proceed with the biomass boiler in order to save the state taxpayers money,” he said in a statement. The savings would come from avoiding construction costs of about $100 million, he said. It was not clear whether the third planned boiler would be replaced or the two natural gas boilers would produce enough power on their own.
Jeff Plale, an administrator for the state Division of State Facilities, said Walker and Huebsch realized there were cheaper ways to meet the university’s heating needs while still being environmentally friendly.
“Natural gas is a clean source of energy, certainly cleaner than coal,” Plale said. “That plant is going to be a whole lot cleaner than it is today. Couple that with being able to save $100 million during a very difficult budget and I think the people of Wisconsin come out better.”
In 2008, then-Gov. Jim Doyle announced that the plant would switch from coal to biomass in part to settle a Sierra Club lawsuit claiming that the plant violated air-pollution laws. Thursday’s move does not risk reopening the lawsuit because the plant is still moving away from coal.
The decision affects the Charter Street Heating Plant on the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus. Its coal-fired burners will be retired next year and were to be replaced with two boilers that run on natural gas and a third that would burn biomass, state officials said.
However, Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch said only the natural-gas burners will be installed.
“We have decided not to proceed with the biomass boiler in order to save the state taxpayers money,” he said in a statement. The savings would come from avoiding construction costs of about $100 million, he said. It was not clear whether the third planned boiler would be replaced or the two natural gas boilers would produce enough power on their own.
Jeff Plale, an administrator for the state Division of State Facilities, said Walker and Huebsch realized there were cheaper ways to meet the university’s heating needs while still being environmentally friendly.
“Natural gas is a clean source of energy, certainly cleaner than coal,” Plale said. “That plant is going to be a whole lot cleaner than it is today. Couple that with being able to save $100 million during a very difficult budget and I think the people of Wisconsin come out better.”
In 2008, then-Gov. Jim Doyle announced that the plant would switch from coal to biomass in part to settle a Sierra Club lawsuit claiming that the plant violated air-pollution laws. Thursday’s move does not risk reopening the lawsuit because the plant is still moving away from coal.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
DOE promotes renewable energy development in tribal communities
Indian tribes, tribal energy resource development organizations and tribal consortia on whose lands the projects will be located are eligible to apply for the available funding. The funds, according to the DOE, will support three project areas: first steps and capacity building, energy efficiency development and deployment, and renewable energy development and deployment.
Specific amount of funds will be allocated to support each area. According to the DOE, up to $1.5 million is expected to support the projects focused on capacity building and strategic planning, which can include energy resource and infrastructure analysis, the development of an energy organization and training programs. The energy efficiency and renewable energy deployment initiatives are expected to receive up to $4 million each to study the technical and economic feasibility of future energy efficiency improvements or renewable energy projects. The funding, however, is “subject to continuing congressional appropriations,” according to the DOE.
Wayne Lee, principal with Little Rock, Ark.-based biodiesel consulting group Lee Enterprises, said the firm found the announcement by the DOE as a great opportunity for tribal communities to consider biodiesel, the nation’s first advanced biofuel, to meet their renewable energy needs.
“I think the new initiatives are really a good step in the right direction in the overall arena of biofuels,” Lee told Biodiesel Magazine, adding that his staff is well-versed in Native American grant writing and other services for biodiesel project development. “Certainly, the tribal nations are in a very good position to take advantage of this and other benefits of clean energy.”
U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu also announced that the department’s Tribal Summit with American Indian and Alaska Native leaders will be held May 5 in Washington. The department’s new Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs intends to work closely with the Office of Congressional Affairs in reaching out to tribal leaders in the design of the Summit.
The full funding opportunity announcements will be available online at http://www.fedconnect.net/ or accessible through DOE’s Tribal Energy Program website.
USDA offers $405M in advanced biofuels loan guarantees to Coskata, INEOS, Enerkem
|
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced today that biofuels and biomass energy projects across America have been selected for funding to continue the Administration’s support for the development of renewable fuels. Vilsack highlighted the various investments USDA made since he laid out a broad vision to spur rural revitalization through renewable energy production in a speech at the National Press Club in October 2010.
“Building an active biofuels and biomass industry in every region of the country will help to create jobs and provide economic opportunity for people who live in rural communities,” said Vilsack. “The Obama Administration knows these investments will benefit all of America because renewable energy provides the opportunity for a cleaner environment and greater energy security for our country.”
