Congressman Greg Walden

Representing the 2nd District of Oregon

Bulletin: EPA should heed biomass letter

December 23, 2010
In The News
Published: December 20. 2010 4:00AM PST
https://bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101220/NEWS01/12200322

The federal Environmental Protection Agency may not, in fact, be out to kill the nation’s burgeoning biomass fuel industry, but that’s not apparent in some of the agency’s recent actions.

Earlier this year, it proposed clean air rules that would have killed the market for wood pellets and bricks like those that will be manufactured in John Day. While the EPA says it understands the value of biomass, it is close to implementing a rule that treats the stuff as a nonrenewable resource, putting it on a par with fossil fuels.

Biofuels apparently are a conundrum to the agency charged with protecting the nation’s environment. They do emit greenhouse gases as they’re burned to generate electricity. Unlike coal and gas, however, the gases they emit would be released anyway as they decomposed. In that respect, they’re a far cleaner proposition than oil, coal and other fossil fuels. Now, as the EPA prepares to issue rules governing greenhouse gas emissions, it has yet to make an exception for biofuels.

That’s got most of Oregon’s delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives (all but Portland’s Earl Blumenauer) in a tizzy. They’re among the 32 members of the House who recently wrote the agency and asked it to propose rules recognizing the value of biomass, even as it announces a so-called “tailoring rule” next month. In fact, Reps. Greg Walden, R-Hood River, and Peter DeFazio, D-Springfield, are leading the charge to have the agency act immediately on biomass.

What they’re asking is far from unreasonable. As they note in their letter, EPA has said it recognizes the role of biomass fuels in reducing harmful emissions. Further, they note, the agency has apparently committed to writing supplemental rules regarding biomass. If it fails to do so before the tailoring rule is put in place Jan. 11, they fear that investment in biomass will dry up, jeopardizing the future of a fuel source that promises not only renewable energy but a market for woody debris that creates fire hazards on the nation’s public lands. Moreover, the jobs biomass plants would create are likely to be in rural areas where they’re badly needed.

EPA should take the letter from Congress to heart. Biomass offers great promise on several fronts, but it won’t be able to deliver if the industry never advances beyond its infancy. The agency’s recognition that woody biofuel and coal are far different things is critical to the industry’s growth.