Sunday, October 20, 2013
Five environmental groups — PT Airwatchers, Biomass Burn, the Olympic Environmental Council, the Olympic Forest Coalition and the World Temperate Rainforest Network — sued to challenge a clean-air permit issued for the facility by the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency.
Clean-air legal fight halts Port Townsend biomass project. FIGHT Biomass Kauai.
Port Townsend Washington STOPS Toxic Biomass Plant
Port Townsend Washington Residents SUED the EPA over Biomass Pollutants.
"EPA Sued for Ignoring Paper Mill CO2 Emissions [The Biomass Monitor]"
"Massive emissions of greenhouse gases in the form of carbon dioxide make biomass and coal burning facilities major contributors to climate change. Yet one large source of climate pollution that’s been flying under the radar has been pulp and paper mills—until now."
"A lawsuit against the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) launched by the Center for Biological Diversity, Greenpeace, and Port Townsend AirWatchers could force new pulp and paper mills—and possibly even existing facilities—to cut back on their carbon dioxide emissions or shut down. The US is the world’s largest consumer of paper products, according to a Center for Biological Diversity fact sheet. The pulp and paper industry is the nation’s 3rd largest consumer of energy, after the petroleum and chemical industries, emitting 57.7 MMT CO2 eq (million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent) in 2004.\
The first-of-its-kind lawsuit demands that the EPA abide by Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, which requires the EPA to review air pollution standards for paper mills every eight years, according to Vera Pardee, Senior Attorney with the Climate Law Institute. The last time the EPA reviewed paper mill standards was in 1986—twenty six years ago. “Since then the EPA hasn’t done anything,” said Pardee on an October 31, 2012 legal briefing via phone organized by Environmental Paper Network. “This is an unreasonable delay.”
The paper mills in question are called “kraft” mills, referring to a chemical process employed to convert wood into wood pulp to make paper. The kraft pulping process is “very energy intensive, digesting wood chips in solutions in high temperatures, recovering chemicals with a heating process,” said Pardee. Every time heat is used, greenhouse gases are emitted.
Aside from greenhouse gases, paper mills are a major source of toxic air pollution, including but not limited to particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds. While referring to the toxic air pollutants emitted from paper mills as “horrific,” Pardee explained the “prime motivation” for the lawsuit to be carbon dioxide emissions due to their effect on the climate. “We’ve just seen Sandy’s impact,” said Pardee, “a hurricane that was amplified to a significant extent by climate change.”
Center for Biological Diversity, Greenpeace, and PT AirWatchers intend that their lawsuit will force the EPA to review the air pollution standards for paper mills. If the EPA determines that the “standards do not meet available technology,” the agency would review the standards and ultimately issue a proposed new rule. If all goes according to plan, the lawsuit would then be at an end. If the EPA continues to shirk its responsibility, then “other legal avenues are available,” warned Pardee.
Any proposed rule revising kraft mill standards would be released by the EPA by May of 2013, opened to public comment, and then finalized by March 2014. However, Pardee doesn’t think climate and forest advocates need to wait until next year to make their voices heard. “Industry is certainly talking to EPA at all times, making submissions—no reason we shouldn’t do same thing,” advised Pardee. The proposed rule would mandate that EPA take a long hard look at various other air pollutants emitted by pulp and paper mills, besides carbon dioxide.
The plaintiffs “truly do expect that the proposed rule will tighten standards and tackle pollutants,” said Pardee. While the rules would at first apply only to new paper mills, the EPA would also be required to issue “guidance” for emissions from existing mills. While guidance leaves industry more wiggle room than standards, paper mills operating across the country could be subject to new restrictions.
Port Townsend AirWatchers, a grassroots community group based in Port Townsend, Washington, became a plaintiff in the EPA lawsuit due to concerns about carbon dioxide and other air pollution from the Port Townsend Paper Company, which is also proposing to build a brand new biomass power incinerator.
“The hope is that our countries industrial regulations will continue to move towards clean air, water, and soil that reflects current science and technology focused on protecting our earth and environment, now and in the future,” said Elaine Bailey, of Port Townsend AirWatchers.