The Biorefinery Assistance Program (Section 9003 of the 2008 Farm Bill) provides loan guarantees to entrepreneurs eager to take advantage of the growing opportunities in renewable energy provided by advanced biofuels. Today’s announcement includes three projects totaling $405 million in guarantee loans.
In rural western Alabama, Coskata, Inc. has received a letter of intent for a $250 million loan guarantee to construct and operate a cellulosic ethanol biorefinery facility. This 55-million gallon-per-year renewable biofuel project will use woody biomass to produce ethanol.
In Pontotoc, Miss., Enerkem Corporation has been selected to receive an $80 million loan guarantee to build and operate a biorefinery that will be capable of producing 10 million gallons of advanced biofuel (cellulosic ethanol) per year by refining some 100,000 metric tons of dried and post-sorted municipal solid waste through a thermo-chemical cellulosic process.
In Vero Beach, Fla., the INEOS New Planet BioEnergy, LLC. has been selected to receive a $75 million loan guarantee to construct and operate a biorefinery capable of producing 8 million gallons-per-year of cellulosic ethanol and gross electricity production capacity of 6 MW. The feedstock for the process will include primarily vegetative waste (citrus and agricultural wastes), yard wastes, wood waste, and municipal solid waste.
Each company has specified conditions that they must meet in order to complete the loan.
The Digest’s Take
First of all, fears that the USDA would only be able to issue three loan guarantees, instead of their hopes for four, or even six as indicated last fall, were realized. The unlucky project that missed out: BlueFire Renewables.
Second, it appears that Coskata has landed the largest biofuels loan guarantee ever issued. And, we finally have more information on the location – to date, Coskata had only divulged that the project was in the Southeast US, but today the USDA confirmed that the project is in western Alabama.
Third, we note that each of the USDA loans were for cellulosic ethanol. Secretary Vilsack indicated that DOE would be issuing a loan guarantee for a 137 million gallon renewable diesel project in Louisiana. The DOE is expected to announce support for the Valero-Darling project.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
EPA biomass delay gives biofuels industry breathing room
Wed, 2011-01-19 10:58
The EPA has announced it will delay planned greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting requirements for biomass for at least three years. The delay is welcome news for the biofuel advocates, who have been warning that EPA plans to regulate biogenic CO2 emissions would negatively impact the renewable fuels industry.
Now, the biofuels industry has some breathing room. For the next three years the EPA will study the issues surrounding biomass emissions and decide how best to shape regulations.
On Jan. 13, Matt Hartwig, Renewable Fuels Association director of public affairs, spoke with Delta Farm Press about the EPA decision. Among his comments:
Can you talk about the scope of this?
“Basically, EPA was putting together greenhouse gas emission regulations. One of their proposals was to measure and regulate what are considered ‘biogenic’ emissions. Those are greenhouse gas emissions – basically CO2 – that occur when you convert biomass into an energy source.
“This would apply to, for instance, a wood-to-power facility the same way it would apply in converting corn into ethanol.
“Our argument to EPA was ‘you shouldn’t regulate these emissions because they are, essentially, naturally-occurring.’ If you leave an apple outside for too long, the sugars will eventually ferment into alcohol. That’s what ethanol production is.
More on science…
“Another point we made to the EPA was ‘you’re talking about emissions that are, in a very basic sense, carbon neutral.’ Any release of CO2 you get during the conversion of biomass material was absorbed out of the atmosphere as that biomass material grew. So, essentially, you’re not adding new net carbon molecules to the atmosphere.
“The danger was, under this proposal, some of the ethanol plants that are today in compliance with GHG emissions would be out of compliance if the biogenic emissions were included.
“So, we argued the science of the proposal – the science doesn’t support it. Second, the EPA was trying to enforce unscientific theory – or, at least, unproven science – with very real financial penalties.
“So, we think EPAs decision to delay their decision for three years was a good step. That was recognition the science was there and they’re taking the time to get it right.”
How long has RFA been talking to the EPA about this specific issue?
“Within the last year this has come up as EPA sought to regulate GHG emissions more vigorously.”
The other aspects of EPA’s potential GHG emissions regulations haven’t been touched?
“Right. There are some other provisions of what EPA is trying to do that are moving forward. But those don’t have an impact on our industry so we haven’t commented.
“The biogenic emissions would have an impact so we’ve tried to work with EPA to get them right.”
How receptive was the EPA to speaking with the RFA about this?
