The White House Opposes Legislation That Claims Biomass is Carbon Neutral

[RiverLover]

The White House Opposes Legislation That Claims Biomass is Carbon Neutral
7/8/15

The White House has taken the right position regarding the myth of carbon neutrality of burning trees for electricity. In a statement released today in response to H.R. 2822 – Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016, the Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, asserted that:

“The Administration objects to the bill’s representation of forest biomass as categorically ‘carbon-neutral.’ This language conflicts with existing EPA policies on biogenic CO2 and interferes with the position of States that do not apply the same policies to forest biomass as other renewable fuels like solar or wind. This language stands in contradiction to a wide-ranging consensus on policies and best available science from EPA’s own independent Science Advisory Board, numerous technical studies, many States, and various other stakeholders.”

Dogwood Alliance is pleased to see the Administration taking a position that is grounded in science and that recognizes the massive threat that a large scale-up in burning trees for electricity represents. Carbon Accounting sounds like a dense and wonky subject…and it is. But if the EPA and other regulatory bodies don’t get the math right when it comes to emissions from burning trees and the true value of our forests, then we will end up increasing greenhouse gas emissions instead of reducing them. Additionally, we will further harm the quality of life in our local communities by increasing air pollution.

It may seem that, given the renewable nature of trees and forests, this resource instead of fossil fuels is the right path, but as NRDC and others have shown, using whole trees for electricity can be worse than coal. Now is the time to invest more in energy conservation and renewables, like wind and solar, instead of an industry that is massively subsidized and impacting critical ecosystems.

Senators Warren and Markey are right to be calling for a moratorium on wood-based bioenergy in the Clean Power Plan. They recently issued a letter to the EPA, maintaining that by treating biomass power plants as if they have zero emissions under the draft Clean Power Plan, EPA risks undermining the ability of the Plan to actually reduce emissions from the power sector.

Dogwood salutes the leadership of these Senators and the White House in taking a position and looks forward to supporting more elected officials in recognizing the dangers of utility-scale use of trees for electricity. Southerners from Louisiana to Virginia are increasingly standing up to stop their forests from being burned for electricity here or in Europe and will continue to press local, state and national politicians to take the same bold step that the Obama administration has.

http://www.dogwoodalliance.org/2015/07/the-white-house-opposes-legislation-that-claims-biomass-is-carbon-neutral/

So glad he listened to the 41 scientists here and the 78 scientists here who appealed to him to look at the studies proving the myth of carbon neutrality in burning wood for electricity. I'm also thankful for Warren & Markey for their efforts.

[RiverLover]

1. FYI, "WH Urged to Remove Wood-burning Power Plants From Plan for Reducing Greenhouse Pollution"

For Immediate Release, June 23, 2015
Contacts: Kevin Bundy, Center for Biological Diversity, [phone] x 313, [e-mail]
Mary Booth, Partnership for Policy Integrity, [phone], [e-mail]
Danna Smith, Dogwood Alliance, [phone], [e-mail]

White House Urged to Remove Wood-burning Power Plants From
Plan for Reducing Greenhouse Pollution

WASHINGTON— Fourteen conservation groups today urged the White House to eliminate biomass energy — the large-scale burning of wood to create electricity — as a means of compliance under the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan,” which will regulate carbon pollution from power plants.

In today’s letter to the Office of Management and Budget, which is currently reviewing the plan, the conservation groups pointed out that the EPA has not identified any scientifically rational basis for treating biomass energy as a means of emissions reduction under the Clean Air Act.

Under the Clean Power Plan, states have the option of using “renewable” energy like wind and solar to reduce emissions of pollutants like carbon dioxide that disrupt the climate. But burning wood for energy is highly polluting. “Power plants burning wood and other forms of biomass emit about 3,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour — an emissions rate that is approximately fifty percent higher than that of a coal-fired power plant,” the letter notes.

“Burning trees for electricity hurts our climate by producing dangerous amounts of carbon pollution,” said Kevin Bundy, climate legal director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “The Obama administration’s power plant policies must be based on science, and the science clearly shows that burning trees for power will likely make the climate crisis worse.”

Today’s letter also points out that the EPA cannot simply leave it to the states to make hard decisions about how to calculate the climate-change effects of biomass energy, because this could result in inconsistent carbon accounting methods for similar facilities. Finally, although the EPA has proposed allowing “sustainably harvested” forest wood to be used as fuel under the Clean Power Plan, the groups note that forest sustainability standards do not address carbon balance.

The letter comes as a rider to an appropriations bill moving through the House and Senate would force the EPA to treat biomass as having zero CO2 emissions as long as forest carbon stocks are stable or increasing. The provision, described as a “poison pill” by Sen. Tom Udall, ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, directly contradicts current science, including a report by the EPA’s own Science Advisory Board panel on biomass energy.

“Forests are our most important carbon sink, with new growth taking up over 13 percent of U.S. emissions per year,” said Mary Booth, director of the Partnership for Policy Integrity. “There’s really no better way to sabotage the Clean Power Plan than by burning up the forest carbon sink in power plants and then forcing EPA to treat the electricity generated as if it has zero emissions.”

“The wood pellet industry is already clearcutting bottomland hardwood forests in the Southeast to fuel European power plants,” said Danna Smith, executive director of Dogwood Alliance. “If U.S. utilities are allowed to burn wood under the Clean Power Plan, it will accelerate carbon emissions and decimate our last remaining native forests, all in the name of ‘clean energy.’ ”

“The American people would be incredulous if Congress passed a law declaring lead in children’s toys nontoxic, or saying tobacco is good for you, in order to support some politically influential industry,” said Bundy. “This appropriations bill is no different. The climate obeys the laws of physics, not the whims of Congress.”

The groups signing onto the letter are the Center for Biological Diversity, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Clean Air Task Force, Dogwood Alliance, Earthjustice, Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, Greenpeace, Partnership for Policy Integrity, Rainforest Action Network, Sierra Club, Southern Environmental Law Center and 350.org.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 900,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/biomass-energy-06-23-2015.html

This might have also helped the administration come to the right conclusion on biomass energy.