The new air quality standards for pulp mills will only apply to biomass incinerators if the incinerator is a part of the pulp mill and legally considered a “modification” of the facility, according to Pardee. “There’s an enormous amount of case law and regulatory material that helps define that.” If the EPA sets the new standards, the law would require a concurrent update in guidance for existing facilities such as the Port Townsend Paper Mill. “If the EPA doesn’t do it,” said Pardee, “there’s the next lawsuit.”
Meanwhile, 3,000 miles away, some Vermont and New York State residents hope that the lawsuit will eventually apply to one of the largest, local air and water polluters,International Paper’s Ticonderoga Paper Mill. Looming on the banks of Lake Champlain—one of the largest freshwater bodies in the US, a recreational paradise, and the drinking water supply for Burlington, Vermont, population 42,000—the Ticonderoga Mill has racked up an astounding number of air and water quality violations over its four decades of operation."
Full Article and Source
Air pollution from biomass energy
Biomass Plants are AIR POLLUTION.
http://www.pfpi.net/air-pollution-2
http://www.pfpi.net/air-pollution-2
Biomass Plants are NOT Healthy for the Environment. Kauai Does not need more ways to create electricity to over charge you for.
The Sun and Wind is Free. Energy is FREE. Stop Letting Utility Companies pollute your air to create electricity you don't need so they can use up slush money, incentives and get filthy rich while polluting your land, air, water and soil.
Kauai, Say NO to More Pollution in the Kauai Air
"We are concerned citizens who endorse sustainable energy goals, but not at the expense of the health of our children, not at the expense of our agricultural industries, and not at the expense of more pollution to our island. Pepeekeo residents reside within 1.7 miles from the plant, and this poses a significant health risk from pollutants, creates a nuisance from noise, and a safety issue from excessive traffic."
Source
http://www.biomass-powerplant.blogspot.com/
Source
http://www.biomass-powerplant.blogspot.com/
Community opposition to Anahola project heard loud and clear, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, Jobie Masagatani, HHC, DHHL Land Management
"KAPAA — The Hawaiian Homes Commission voted Friday to reject a proposal by Green Energy Team, LLC to lease 2,143 acres of Hawaiian Home Lands in Anahola.
“For myself, I have taken a lot of the testimony that’s been provided to heart,” said Jobie Masagatani, chair of the HHC and director of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. “I wish we had more time to seek that opportunity to potentially come together, but time has run out on us. And I still have a number of unanswered questions.”
For those reasons, Masagatani said she would not support the lease.
By a 5-3 vote, the commission voted against the measure, despite DHHL Land Management Division’s recommendation for approval.
“With that the motion fails,” Masagatani said, drawing an extended applause from those gathered at Kapaa Elementary School.
The 20-year lease would have allowed Green Energy to clear existing Albizia trees from the land and establish a eucalyptus tree plantation to fuel its $90 million biomass-to-energy facility near Koloa. In return, DHHL would have received annual rent and 2 percent of the gross revenue generated by the harvested wood, as well as improvements to the land.
In the first five years, Green Energy would have cleared and returned 267 acres to DHHL for homesteading. An additional 819 acres would have been cleared and replanted with eucalyptus trees over the 20-year period. At the end of the lease, all the land would have been returned to DHHL.
The incentives were not enough for the local community, who have stood firm against the proposal since a pair of public hearings were held in March.
“I am encouraged that several in the Anahola community wanted a chance to be a part of the ultimate goal of getting these lands ready for homesteading,” Masagatani said in a release.
“They want a chance to have their voices heard. We look forward to working closely with the people of Anahola to explore ideas on the future use of these lands.”
The 2,143 acres in question belong to native Hawaiians under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920.
Prior to the vote, Commissioner Ian Lee Loy said he believed Green Energy could have been a “tool” to clear the land and make it accessible, which would have allowed DHHL to begin awarding subsistence agricultural lots.
The bottom line, he said, is that the department does not have the resources to do it itself.