“Certainly, we had concerns about the way EPA was addressing it. Ultimately, what’s important is the result.
“And we think EPA did the right thing, here. Instead of implementing science they thought was ready for prime-time, they said ‘no, we’ll take a step back and reevaluate.’
“Unfortunately, they didn’t do that with the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) when they included things like indirect land-use change. But in this instance, they did the right thing and we’re thankful for the additional time to work with EPA to get the regulation right.
For more on the RFS, see Obama administration makes massive biofuel push
“In a real-carbon world, we believe ethanol stands up very well to fossil fuels like petroleum. But that’s only true if you are counting things equally and as they should be.”
Did you get any indication why a three-year delay?
“I’m not sure why it’s three years instead of one year or six months.”
Other things you’re tackling with the EPA?
“There’s always something. We continue to work with them on the E-15 issue … and following science to its logical end: approval of E-15 for all cars and light-duty pickups…
“We’ll continue to work with them on issues regarding the RFS and greenhouse gas calculations for ethanol. There are some things EPA has chosen to include in its calculation of greenhouse gas emissions for ethanol under the RFS that we think that” are scientifically unsound. “There’s never a shortage of issues to work on with the federal government.”
dbennett@farmpress.com
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
EPA to defer GHG permitting requirements for biomass use
The U.S. EPA is announcing its plan to defer, for three years, greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting requirements for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from biomass-fired and other biogenic sources. The agency intends to use this time to seek further independent scientific analysis of this complex issue and then to develop a rulemaking on how these emissions should be treated in determining whether a Clean Air Act permit is required.
“We are working to find a way forward that is scientifically sound and manageable for both producers and consumers of biomass energy. 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 P. Jackson. “Renewable, homegrown power sources are essential to our energy future, and an important step to cutting the pollution responsible for climate change.”
Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack commended the EPA for its decision, echoing Jackson’s sentiment that renewable energy from wood, switchgrass and other sources should be utilized. “EPA’s action will provide the agency with the time it needs to ensure that GHG policies properly account for the emissions and carbon sequestration associated with biomass,” he said. “In many cases, energy produced from biomass will provide significant reductions of GHGs relative to fossil fuels. The USDA looks forward to working with EPA in ensuring that this administration’s policies use the best science and spur innovation and job creation in the renewable energy sector.”
“With EPA's commitment to defer regulation of greenhouse gases from biomass combustion in federal air quality permitting programs for at least three years, larger new and existing biomass combustion projects will avoid significant portions of those programs,” said Brian Patterson, associate and senior consultant with Golder Associates Inc. “In most cases, this will reduce the capital and operating costs of these projects. However, state-specific permitting programs will also play a role in the ultimate project air quality requirements.”
By July 2011, EPA plans to complete a rulemaking that will defer permitting requirements for CO2 emissions from biomass-fired and other biogenic sources for three years. During the three-year period, the agency will seek input on critical scientific issues from its partners within the federal government and from outside scientists who have relevant expertise. EPA will also further consider the more than 7,000 comments it received from its July 2010 Call for Information, including comments noting that burning certain types of biomass may emit the same amount of CO2 emissions that would be emitted if they were not burned as fuel, while others may result in a net increase in CO2 emissions. Before the end of the three-year period, the agency intends to issue a second rulemaking that determines how these emissions should be treated or counted under GHG permitting requirements.
The agency will also issue guidance shortly that will provide a basis that state or local permitting authorities may use to conclude that the use of biomass as fuel is the best available control technology for GHG emissions until the agency can complete action on the three-year deferral in July.
In a separate but related letter, EPA is notifying the National Alliance of Forest Owners that it will grant its petition to reconsider the portion of the May 2010 tailoring rule that addresses the same issue.
CO2 emissions from biomass-fired and other biogenic sources are generated during the combustion or decomposition of biologically based material. Sources covered by this decision would include facilities that emit CO2 as a result of burning forest or agricultural products for energy, wastewater treatment and livestock management facilities, landfills and fermentation processes for ethanol production.
On January 2, 2011, air permitting requirements began for large GHG emitting industries that are planning to build new facilities or make major modifications to existing ones. These facilities must obtain air permits and implement energy efficiency measures or, where available, cost-effective technology to reduce their GHG emissions. This includes the nation's largest GHG emitters, such as power plants and refineries. Emissions from small sources, such as farms and restaurants, are not covered by these GHG permitting requirements.
More information: http://www.epa.gov/nsr
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)