Increased global forest density necessitates more forest management

Environmental Research Web published a report last month based on U.S. and European research concluding that global "Forest Density is Increasing." This substantiates the argument that Indirect Land Use Change is a speculative theory because increased forest density can mitigate the impacts of deforestation - particularly in large forests like Brazil's. If we can sustainably grow and manage forests that have increased density or develop best practices that improve the health and yield of forests (just as we can with food and energy crops) then minor variations in the use of acres becomes a meaningless concern.

Unfortunately, many in the North American environmental community will conclude that the study results prove something else. They believe that, by obstructing forest industry development and enforcing a more laissez-faire attitude toward forests, that forests will cure themselves of the "exploitive invasion" by the forest products industry.

Almost everyone agrees that that an end to active fire suppression decades ago in North America has resulted in more forest density. However, the challenge and responsibility of maintaining forest health is more important now than ever before. Is it safe to have unmanaged forests with 400-600 trees per acre when, properly thinned, it is much healthier and fire resistant at 100?

What is the value of a carbon sink if it (and its diverse habitats) can be lost to megafires and beetle kill? These disasters have grown substantially since 2000 in North America - in acreage and intensity. One can believe that "natural conditions" will fix forests but if that same person believes that 39% more carbon in the atmosphere compared to the pre-Industrial era compromises natural conditions then a laissez-faire attitude toward forest health is pure negligence.

Increased density of our forests makes it imperative that we exercise more forest management. The academics (UC/Berkeley), agencies (USDA/Forest Service and the Woody Biomass Utilization Group), and associations I belong to (TAPPI, SAF, ACORE) all tell me that the key to improving forest management is building more "infrastructure." They define infrastructure to mean forest products facilities, including biopower plants and biorefineries, that can convert forest thinnings into products, power, and fuels.

These products that have the added carbon cycle benefit of reducing greenhouse gases from combusting coal and oil distillates. More infrastructure will also provide important disaster response alternatives for managing forest salvage from hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts - all anticipated to rise with global climate change.

I wrote about a 2008 study of 4 wildfires in California and the carbon consequences of active vs. inactive forest management as carried out by private vs. federal managers (see Links between California Wildfires and GHG emissions). The data analysis from this study raises some important questions relevant to our perception of the best way to manage forests before and after high density fuelwood accumulation.

----------------

technorati BIOstock, biomass, agriculture, forestry

Open Letter Defending REAP and BCAP

Yesterday the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee voted to eliminate USDA BCAP and REAP funding - this in the name of frugality. Biomass Magazine's Lisa Gibson has written an excellent article that accurately depicts the situation. I encourage readers to contact their House Congressional Representatives immediately to express their desire to keep these programs intact.

Cutting these biomass production initiatives are very likely just the opening salvo in an attack by the new House majority Republicans to gut alternative fuel and climate change programs. Surprising, really, since the states most likely to be hurt by these cuts are traditional Republican rural strongholds. The outcome of these cuts would be even less market entry of technologies providing choices at the pump and power outlets, shrinking markets for agricultural and forest industry producers, and declining of products that can provide America with greater energy self-reliance.

Here's an open letter to my Congressman on the possibility that the House Appropriations Committee will progress with plans to cut REAP and BCAP funding:

I want to express in the most vigorous way possible my alarm that the House Appropriations Subcommittee has recommended the elimination of two USDA programs (REAP and BCAP) that are critical to the future national and energy security of the nation.

I am deeply involved with bioenergy issues throughout the U.S. because of my firm belief in the need to insure that next generations of Americans have the choice of alternative fuels at the pump. Fossil fuels are not only not renewable but are getting dirtier, more expensive, and unsustainable (economically, environmentally, and socially) all the time.

REAP and BCAP are small investments that will help propel the development of new energy projects that cannot be off-shored. At the same time they will enable rural communities to remain economically self-reliant at a time when too many of our resources are being underfinanced for proper management or, worse, plowed under to make room for urban sprawl.

I implore you to take a leading role in fighting this attack on renewable energy development on the false perception that it will "save money." That is penny-wise and "pound-fuelish" to the extreme.

----------------

technorati biomass, agriculture, forestry

Ag and Forestry Provisions in Waxman/Markey ACES bill

The Waxman/Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) narrowly passed through the House vote on June 26. It would not have passed if the authors had failed to accede to the amendments insisted upon by Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN). What are the provisions?

Below is a condensed explanation of the key provisions agreed to by bill sponsor Henry Waxman (D-CA) as reported by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI). Aside from securing approximately support of 45 Democrats who would have voted against the bill without the compromise, the ACES bill is much more likely to achieve its stated objective of creating more green jobs, stimulating investment and local economies, and contributing to greenhouse gas emission reductions.

Should these provisions survive Senate deliberations, it also would reverse the polarizing language of the 2007 EISA which severely reduced the availability of qualifying biomass feedstock for bioenergy projects.

--------------------------------
Democrats Strike Deal With Agriculture on Climate Bill

On June 23, Democrats in the House of Representatives announced that they had reached a deal on several key agricultural concerns in the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) (H.R. 2454). The deal, struck with Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and bill sponsor Henry Waxman (D-CA), included the following key provisions:

1) The agricultural and forestry sectors will be fully exempted from carbon emissions caps.

2) Oversight of the domestic agricultural and forestry offsets program would be moved from the EPA to the USDA. Under these provisions, farmers could sell carbon credits in exchange for practices that reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions or store carbon in the soil and vegetation. Supporters believe that the USDA is in a better position to implement such a program effectively, while critics fear that the USDA will be more lax than the EPA in determining which practices actually reduce carbon emissions. For the time being, the role of the EPA in implementing the offsets program will remain undefined, subject to future guidance from the Obama administration.

3) The renewable fuel standard in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires the EPA to conduct a life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions attributed to indirect land use changes around the world caused by the production of biofuels in the United States. Under the agreement, this assessment would be put on hold for the next five years while the National Academy of Sciences conducts a study of the scientific basis and methodologies used in conducting such assessments.

4) The definition of renewable biomass would be expanded to include a much larger portion of available woody biomass on both federal and non-federal lands, and the definition of renewable biomass would be similarly amended for purposes of implementing the renewable fuel standard.

President Obama spoke in favor of the bill on Tuesday, saying it “will spark a clean energy transformation that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and confront the carbon pollution that threatens our planet.”

-------------------

SUSTAINABLE FOREST BIOMASS

Over the past two years, EESI has undertaken a project to assess the state of woody biomass utilization and to develop a suite of policy recommendations intended to promote woody biomass as part of the sustainable forestry paradigm.

After soliciting the opinions of a diverse group of foresters, researchers, NGOs, civic officials, as well as forest industry stakeholders, EESI has put together a well-documented policy paper that is balanced in the areas of environmental, economic, and soclal sustainability.

Although sustainability should be a cornerstone of federal biomass policy, it is important that federal laws and programs do not include highly prescriptive (or proscriptive) rules for where biomass can be harvested, for what purposes, or in what quantities.

