Bulletin: Lawmakers ask EPA to change biomass rule

Oregon Reps. Peter DeFazio and Greg Walden lead the effort

THE LETTER IS ATTACHED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.

By Keith Chu/ The Bulletin

https://bendbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20101214/NEWS01/12140379

Published: December 14. 2010 4:00AM PST

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan group of U.S. House members — including four-fifths of the Oregon delegation — signed onto a letter asking the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its stance on biomass power.

In the first draft of the agency’s rules overseeing greenhouse gas emissions, the EPA did not considered biomass power a renewable power source, essentially placing it in the same category as fossil fuels. But in the letter, sent Friday, lawmakers asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to exempt biomass power plants from the “tailoring rule” until the agency has a chance to review a host of comments it received on the issue.

Oregon Reps. Peter DeFazio, D-Springfield, and Greg Walden, R-Hood River, spearheaded the delaying effort.

“The implementation of the Tailoring Rule without recognizing the carbon benefits of renewable biomass threatens future investment in biomass energy, job creation in rural communities, and our collective renewable energy goals,” the lawmakers wrote. “Immediate action is needed by EPA to change the treatment of biomass under the rule to avoid harmful impacts on the biomass energy sector.”

The EPA is scheduled to release its final rule on Jan. 2. An EPA spokeswoman didn’t respond to questions about the rulemaking process or the lawmakers’ letter on Monday.

A total of 32 House members signed on to the letter.

Central Oregon has at least two major biomass power proposals underway: a 20-megawatt plant scheduled for La Pine and a 35-megawatt plant in development in Warm Springs. Combined, the plants are expected to cost about $200 million and bring in nearly 100 jobs.

Some environmental groups, especially the Natural Resources Defense Council, have campaigned against counting biomass as a renewable energy source, citing studies showing that burning the woody debris does create greenhouse gas emissions. They also argue that big biomass plants will encourage the harvesting of forests to provide fuel.

Biomass power defenders argue that it emits less carbon than fossil fuels and that the carbon would have been released anyway, usually by burning piles of slash, said Phil Chang, a program manager for the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council.

“That carbon is still going to go up into the atmosphere,” Chang said. “If you don’t view that carbon that’s already in the biosphere as qualitatively different than fossil carbon, biomass energy is not going to be attractive.”