Environmental groups object to biomass plant

March 09--Critics of a biomass power plant proposed by We Energies and Domtar Corp. say the project shouldn't qualify for a state environmental permit because it will lead to higher emissions of greenhouse gases.

But state regulators say the type of technology chosen by the Milwaukee utility is the most efficient available and qualifies for a permit under federal rules now in effect.

The We Energies project is the first biomass plant, and one of the first three projects in the country, to be reviewed under new greenhouse gas rules enacted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

It doesn't make sense to issue a permit for the project because it would add emissions of carbon dioxide at a rate much higher than a natural gas-fueled power plant, said Mary Booth, an ecologist who is researching biomass projects for a national coalition called the Partnership for Policy Integrity.

"We looked at the permit numbers, and the emissions of greenhouse gases are six times higher from biomass than in the natural gas boiler," she said. "It's right there in the numbers, and yet they say we're not going to consider any further use of natural gas as a way to make this facility cleaner because this is a biomass project."

Steve Dunn, of the state Department of Natural Resources, said the agency is expected to issue a final permit in the next month after reviewing comments by opponents and others.

The DNR says the plant qualifies for a permit by virtue of its efficiency, a point the EPA agreed with in comments filed with the state. Because it is a co-generation plant that will produce electricity as well as steam for the Domtar paper mill, the We Energies project is more efficient than a biomass plant that produces power only, he said.

The proposal is being closely watched by the industry because it is one of the first to be issued. It also comes at an unusual time, because the EPA is considering backing off on carbon regulation for biomass power plants.

Supporters of biomass say the projects should be considered carbon-neutral because waste wood is already releasing carbon into the atmosphere as it decomposes, and because of assurances that the carbon debt will be repaid by replanting of trees.

But it takes years for those trees to be replanted and for the carbon emitted by the power plant to be offset, say Booth and other critics.

Concern over the carbon neutrality of the biomass plant comes as a separate decision on the project remains pending. The state Public Service Commission must decide whether the plant is needed and whether it's cost-effective for We Energies customers.

We Energies proposed the plant to help it move beyond building wind power projects as a means to help it comply with the state's renewable power requirement. The utility is required to generate more than 8% of its power from renewable sources by 2015.

The $255 million project is more costly than a comparable wind power project would be, customer groups say. But We Energies, which is building the state's largest wind farm to the northeast of Madison, said in a filing that a bill introduced by Gov. Scott Walker to restrict wind farm development "would make it much more difficult to develop wind projects in Wisconsin."

"We're all waiting to see whether or not they actually build the facility," said environmental lawyer Mark Thimke at the Milwaukee law firm Foley & Lardner.

Cost concerns led to the cancellation of Xcel Energy Corp.'s proposed biomass power plant in Ashland and led to Walker's decision to cancel a proposed biomass plant to serve the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus.

-----

To see more of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.jsonline.com.

Copyright (c) 2011, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

For more information about the content services offered by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services (MCT), visit www.mctinfoservices.com.

A service of YellowBrix, Inc.