It includes a call to evaluate the true comparative costs of various energy paradigm solutions whereby the lifecycle assessment of new approaches are compared not only with each other, but also with a fair assessment of costs and liabilities of the current fossil paradigm.

To view the entire policy paper written by EESI veteran Jesse Caputo, go to Sustainable Forest Biomass: Promoting Renewable Energy and Forest Stewardship.

NACD's Woody Biomass Desk Guide and Toolkit

It seems like every bioenergy and conservation conference I go to drives toward the same conclusion... "What we need is education, education, education." Of course, determining which messages should be communicated is key - which is why the credibility of the authors is paramount. Who is writing the content and what is their motivation?

Whenever I come across material that I think is credible and approachable from a lay audience's perspective, I upload links to them through this Bioenergy BlogRing. Some of the guides I have written about in the past include:
• 25x'25 - Agriculture and Forestry in a Reduced Carbon Economy
• USDA Forest Service - Woody Biomass Utilization Desk Guide
• Southern Forest Research Partnership, Inc. - Sustainable Forestry for Bioenergy and Bio-based Products Training Curriculum Notebook
• California Forest Foundation - Protecting Communities and Saving Forests

Fred Deneke of 25x'25 just sent me a treasure trove of information about Woody Biomass amassed by the National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD).

Conservation Districts were born out of necessity in the 1930s Dust Bowl when America's topsoil rapidly eroded. They are local units of government established under state law to carry out natural resource management programs at the local level.

NACD is the nonprofit organization that represents America’s 3,000 conservation districts and the 17,000 men and women who serve on their governing boards. It was founded in 1946 on the philosophy that conservation decisions should be made at the local level with technical and funding assistance from federal, state and local governments and the private sector.

The association's programs and activities aim to advance the resource conservation cause of local districts and the millions of cooperating landowners and land managers they serve.

The desk guide is intended to be used for public outreach in support of biomass industry planning and development. It includes educational content, handouts, introductory Powerpoint presentations, case studies, FAQs, and a glossary of terms.

Here is how the authors describe the guide...

-------------------
Woody Biomass Desk Guide and Toolkit

Communities today are challenged to develop effective strategies that support forest ecosystem health, mitigate the effects of climate change, satisfy growing energy needs, and provide local economic opportunities. For some communities, woody biomass may be a viable option for meeting these needs and deserves serious consideration. Forests in the United States represent an important potential energy and biobased product resource.

NACD, in collaboration with federal, state, and local partners is working to raise awareness about the potential for woody biomass as a primary feedstock for such products.

This Woody Biomass Desk Guide and Toolkit provides an overview of woody biomass production and utilization in the U.S., tips of how to provide effective outreach for your clientele, and educational handouts to share with your audiences. The purpose of this guide is to equip natural resource professionals and outreach specialists with the information and tools needed to increase awareness of the use of woody biomass for energy in the U.S.

Desk Guide and Toolkit Chapter Topics

Introduction and Table of Contents (1MB PDF)
Chapter 1 - Setting the Stage (836KB PDF)
Chapter 2 - What is Biomass? (2.5MB PDF)
Chapter 3 - Products and Possibilities (1.7MB PDF)
Chapter 4 - Implications of Producing and Using Woody Biomass (1.5MB PDF)
Chapter 5 - Incentives to Produce and Use Woody Biomass (1.3MB PDF)
Chapter 6 - Do-It-Yourself Supply Curve: Tools to Help You Get Involved in an Entrepreneurial Biomass Project (13.8MB PDF)
Chapter 7 - Outreach and Education (492KB PDF)
Chapter 8 - Case Studies (2.15MB PDF)

Handouts
In addition to the reference sections, most of the chapters also contain handouts. These outline important points, strategies, and information that may be useful for landowners, the public, local leaders, or other audiences.

Handout 1 - Electricity Production: Comparing Wood and Fossil Fuel Feedstocks (2MB PDF)
Handout 2 - Woody Biomass Basics (2.25MB PDF)
Handout 3 - Agricultural Biomass (1.5MB PDF)
Handout 4 - Implications of Using Woody Biomass for Energy and Other Products (1.15MB PDF)
Handout 5 - State and Local Policies and Incentives to Produce and Use Woody Biomass (1.5MB PDF)
Handout 6 - Financing a Bioenergy Project (1.15MB PDF)
Handout 7 - Common Concerns (1.15MB PDF)

NACD has two more Desk Guides in the works that will be out shortly. One will be on Community Wildfire Planning (Pre, During, & Post) and the third on Woody Disaster Debris Disposal.

----------------
technorati biomass, agriculture, forestry, education

New RES Bill Repeats Biomass Restrictions of RFS

The passage of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 included mandates for the production of billions of gallons of "advanced biofuels" including 16 billion gallons per year of cellulosic ethanol by 2022. This is an important investment and technology development driver for this emerging industry. But it is significantly undercut by the restrictions on the sources of qualifying feedstock as defined in its Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS).

This poorly conceived set of restrictions was added to the Act after prolonged negotiations without the approval or vote of the participants. According to the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, there are some 10 million timberland owners in the U.S. - 92% of them are excluded from participating in the biofuels mandate because of the definition! Compare the before and after impacts of the definition on the state of California alone (see maps at right).

It has been the subject of debate and of several legislative attempts to excise or amend it, notably bipartisan legislation championed by Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD).

Unfortunately the same definitions and restrictions have been included in the Waxman / Markey "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009’’ which seeks to establish a federal Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) similar to the RFS.

The Society of American Foresters has published an appeal to its members to let their Representatives know their concerns about including these controversial definitions on this draft. Below is the text of their appeal.

----------------
SAF Member Action Alert: Biomass Energy

Action Alert--Attention all SAF members: The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy & Commerce has released a draft renewable energy and cap & trade bill. The draft bill would exclude federal lands and many private lands from producing biomass for energy counting towards a national Renewable Energy Standard. The Committee is moving quickly and plans to approve this bill in the coming weeks before Memorial Day.

The definition of biomass in this bill is prescriptive and would restrict biomass from public lands and a great deal of biomass from private lands, from counting towards a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES). In turn, this would result in less energy from woody biomass rather than more.

Specifically, the Definition would NOT count biomass used to produce biomass energy from:

• ‘old growth’ or ‘mature’ forests (these terms are not defined)
• ‘plantations’ (planted trees) established after the enactment of the Act (again, term is not defined)
• Forests identified by a State Natural Heritage Program as rare, imperiled, or critically imperiled
• Any Federal Land, unless it’s near a structure or campground.

To read the definition click on this link to the draft bill and go to page 7 and 8.

The SAF website has a list of Members of the Energy and Commerce Committee who need to hear from you.

PLEASE CONTACT THEM (VIA PHONE OR EMAIL) AND LET THEM KNOW THE WAXMAN-MARKEY DRAFT BILL BIOMASS DEFINITION WILL NOT WORK. GO TO https://writerep.house.gov AND ENTER YOUR ZIP CODE.

