The Center for Public Integrity is taking a stance on biomass energy plants, like the proposed waste-to-energy-incinerator-gasification plant that’s been proposed in west Charlotte. (Read our post about that plant, which is part of the proposed ReVenture Eco-Industrial Park, from yesterday.)
From the iWatch News site:
Just 12 miles apart in the belly of California, a pair of 12.5 megawatt power plants fouled the air with a toxic brew of pollutants — nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, ammonia and particulate matter. They released thick plumes and visible dust. They failed to install proper monitoring equipment, and failed to file reports on their emissions.
Another instance of coal plants polluting the environment?
Not quite. These are biomass power plants, part of the so-called green wave of the future.
Pitched as a smarter, environmentally-friendly way to produce power, the electricity generating stations are spreading nationwide, spurred by hundreds of millions in stimulus dollars and big muscle support from members of Congress and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Generating electricity by burning trees, construction debris, poultry litter and agricultural mass has become a key element in a larger push to develop sources of alternative energy, and popular because it’s been around for decades and is reliable.
Yet green energy is not always so green.
Worries about the potential health effects have sent ripples through communities where new plants are being built. The industry and its allies in Washington, meanwhile, have managed to delay for three years finalizing a study into the legitimacy of claims that biomass pollution fouls the air and harms health , perhaps even contributing to asthma and heart disease.
Biomass plants emit nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide, though in lower quantities than at coal plants, the EPA said, and in varying amounts depending upon the type of biomass burned and generator used.
The Biomass Power Association — whose slogan is “natural energy, naturally” — stresses environmental and consumer benefits that include “improving forest health, protecting air quality, and offering the most dependable renewable energy source.”
Such assertions, coupled with big pots of federal money made available to spur the industry’s expansion, have fueled a wave of construction from Georgia to Massachusetts to Washington state — along with a strong reaction from citizens.
Many communities, already wary of earlier industrial growth that fouled their water and air, are pushing back, even as Washington opts to aggressively promote the industry.
Read the rest of the post, by Ronnie Green, here.
Learn more about the Center for Public Integrity here.
Now, remember: ReVenture’s plant is a hybrid of incineration and gasification technology, so it may not be quite the same as the plants mentioned in the above post … but it’s not all that different, either.
Mecklenburg County is looking at signing a multimillion dollar, 20-year trash deal with ReVenture. That trash is what’s going to be incinerated/gasified in the company’s energy plant. As I pointed out yesterday, the people who live near the plant, and its tentacles — Foxhole landfill and the sorting facility off North Graham Street, want some reassurances that their traffic, roads and health won’t be negatively impacted by the plant’s activities.
Further reading: EPA
This article appears in Apr 26 – May 2, 2011.
Another quote from the article: “This whole thing has become a sham and at this point is turning into an incredible fraud because we’re going to ask taxpayers to spend a huge amount of money to produce dirty energy which is a health problem,” said Dr. William Sammons, a physician who is part of the Biomass Accountability Project and has traveled the country fighting proposed plants.
And another: “It’s a huge gold rush,” said Mary Booth, co-founder of the Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance. “The 30 percent reimbursement of construction costs is massive.”
And another: The plants emitted nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, ammonia and particulate matter in levels exceeding permit requirements many times, court records show. All the while, they failed to submit a proper emissions control plan, emissions source tests or audits to the California pollution control district. They didn’t install systems meant to control emissions of harmful pollutants, and failed to submit quarterly reports detailing “the data and magnitude of excess emissions at the facility.”
From the article:
Last year, the company withdrew a 50-megawatt facility pitched for Gadsden County, Florida, after concern the plant would be less than a mile from an elementary school in the mostly black county. “It is unconscionable that incinerators are allowed to be built in close proximity to where we sleep, go to school, church, play and seek medical care,” James E. Maloy Jr., president of the Concerned Citizens of Gadsden County, wrote Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson and others.
Unfortunately, the proposed site of the ReVenture gasification incinerator is less than 1 mile from the White Water Academy! That doesn’t seem to concern our elected officials.
In a rush to bash ReVenture because of its progressive approach to dealing with Mecklenburg’s garbage, opponents seem to have a passion for looking past the fact this technology has been around for many years in Europe and is very successful. Europeans, especially in Denmark, take pride in their local Energy from Waste facilities and even use them as focal points of neighborhoods.
Whats the alternative to the current situation?
No one is “bashing.” People are asking for more data.
And this technology has NOT been in use anywhere else. This is new, unproven technology. That is the truth. ReVenture says that themselves.
Also, the county had a long term plan in place prior to ReVenture. It was fine before $50 million in stimulus money – tax dollars that will go to a private company – was on the line.