“If we walk away from this divided, nothing is going to change for a long time,” he said. “So, there’s an opportunity, folks, for us to move forward, for us to seize this. It may not be perfect, but its an opportunity that is not afforded to us otherwise.”
Commissioner Leimana DaMate said her biggest concern was the potential affects eucalyptus trees might have on the land. After not receiving a response from the Department of Land and Natural Resources’ Division of Forestry and Wildlife, DaMate said she put her trust in local residents, who testified that the trees would poison the soil.
“I put my faith in the Anahola people and kupuna of the area,” she said. “I believe they can (clear the land), and based on this, my vote has to be no.”
Commissioner Renwick Tassill said he made a commitment 40 years ago to act on behalf of the beneficiaries, but that he was having a hard time making a decision about Green Energy’s proposal.
“I see benefit, I see shortfall,” he said.
In the end, he also voted against the lease, along with DaMate, Masagatani, Perry Artates and Gene Ross Davis.Commissioners Loy, Jeremy Hopkins and Michael Kahikina voted in support.
During the pair of meetings Thursday and Friday, the HHC heard feedback from dozens of individuals, many from the Anahola area. Eighty percent of the testimony was in opposition of the project, according to a DHHL release."
“For myself, I have taken a lot of the testimony that’s been provided to heart,” said Jobie Masagatani, chair of the HHC and director of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. “I wish we had more time to seek that opportunity to potentially come together, but time has run out on us. And I still have a number of unanswered questions.”
For those reasons, Masagatani said she would not support the lease.
By a 5-3 vote, the commission voted against the measure, despite DHHL Land Management Division’s recommendation for approval.
“With that the motion fails,” Masagatani said, drawing an extended applause from those gathered at Kapaa Elementary School.
The 20-year lease would have allowed Green Energy to clear existing Albizia trees from the land and establish a eucalyptus tree plantation to fuel its $90 million biomass-to-energy facility near Koloa. In return, DHHL would have received annual rent and 2 percent of the gross revenue generated by the harvested wood, as well as improvements to the land.
In the first five years, Green Energy would have cleared and returned 267 acres to DHHL for homesteading. An additional 819 acres would have been cleared and replanted with eucalyptus trees over the 20-year period. At the end of the lease, all the land would have been returned to DHHL.
The incentives were not enough for the local community, who have stood firm against the proposal since a pair of public hearings were held in March.
“I am encouraged that several in the Anahola community wanted a chance to be a part of the ultimate goal of getting these lands ready for homesteading,” Masagatani said in a release.
“They want a chance to have their voices heard. We look forward to working closely with the people of Anahola to explore ideas on the future use of these lands.”
The 2,143 acres in question belong to native Hawaiians under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920.
Prior to the vote, Commissioner Ian Lee Loy said he believed Green Energy could have been a “tool” to clear the land and make it accessible, which would have allowed DHHL to begin awarding subsistence agricultural lots.
The bottom line, he said, is that the department does not have the resources to do it itself.
“If we walk away from this divided, nothing is going to change for a long time,” he said. “So, there’s an opportunity, folks, for us to move forward, for us to seize this. It may not be perfect, but its an opportunity that is not afforded to us otherwise.”
Commissioner Leimana DaMate said her biggest concern was the potential affects eucalyptus trees might have on the land. After not receiving a response from the Department of Land and Natural Resources’ Division of Forestry and Wildlife, DaMate said she put her trust in local residents, who testified that the trees would poison the soil.
“I put my faith in the Anahola people and kupuna of the area,” she said. “I believe they can (clear the land), and based on this, my vote has to be no.”
Commissioner Renwick Tassill said he made a commitment 40 years ago to act on behalf of the beneficiaries, but that he was having a hard time making a decision about Green Energy’s proposal.
“I see benefit, I see shortfall,” he said.
In the end, he also voted against the lease, along with DaMate, Masagatani, Perry Artates and Gene Ross Davis.Commissioners Loy, Jeremy Hopkins and Michael Kahikina voted in support.
During the pair of meetings Thursday and Friday, the HHC heard feedback from dozens of individuals, many from the Anahola area. Eighty percent of the testimony was in opposition of the project, according to a DHHL release."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)