KEY POINTS (FEEL FREE TO USE THESE POINTS OR USE YOUR OWN):

Wood is necessary to meet a renewable energy standard: If as a nation we are to truly meet renewable energy goals—whether electricity or biofuels—wood must be allowed to make its full contribution. Renewable forest biomass will account for up to 1/3 of the energy needed to meet the RES

We should promote rather than discourage the use of renewable forest biomass. Limiting renewable forest biomass harms conservation, consumers, and the climate. Foresters have the expertise to help landowners sustainably manage forests for wood products and biomass energy while still conserving the environment.

Federal lands must be included: Many Federal forests desperately need treatments to improve forest health, control insects and disease and prevent catastrophic wildfire. Biomass removal in these forests could help to create renewable energy while also improving forest health and allowing forests to act as climate ‘sinks’ rather than ‘emitters’ (through insect & disease infestation and catastrophic wildfire).

Different regions of the country contribute different strengths to renewable energy generation. For instance, some states have more wood than wind. Limiting forest biomass hamstrings some states from meeting mandates, thereby increasing costs to consumers and creating regional disparities in economic development.

Green jobs – Biomass energy plants create 4.9 jobs for each MW of installed capacity. One plant can inject $150 million in upfront construction investment with $20 million spent in the local economy each year.

Definitions of eligible biomass feedstock should put working forests on an even playing field with other renewable energy sources.

Sustainable forest biomass reduces greenhouse gases (GHG) because it is carbon neutral

----------------
technorati biomass, agriculture, forestry,legislation

Flambeau River BioFuels trailblazes Paper & Pulp Mill Conversions

It is always life-affirming to see the good guys win one. In this case the good guys are the participants of the Flambeau River Biofuels project led by strategic consultant Ben Thorp whose vision, persistence, and professionalism has been an inspiration to all who know him.

It has been a labor of love for Ben who has seen the industry he has devoted so much of his career (at Georgia Pacific) be reduced to a fighting retreat as offshore sourcing, labor prices, and environmental activism has taken a toll on this proud industry. During a time of heightened awareness of the need to buck the oil addiction, it is rarely mentioned that biomass conversion is the nation's largest producer of renewable energy (see chart).

To date the electricity and heat produced by combusting manufacturing residual wood at paper and pulp mills is generally used in plant operations. With projects like the Flambeau River project, the biofuels produced will be sold on the open market (capacity of 6 million gallons per year of Fisher-Tropsch liquids in the form of renewable sulfur-free diesel fuels and waxes).

The refinery is projected to open in 2010.

--------------------------
U.S. Department of Energy Awards Flambeau River BioFuels a Grant to Construct First-in-Class Facility for Production of Renewable Diesel to be Co-located at Pulp and Paper Mill in Park Falls, WI

PARK FALLS, Wis., July 15 /PRNewswire/ -- Flambeau River BioFuels is pleased to announce that it has received approval of its $30 million grant request from the U.S. Department of Energy to construct and operate a first- in-class biorefinery at an existing pulp and paper mill in Park Falls, Wisconsin. The final award value will be subject to final negotiation with the Department of Energy. When in full operation, the biorefinery will produce at least 6 million gallons of liquid fuels per year in the form of renewable sulfur-free diesel. The biorefinery will not be dependent on any food-based feedstock materials, but rather on by-products or residuals from forest and agricultural sources. The biorefinery will also generate at least 1 trillion BTUs per year of process heat that will be sold to Flambeau River Papers, which will make it the first integrated pulp and paper mill in North America to be fossil fuel free.

"This grant supports Flambeau River BioFuels' goal to be a major contributor in achieving the Federal government's goal of increasing renewable fuels production and reducing our nation's dependence on Mideast oil," said Bob Byrne, President, Flambeau River BioFuels. "With this funding, we will be able to accelerate the retrofitting of this mill from a pure pulp and paper plant to a broader production facility that will produce biofuels within the same facility, thus sharing key infrastructure elements and costs."

The Flambeau River BioFuels biorefinery will employ two commercially proven technologies to produce clean renewable energy and biofuels. It will gasify biomass resources, such as forest residuals and agricultural wastes, into a high-quality synthesis gas, which will then be catalyzed by the well-established Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) process to generate renewable transportation fuels (sulfur-free biodiesel).

"As you can imagine, we are very pleased that our technology approach has been recognized by the Department of Energy as a viable way to produce biofuel from forest residuals -- one of the most abundant renewable resources in the U.S." said William "Butch" Johnson, whose company Johnson Timber is both a project partner and a supplier to the biorefinery. "Since day one, our project has received strong support from Governor Doyle, Chairman Obey and Senator Kohl and we wish to thank them for all their efforts. Once operational, the biorefinery will serve to validate the technology while creating a compelling new model for the pulp and paper industry that can be proliferated throughout the U.S."

"A clean energy future depends on combining Wisconsin ingenuity with our state's resources, and I want to congratulate Flambeau River BioFuels for leading the way," Governor Jim Doyle said. "Their proposed biorefinery shows us all that we can have an energy future that creates jobs, protects our environment and relies less on Mideast oil and more on Midwest know-how."

The Flambeau River BioFuels biorefinery will create permanent, high-skilled operating jobs in the region, long-term logging jobs, and short-term, engineering and construction jobs, thus contributing to the economic stimulus of Park Falls, Wisconsin. The biorefinery is expected to be in operation in 2010.

The project team leading this endeavor is comprised of premiere engineers and scientists with demonstrated successes in implementing new technologies. It will also be supported by the expertise of university and government laboratories.

Flambeau River Biofuels received this grant through their partnerships with: ANL Consultants, Auburn University, Brigham Young University, Citigroup Global Markets, CleanTech Partners, Emerging Fuels Technology, Flambeau River Papers, Johnson Timber, National Renewable Energy Lab, Michigan Technological University, NC State University, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, ThermoChem Recovery International, University of Wisconsin, and the USDA Forest Products Laboratory.

"This grant will help meet our government's goals of creating new jobs, stimulating remote areas, re-positioning traditional industries for a new world era, and, most importantly, producing clean fuels from renewable resources abundantly found in the U.S.," said Bob Byrne. "We are proud to be a part of this important initiative by taking a leading position in the advancement of bioenergy technologies and the development of cellulosic biofuels."

For more information please Bill Johnson at 1-715-558-1630 or Bob Byrne at 1-715-661-0235.

SOURCE Flambeau River BioFuels
----------------
technorati BIOstock, biomass, forestry

Georgia's Energy Innovation Center: An interview with Director Jill Stuckey

In April, 2008, Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue established six "innovation centers" to focus executive activity in industries perceived to be of key importance to the future of the state. One of these is the Energy Innovation Center (EIC). The primary goal of the EIC will be to increase production and use of renewable energy and biofuels in Georgia by utilizing natural resources, locally grown feedstocks, agricultural and industrial byproducts, solar energy, wind power and other renewable energy alternatives.

“The state of Georgia is quickly becoming a recognized leader in alternative energy and fuel,” said Governor Sonny Perdue. “Our goal is to develop a bioenergy industry that provides substantial economic benefit to Georgia and produces 15 percent of the state’s transportation fuels by 2020 from locally produced biofuels.”

At this past week's huge BIO International convention in San Diego, I had the privilege of shaking hands with Governor Perdue and the pleasure of interviewing his Director of the Energy Innovation Center, the dynamic and engaging Jill Stuckey.

“The governor wants a complete circle when it comes to energy development and production in Georgia,” said Stuckey. “Our goal is to grow the feedstocks, produce the fuel, and use our own energy. Designating energy as a focus of one of the Centers of Innovation allows us to harness the power of our resources under one roof.”

Jill is not a newcomer to energy innovation. Prior to this role she was in charge of Alternative Energy in the state.

"When Rita and Katrina hit I was one of the ones who had to try to find fuels when there weren't any coming in through the pipelines from the Gulf. In metro Atlanta, that's where our fuel comes from.

"People don't realize that two thirds of our tank capacity in the world is in our gasoline tanks in our vehicles. Only one third is in our gasoline terminals, gas stations and their tanks. When there is a scare and everyone runs to the gasoline stations, we run out. We want to see fuel developed within our state to increase our self-reliance during crises - whatever they are."

"What the Governor would like to see is that we raise the feedstocks, we produce the fuels there, and we use it there. We would love to see that, when we drive to the pumps, the fuel is coming from 75 miles away from people we know rather than 5,000 miles away from folks that might not like us very well. Not to mention the economic development difference of having a factory right within our community instead of sending it to a foreign country."

I asked Jill several questions about Georgia's longterm commitment to biofuels and its various feedstocks for biomass conversion.

What is Georgia's attitude toward corn ethanol?

"If it wasn't for corn ethanol, gasoline prices could well be 20% higher than they are today. Lots of people are growing corn now. We have doubled our corn acreage in the state of Georgia since a year or so ago. We have a 100 million gallon ethanol facility that will be starting up this Fall. "

What about cellulosic ethanol from wood as a feedstock?

"We have 12 million acres of plantation forests in the state of Georgia. That's our crop. We know how to manage it, we know how to use it. Just about all the industry that I have spoken to is very anxious to look at the next generation utilizing pine for something other than paper - but still embracing that industry."

Back in November, the Governor joined the U.S. Department of Energy Secretary, the Under Secretary of Agriculture and renowned investor, Vinod Khosla for the groundbreaking of the Range Fuels facility in Soperton, GA. What is the commitment of Georgia's government to cellulosic ethanol from woody biomass?

"The Governor came in and was very excited about the groundbreaking and the opportunity for Georgia and the potential for this company. He is very committed to this industry.

"The Range Fuels facility was able to acquire their environmental permit within 76 days. He had an executive order stating that we would turn it in 90 days once we had a completed application and we beat that. He has also passed legislation that gave them tax-free on all their bricks and mortar materials. A lot of the machinery was already tax-exempt but he passed that for all alternative fuels companies. He is very committed to that and I don't see any of that is going to change. I wouldn't be surprised to see more legislation passed to help these companies."

What about succeeding Georgia administrations? Can investors and timberland owners be confident that policies set today will last for the next generation?

"All the upcoming candidates for Governor are interested in alternative fuels and alternative energy as well as the existing pulpwood industry. That industry has a lot of potential with a big headstart if they were to get involved with these projects. I have seen considerable interest in that industry."

What do you think about hybrid trees and energy crops?

"People talk a lot about switchgrass. The numbers I've heard are $80-$100 per ton for that. Wood is less than half of that. We have 12 million acres of plantation pines sitting in Georgia, ready today. We are doing some work with the polonia tree because it grows three times faster than a pine tree. It doesn't have the saps that are inhibitors for the ethanol process.

"We are always looking toward the next generation working with people like Arbogen. We are trying to find the most tons per acre the fastest we can grow. The pines are so great - they don't need a lot of water, you don't have to cultivate them like you do with most other crops. If we don't want to harvest them today we can harvest them next month. It's such a no-brainer."

In the face of mainstream media confusion and disinformation moving forward requires stakeholder engagement and public outreach to make sure that all sectors of Georgia are ready for the changes ahead. How is that being handled?

"That's one thing the Herty Foundation is trying to do - to gather all the powers to be in Georgia and the landowners. They are trying to explain what they see the future is going to be - selling their wood and how to grow it, and explaining that they may not be selling by green ton but by BTU or moisture content - and try to get them to think about how the future is going to be for wood-to-energy as well as wood-to-paper."

The controversial U.S. Senate staff redrafting of the definition of qualifying biomass feedstock in the 2007 EISA (Energy Independence and Security Act) could be interpreted to exclude Georgia woody biomass. What can Georgia's political leaders do to insure that federal law does not infringe on state's management over their own resources?

"From the state's standpoint we have been very involved in that issue from our state forestry commission as well as we are working with our landowners because they are very concerned about that issue. We are very vocal in Washington working with our elected officials in Washington to help any way we can."

"We need to hurry up and try to get this figured out."

----------------
technorati <BIOstock, biomass, agriculture, forestry

Hurricane Katrina's greenhouse gas legacy

Hurricane Katrina's legacy is not just the flooding of New Orleans and the destruction of coastal Mississippi. It is also responsible for damaging five million acres of forests - an area the size of the state of Massachusetts. For comparison, the destructive power the 1980 eruption of Mt. St. Helens wiped out 150,000 acres of forests (less than 4% of the forest destruction reach of Katrina).

In a front page article of the Los Angeles Times, Thomas Maugh II and Karen Kaplan reported on new research results by Tulane's Dr. Jeffrey Q. Chambers that has appeared in Science magazine. By using spectral analysis comparisons of before (2003) and after (2006) imagery of the region made by NASA's Landsat V satellite (click to enlarge image above), Chambers and his research team has made a number of alarming findings about the carbon footprint of this very destructive hurricane.

What is the greenhouse gas consequence of all that wasted biomass rotting and decaying?

Left in place without removal, the carbon of the trees will continue to decay for decades. Roughly 50% of the content of trees is carbon. The emissions from decay will contain methane and carbon dioxide. According to Dr. Chambers' analysis, 367 million tons of carbon dioxide will be emitted - which is about the same amount as is absorbed by all U.S. forests in a year. It is also a total that exceeds the combined emissions of national forest fires for an entire year.

What is the time frame for removal?

As it decays, the woody biomass becomes harder to access and harder to remove. Even with modern equipment, it is easier to assess, plan, and harvest standing trees than those lying on the ground at some progression of decay. Besides the remaining obstruction of hurricane-damaged logging roads in the area, foliage regrowth has already begun which makes logging access more difficult.

Should the drought conditions of the South persist, the dead biomass represents a significant fire threat which would add significant amounts of new greenhouse gas and particulate matter emissions to the atmosphere and further complicate restoration.

What will the new forests look like if left to natural regeneration?

According to the Times article, "Chambers and his colleagues said the deforested land, once covered with native species such as longleaf pine, oak and cypress, is being taken over by invasive species that are change the ecology of the area. One of the most prolific, the Chinese tallow, oozes a milky, toxic sap that creates an inhospitable environment for insects, birds and small animals."

How can we pay for forest restoration?

According to Dr. Thomas Bonnicksen of The Forest Foundation, the a privately financed restoration of the forests is straightforward. "Sell the logs to sawmills to be turned into wood products, and use the revenue generated to pay for removing the slash left behind and replanting the forest. Replant native trees in a patchy mosaic so the forest develops naturally. This includes leaving enough snags and logs for wildlife habitat, and returning a few years after planting to remove competing brush so trees grow quickly and are protected against future wildfires."

Who would administer the forest restoration program?

There is a federal committee called the Woody Biomass Utilization Group that includes forestry, energy, and wildlife experts from several departments of government - the Departments of Energy, Agriculture/Forest Service, and Interior. They also have a subgroup studying Disaster Debris that works with FEMA and Homeland Security in an effort to establish and coordinate federal remedial response to environmental disasters like Katrina, floods, tornadoes, and megafires throughout the country.

When asked what the biggest hurdle was to the implementation of harvesting and reforestation programs, Ron Vineyard of the Forest Service responded "infrastructure." By that he meant that there needs to be more sawmills, power plants, forest products companies, and biorefineries who can take possession of the woody biomass harvested from the disaster zones. The carbon would be sequestered in forest products like lumber, paper, and biochar while carbon-neutral bioproducts like ethanol, alcohols, chemicals, and bioplastics could be cleanly produced to reduce the use of carbon-positive petroleum byproducts.

Unfortunately, many of companies of the pre-existing infrastructure have been damaged from the hurricane, too, and the timberland owners of the region are likely to sell their lands to developers rather than pay to reforest their lost inventories. That will not make environmentalist groups happy who recognize the need to keep our forests large and healthy as carbon sinks to mitigate global warming.

Government action is needed now

There is no possible way that the federal agencies - who are already coping with fire-fighting, humanitarian rescue efforts, and capital restitution from each year's mounting ecological catastrophes - can pay for the scope of immediate remedial action needed. Political leadership and coordination with utilities and private industry is required - and the nation will be stronger for it.

Now is the time for federal, state, and local governments to pass policies that reduce regulatory hurdles and create incentives to utilities and private industry to establish new infrastructure. Passage of bioenergy friendly amendments to the stagnating Energy and Farm Bills would be a very timely response demonstrating Congress' recognition of the long-term consequences of the problem while supporting green business and career opportunities for their constituencies.

Emerging technology companies can convert the woody biomass much more cleanly than their predecessors. This will create the economic means to address the gargantuan and urgent task of harvesting and replanting Katrina's catastrophic biomass legacy.

technorati BIOstock, biomass, agriculture, forestry

Watch 60 Minutes - Warming Climate Fuels Mega-fires

I recommend that my readers watch a story on CBS 60 Minutes this Sunday, October 21st. You can read it first at Expert: Warming Climate Fuels Mega-Fires - including my online comment. Like so many investigative stories on television, they create a significant amount of viewer outrage without offering solutions.

I am glad they are pointing out that "Seven of the 10 busiest fire seasons have been since 1999." What they don't point out is that 50% of the Forest Service budget has been allocated to fighting forest fires and obstructive litigation rather than deploying proven prevention measures.

Forests are now 4-10 times denser than their historic norm (when they were open enough for a horse to gallop through). Now dense underbrush and small diameter trees hamper walking and fire-fighting. That, coupled with warmer, dryer conditions, is what is causing these fires.

I witnessed a persuasive presentation at a workshop sponsored by UC/Berkeley and the USDA/Forest Service last month that thinning forests works. Through a series of photographs Ron Vineyard of the Eagle Lake Ranger District of the Lassen National Forest showed how the 2002 Cone Fire in Northern California extinguished itself within about 20 yards of its entry into the mechanically thinned zone. Their studies place the cost of suppressing a fire in an unthinned forest at $1,726/acre. The cost of mechanically thinning a forest with an underburn is approximately $204 per acre. An ounce of prevention is, indeed, worth a pound of cure.

With the benefits of thinning so obvious I asked him what the biggest hurdle was for the Forest Service. He said "Infrastructure." He explained that there wasn't sufficient private industry demand for the fuelwood to make publicly financed thinning operations economically sustainable.

Currently the forest products industry is not robust enough to fill the breach. But there is significant promise that new tech biorefineries will be able to cleanly convert woody biomass (fuelwood and underbrush) into cellulosic ethanol.

For now, I would like to see environmental groups restrain themselves from attacking Forest Service fire prevention programs they plan to deploy. If they care about global warming they should recognize that mega-fires now spew more greenhouse gas emissions per year than all the auto emissions of the U.S. combined.

I will be attending the Society of American Foresters National Convention in Portland, Oregon October 23-24 and presenting my speech Woody Biomass: Fuel for Wildfires or Feedstock for Bioenergy? October 25th at the Residual Wood Conference in Vancouver, BC.

technorati wildfires, BIOstock, biomass, forestry

An educational "Hidden Treasure" on forest stewardship

The National Association of Conservation Districts has announced the renewed availability of printed copies of the educational comic book "The Hidden Treasure: Forests and Woody Biomass."

It highlights the core principles behind current USDA Forest Service and USDI efforts to educate citizens of all ages of the correct relationship between forest density, wildfires, tree health, and emerging woody biomass to energy. It presents "messages that are closely tied to the goals and objectives of the Forest Service's National Fire Plan."

Here is a personal note from Fred Deneke, forestry expert for the 25x'25 Steering Committee:

Please let your field and USDA counterparts know that the NACD woody biomass comic "The Hidden Treasure" is now available for viewing and ordering on the NACD website: www.nacdnet.org/education/hiddentreasure.

We printed 300,000 copies thanks to the support of Dennis Eagen and Charlie O'Brien of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers and further donations from some of their forestry related member companies.

One of the first orders that came in today was from the Riverside RCD in California for 4,000 copies. At that rate the 300,000 won't last long so best get your orders in early!

Here is how the NACD describes their useful educational resource...

----------------
Hidden Treasure Comic Book

Money may not grow on trees, but heat, electricity, liquid fuel, and even plastics do. Children can learn how through The Hidden Treasure, an educational comic book from NACD. This teaching tool shows young people and families how woody biomass from our nation's woodlands can provide a wealth of products and energy resources.

The Hidden Treasure helps children understand the real worth of our valuable forest resources, so their treasure can be fully revealed. The Hidden Treasure provides an engaging and educational story for children in late elementary to middle school to help them understand that forest renewal improves the health of forests and provides biomass for many productive uses and how wood biomass will play an important role in our nation's future, including energy security through the production of biofuels, biochemicals, and other sources of energy.

If you would like to preview or print a copy of The Hidden Treasure, click on one of the links below.

High resolution: The Hidden Treasure(6.08 MB)
Low resolution: The Hidden Treasure (1.46 MB)


technorati BIOstock, biomass, education, stewardship, forestry

Florida's Farm to Fuel Summit: A Californian's View

Florida Department of Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson hosted the 2nd Annual Florida Farm to Fuel Summit in St. Petersburg last week. A year in the making, it brought farmers, land owners, technologists, educators, and politicians together to talk about the status of biofuels developments taking root in the biggest biomass state in the U.S.

Looking over the roster of registrants, there were not too many Californians attending this sold out event despite its scope - exploring the many producers, programs, and technologies that are feeding the biofuels movement in Florida. That is a shame because there are many parallels between the two states - a fact highlighted two weeks ago when California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Florida Governor Charlie Crist jointly "raised the flag" for the fight against global warming at the Serve to Preserve Florida Summit on Global Climate Change.

During the global climate change event, Crist signed a series of executive orders that in large measure mimic orders signed by the California governor on the opposite coast. The orders include efforts to mitigate state government emission of greenhouse gas, to substitute clean technologies for the production of electricity, and to significantly reduce vehicle tailpipe emissions.

"We will follow the great governor of California's example," Crist said. "He has set the lead."

A synergy can be expected from this cross-country axis that will help to accelerate national state government expansion of renewable energy legislation. It is expected to have profound impact on the rate of advanced research, implementation, and infrastructure development not only on the coasts, but everywhere in between.

So what did attendees of the Farm to Fuel Summit see?

Florida's level of commitment
I have been tracking Farm-to-Fuel since I read about Commissioner Bronson's organization in April, 2006 - prior to the first Farm to Fuel Summit. He has been a staunch proponent of the 25x'25 Initiative. Therefore it was no surprise that 25x'25 co-chairman Read Smith was one of the featured speakers at the opening of the summit (shown below driving the EPIC Formula One simulator).


The keynote address was delivered by Florida Governor Charles Crist who reaffirmed his administration's commitment to the Farm to Fuel program. He announced that he will be leaving on a trade mission to Brazil in November to understand more about their transition to biofuels and to seek collateral development of biorefineies and infrastructure. He then announced that a subsidiary of the largest power utility in the state, Florida Power & Light Energy, will be co-developing a citrus-to-ethanol plant in Florida.

Florida's Chief Financial Officer, the engaging Alex Sink (with me in the photo at right), reaffirmed the state government's commitment to insure that economic development funds are available to foster biofuel development. She was genuinely impressed by the size of the turnout and she invited attendees to see how her group is participating in a Florida Climate Change series of workshops.

Agriculture is the state's second largest industry. She asserted that "Farmers are the best stewards of our land because if we aren't good at it, our very livelihoods are at risk." She predicted that when the history of Florida is finally written, the impact of renewable fuel conversion will be as big as the introduction of citrus crops was.

Renewable Fuels Status Reports
A panel of speakers including Matt Hartwig, Communications Director of the Renewable Fuels Association, talked about ethanol and biodiesel feedstock-to-fuel programs. Matt cited the primary drivers for biofuel growth according to his organizations research - the environmentally-friendly profile, the sustained high price of gas and oil prices, and the expanding market for biofuels, including an anticipated jump in California blending percentage from 5.67% to 10%. RFA is headquartered in Washington, D.C. and is actively lobbying Capital Hill for the Farm Bill and legislation favorable to farm to fuel development.

Robert White of the Ethanol Promotion and Information Council (EPIC) talked about the hurdles to implementation of infrastructure (especially E85 pumps) in Florida and around the nation. He announced a campaign designed by EPIC specifically for this state called the Florida Needs Ethanol Campaign. The purpose is to give consumers the opportunity to learn more about ethanol and to register their desire for ethanol pumps with the fuel stations in their neighborhood.

David Shiflett of World Energy, a leading international biodiesel supplier, talked about the biodiesel industry in Florida. He had an interesting graph on logistics that equated the number of movements necessary to ship 10 million gallons of biofuel. It would require 2400 truck shipments, 500 rail cars, 25 barges, or 1 pipeline. Anticipating the demand on existing infrastructure means planning for huge increases in the future.

He also talked about the variability of biodiesel fuel based on the feedstock used to produce it. A student in the audience, seventh grader, Erin McCaskey (see separate article Student teaches biofuel professionals), could concur with this statement having produced five varieties in her award-winning science project to determine the calorimetric energy content of each. It is anticipated that the lack of consistent oil composition and emission standards will be an impediment to the widespread acceptance of biodiesel in many states.

In addition to recognizing Erin McCaskey, a person Commissioner Bronson referred to as "the oldest youngster to come to this meeting", Katzen International Inc. founder Dr. Ray Katzen (92), was honored for working on cellulosic ethanol technology starting in 1955 (see an excellent article by Ron Kotrba from BBI (who was also attending the Summit) titled The Project of a Lifetime). Ray established his "Project 20" - a campaign to produce 20 billion gallons of ethanol per year by the year 2020 - in 1990.

A special preview was given to Fields of Fuel - a film by Josh Tickell, author of Biodiesel America.

Advancing the Science of Bioenergy
Dr. Lonnie Ingram from the University of Florida was on hand to make a presentation about his patented process for producing ethanol using enzymatic hydrolysis. He projected that Florida had enough biomass to satisfy a demand equivalent to the 8.6 billion gallons of gasoline consumed each year. His technology is the lynchpin to a plant being built in Jennings, LA that is being developed by Verenium Corp for the conversion of sugarcane bagasse to ethanol. His work was honored during lunch presentations and the University of Florida was presented with a royalty check by the corporation for wood construction waste conversion to ethanol at a plant in Osaka, Japan.

Dr. Ann Wilkie introduced the subject of waste-to-energy by talking about University of Florida research into anaerobic digestion for waste treatment. Her current program focuses on biogas generation from bioethanol and biodiesel by-products. Her notable quote "Fossil fuel is fossil thinking."

Dr. Adam Schubert of BP talked about his companies commitment to biofuel technology citing a half billion dollar investment in establishment of the Energy Biosciences Institute at UC/Berkeley. His company is also at work with Dupont on the production of biobutanol and other fuels capable of being blended at higher rates into gasoline without modifying vehicles.

Ryan Katofsky of Navigant Consulting Inc. (NCI) talked about thermochemical biorefinery processes used for breaking down the molecular bonds of feedstock into syngas (carbon monoxide and hydrogen molecules). As he put it "I am an engineer. We have a motto 'If it doesn't fit, hit it with a hammer. If it still doesn't fit, hit is with a bigger hammer." The syngas can be combusted or converted into biofuels. NCI worked with Princeton and Georgia Tech to craft a recently completed detailed evaluation of pulpmill biorefineries for TAPPI.

Business of Bioenergy
The subject of carbon credits was introduced by Todd Jones of AgCert, a company that produces and sells emission reduction offsets, primarily to the agricultural community. David Kolsrud of DAK Renewable Energy talked about building community based projects using the combined financial and biomass resources of numerous investors. Reggie Holt of Farm Credit of Central Florida got down to the brass tacks of financing biofuel plants and operations using a $100,000,000 Fuel Ethanol Facility as an example.

John Masiello leads a team for a Fortune 250 company called Progress Energy that is responsible for researching, developing and implementing the company's energy-efficiency and alternative-energy programs. He described the rapid growth in energy demand due to more electrified lifestyles and bigger homes. Here are a few of the projects he outlined that Progress Energy/Florida is involved in:

Energy efficiency programs are a key part of customer service operations of Progress Energy. They estimate that their programs have reduced demand by 1600MW. By 2014 they expect to grow the program to over 2500MW through conservation programs.

Progress Energy Florida is also purchasing from Ridge Generating Station near Auburndale, Florida. The 45MW plant is fueled by wood waste (66%), tires (30%) and landfill gas (4%).

One project is a contract that PE/F has with Biomass Investment Group on the utilization of E-Grass™ - a dedicated crop grown specifically for conversion into power. BIG's bio-based products are sold to power producers as an environmentally-friendly renewable fuel, and to the paper industry as a non-wood source of fiber. The finished plant will be capable of generating 130MW - roughly enough electricity to supply 83,000 homes while saving 20 million tons of carbon emissions.

Progress Energy/Florida has also announced a Request for Renewables program to attract developers interested in selling renewable energy to PE/F.

Biomass Resources/Feedstocks in Florida
It surprises many to learn that 10% of the biomass produced in the United States comes from Florida. Its soil, wet climate, sunshine, and strong farm and forestry industries makes it an ideal laboratory for biofuel industry development.

Two speakers gave presentations concerning the use of woody biomass for energy in Florida. Marian Marinescu of the University of Florida talked about the environmental, economic political, and social benefits of woody biomass utilization as a renewable feedstock for production of a range of biofuel output - focusing mainly on wood pellets, but also talking about syngas, charcoal, ethanol, methanol, bio-oils, and biodiesel. His points made a nice seque to Olaf Roed, President and CEO of Green Circle Bio Energy, Inc. whose company is building the "world's largest pellet plant in Jackson County, Florida" to begin production in December, 2007. He believes wood pellets could play a significant role in mitigating global warming. The pellets they produce will be used primarily by European power companies engaged in co-firing to reduce their use of coal.

James Wimberly of Biomass Investment Group Inc. (BIG) talked about his company's development and marketing of E-Grass™, the feedstock referred to earlier by John Masiello of Progress Energy. He said that E-grass can produce 30 tons of biomass/acre/year - compared with the oft-cited switchgrass which harvests about 8 tons. Their contract with PE/F is for 130MW of electricity using a fast pyrolysis process to produce a combustion turbine fuel that will power an Integrated Pyrolysis Combined Cycle (IPCC) electricity generation system.

The other two presenters of the panel talked about producing biodiesel from new feedstock resources. David Jarrett of Xenerga, Inc. talked about the potential of Jatropha. Fred Tennant of PetroAlgae gave a presentation about the worldwide demand for diesel (currently 200 billion gallons/year) and how his company planned to employ microalgae to "grow oil" using a water intensive process.

Renewable Energy Technology Grants Program
The final panel of the conference (excluding discussions by state and national Florida politicians and commissioners) focused on the status of the Florida Renewable Energy Technology Grants Program:

The Florida Legislature appropriated $15 million for the grant program, with at least $5 million to support bioenergy projects and $10 million for projects that generate or utilize other renewable energy resources, including hydrogen, biomass, solar energy, geothermal energy, wind energy, ocean energy, waste heat and hydroelectric power.

Dr. George Philippidis of Florida International University discussed a joint program undertaken by his Applied Research Center and Florida Crystals Corporation (FCC). Their work will focus on producing cellulosic ethanol from sugar cane bagasse.

Craig Evans, a consultant for ALICO Inc., reported on the status of his company's project for producing cellulosic ethanol from the waste generated from their diverse agricultural and mining operations. Kevin Bouffard of The Ledger wrote a May 2006 interview of Craig, former President of Stewardship America, about citrus waste and the potential of thermochemical conversion technology using the BRI process for converting blended biomass waste into ethanol and electricity. In a state with as many forms of biomass as Florida, the universal blending feedstock attributes of the technology seem very appropriate.

David Stewart of Citrus Energy LLC is developing a technology for converting citrus waste into ethanol. According to a joint announcement with FPL Energy this week:

The cellulosic ethanol plant will be owned and operated by FPL Energy and is expected to produce four million gallons of ethanol per year. It will be located on the grounds of a local Florida citrus processor (near Juno Beach, FL).

FPL Energy said that ethanol from citrus peel could result in a new Florida industry producing over 60 million gallons of fuel per year, which could replace about one percent of Florida's annual gasoline consumption

Alan Banks of Losonoco, Inc. talked about his company's plan to recommission an existing 1st generation corn ethanol production facility in Barstow Florida and co-locating a 2nd generation gasification plant that uses biomass from yard waste, citrus residues and sugar bagasse to produce a total of approximately 25m gallons of ethanol per year.


---------------
In short, there a tremendous amount of synergy possible between the technological and entrepreneurial resources of California and the farm and forestry feedstock industries in Florida. Farm to Fuels is a terrific effort by Commissioner Charles Bronson's office to communicate and organize the renewable fuels industry in Florida.

technorati BIOstock, biomass, agriculture, forestry

Southern utilities lobby against federal RPS legislation

Major Southeastern utilities including the Tennessee Valley Authority, Southern Company, and Duke Energy are lobbying hard against Energy Bill provisions that would establish a federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). The RPS would mandate that the all U.S. utilities replace 15% of their fossil fuel power generation with renewable alternatives by the year 2020. The utilities are crying foul insisting that their region does not have the same wind and solar power potential of other states and that it is unfair to their consumers to levy extra surcharges for their inability to meet the new standard.

Of course, there are ample woody biomass resources available for conversion to renewable energy (biofuels and electricity) but these assets are, according to the utilities' position, not projected to supply enough electricity to meet RPS goals. In California, its RPS creates high demand resulting in strong investment incentives to develop new renewable generation capacity.

As reported by Carl Levesque of the American Wind Energy Association,in his article featured on Renewable Energy Access titled Slimmed-Down U.S. Energy Bills Raise Major Questions:

High expectations and disappointments have characterized early action on energy legislation. Last month, the U.S. Senate produced an energy bill that includes no tax title -- and, therefore, no production tax credit extension -- and that has no renewable portfolio standard (RPS). In fact, Senate advocates of renewable energy found themselves in a procedural morass that did not even allow for a vote on the RPS issue.

Joe Romm, author of a new book on global water and politics titled Hell and High Water and Climate Progress blogger for the Center for American Progress Action Fund placed the blame on Southern utilities:

In brief, last week the Senate tried to require power companies to generate 15% of their electricity from renewable energy by 2020. That modest renewable portfolio standard (RPS) was killed by the combined efforts of utilities like the Tennessee Valley Authority, Southern Company, and Duke Energy.

Romm cited an article written by Daniel Cusick for Greenwire...

----------------
Who Killed the Senate RPS?

Southern utilities played key roles in the effort to undermine plans in the Senate last week to require power companies to generate at least 15 percent of their electricity from renewable energy.

The fingerprints of the Tennessee Valley Authority and those of the Tennessee Valley Power Providers Association, whose members distribute TVA power to nearly 9 million customers in the South, were all over the successful effort to keep the so-called renewable portfolio standard (RPS) out of the sweeping Senate energy bill.

So too were those of other major Southeastern utilities, including Southern Co. here and Duke Energy Corp. of Charlotte, N.C., both of whom pressed the message to lawmakers that a nationwide renewables mandate would undermine the South’s stable electricity market by forcing utilities to draw more power from wind, biomass, geothermal and other forms of energy.

Their message became a mantra for mostly Republican senators from the South. “Forcing Tennesseans to either build 40-story wind turbines on our pristine mountaintops or to pay billions in penalty taxes to the federal government amounts to a judge giving a defendant the choice to be hanged or shot,” warned Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.).

Tennessee’s junior senator, Republican Bob Corker, labeled the RPS proposal as a “transfer of wealth” from the Southeast to other regions of the country where wind and solar power are more viable.

Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions (R), in a June 14 floor speech, said it would not be feasible for utilities in the South to generate enough power from solar, wind or other renewable power sources to meet the RPS goal. He made his case using data provided by TVA, its power distributors in north Alabama, and the state’s other dominant utility, Southern Co.

“In my home state of Alabama, solar is not effective in our area,” Sessions said. Wind power, too, is a non-starter, he said, because the state lacks sufficient wind to drive large turbines.

“I just don’t like to see us require wind turbines where it is not going to work, or solar panels where it won’t work,” Sessions said.

‘Didn’t seem fair for us’
Proponents of the RPS proposal say the region’s lawmakers missed a prime opportunity to expand the South’s renewable energy base, which they say has far more potential than the utilities and their allies suggest.

“We think that’s very unfortunate,” said Stephen Smith of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE), a Knoxville-based advocacy group. “And we are going to let the customers in TVA’s service area know that their energy providers were actively working against clean energy.”

The issue is not dead on Capitol Hill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said last week he hopes to revive the proposal, and there could be an effort to add an RPS when the House assembles its energy bill next month.

Spokesmen for TVA in Knoxville insist the government-owned utility took no official position on the renewables measure. But its influence was clear in bleak economic projections it offered to lawmakers opposed to the measure. The authority said a 15 percent RPS would have cost the utility an additional $410 million per year by 2020, and most of that tab would have been passed on to consumers.

TVA spokesman Gil Francis said lawmakers requested the information as they sought to take positions on the renewables measure. “We did not take a formal position,” Francis said, “and we did not send a letter.”

Rather, the heavy lobbying came from the 158 distributors of TVA power who buy wholesale electricity from the utility and resell it under retail sale agreements with municipalities and cooperatives.

Jack Simmons, president and CEO of the Tennessee Valley Public Power Association, which represents TVA’s retail distributors, said his organization believes the RPS plan sponsored by Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) would impose an untenable mandate upon TVA retailers, forcing them to spend tens of millions of dollars to buy wind and solar power from outside sources.

Specifically, Simmons said, six of the valley’s largest power providers — in areas such as Nashville, Memphis, Knoxville and Chattanooga — have to buy additional renewable power from outside the region at a cost of 2 cents per kilowatt-hour to meet the standard. He and other critics of the proposal likened the mandate to an energy tax on the region’s homeowners and businesses, and a transfer of wealth from the South to other regions.

“Right off the bat, it didn’t seem fair for us to have to pay a 2-cent-per-kilowatt-hour tax when we didn’t have any control over whether we made green power or not,” Simmons said in a telephone interview last week.

Simmons insisted his group is not opposed to greater development of renewable energy resources in the Tennessee Valley. “We were opposing the way the legislation was crafted since it would tax our members without any relief,” he said.

In North and South Carolina, where Duke Energy provides electricity to much of the upstate region, and in portions of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and Florida where Southern Co. predominates, the message was much the same.

“A one-size-fits-all approach does not work for us,” said Duke spokesman Tom Williams.

Southern Co. officials said the measure would have driven up annual costs by as much as $745 million by 2020, and much of that increase would have been borne by its 4.32 million customers in Alabama, Florida, Georgia and Mississippi.

“We believe it would be very difficult to comply with a 15 percent RPS from resources here in the Southeast,” said Leonard Haynes, Southern’s executive vice president for supply technologies, renewables and demand side planning.

Call for research
But critics of the utilities’ position, like Smith of SACE, argue the challenges are not insurmountable. Moreover, they say that large power providers in the region will not make a sustained push on expanding renewables unless they are forced by a government mandate.

“The biggest casualty of this debate was the potential for renewables development in the Southeast, and the failure of our utilities to embrace that potential and instead to argue for the status quo,” Smith said.

Smith added that his group and others will work hard to restore a renewables provision through the House, hoping it will be brought back up during the final bill’s conference negotiations.

But George Sterzinger, executive director of the Washington, D.C.,-based Renewable Energy Policy Project, conceded that RPS foes who argued that the South would struggle to meet an RPS mandate have a point. “Using the current set of technologies,” he said, “that’s probably true.”

But, Sterzinger added, even if wind and solar power are not viable in the Southeast, the region has high potential to develop renewable energy resources from biomass such as forest products and switchgrass, a high-yield crop that grows well in the Southern climate.

Southern Co., for example, is already co-firing switchgrass as part of its voluntary “green power” purchase program in Alabama. But the program has failed to draw significant customer interest, in part because of the technological limitations of co-firing with switchgrass, but also because the utility has failed to aggressively market the program (Greenwire, Nov. 2, 2006).

And Southern subsidiary Georgia Power Co. included a biomass provision in its latest filings for additional power supply before the state public service commission.

Sterzinger said utilities wanting to get serious about biomass energy need to invest more heavily in research geared toward burning woody debris and grasses more efficiently, including processes that would gasify biomass materials.

Haynes, the Southern Co. executive, said such R&D efforts are part of the company’s longer-range priorities at its Power Systems Development Facility in Wilsonville, Ala. “Down the road, we think we may have an opportunity to either gasify biomass or introduce biomass along with coal in the gasification process,” he said.

According to Williams, wind power development in western North Carolina is a nonstarter because of restrictions on ridgeline development throughout the Appalachian mountains, which are important to the state’s tourism economy.

“We have potentially very good biomass potential in the Carolinas, but we don’t have the wind potential some others have,” he said.

technorati BIOstock, biomass, agriculture, forestry