Summary case studies: the emerging bioenergy industryThe following are some representative examples of biomass power plants being proposed and builtaround the country. Information on facilities and the loopholes from which they benefit is takenfrom permits and permit application documents. Unlike the set of permits for new, “greenfield”facilities that we used for graphically demonstrating the differences between PSD facilities andsynthetic minor facilities (Figures 4 through 7), this list includes some biomass facilities thatpreviously burned fossil fuels.Sierra Pacific, Anderson, CAWhat: An existing facility that is increasing biomass-burning capacity. 468 MMBtu/hr stoker boiler;31 MW (gross)Estimated CO 2 emissions (tons per year): 401,890Permitted emissions (tons per year): NOx: 267 CO: 472 PM 10 total : 41 SO 2 : no limit setStatus for NOx, PM, and CO: Major source (PSD)Status for HAPs: Major sourceFuel: 25 bone dry tons/hour of: “a. Untreated wood pallets, crates, dunnage, untreatedmanufacturing and construction wood debris from urban areas; b. All agricultural crops orresidues; c. Wood and wood wastes identified to follow all of the following practices; i.Harvested pursuant-to an approved timber management plan prepared in accordance withthe Z'berg-Nejedly Forest practice Act of 1973 or other locally or nationally approved plan;ii. Harvested for the purpose of forest fire fuel reduction or forest stand improvement.”Construction and demolition wood or other waste allowed as fuel? YesUse of NCASI or other non-EPA factors to estimate HAPs? UnknownNotes: This air permit does not set a limit for SO 2 at all, and does not specify any means ofcontrolling emissions of HCl, as apparently, the major source limit of 0.022 lb/MMBtu forHCl under the boiler rule is so easily met, no controls are needed. The plant can emit up to45 tons of HCl under the major source limit. This permit is also notable in that it actuallyspecifies an emission rate for CO 2 , unusual for a bioenergy plant permit.DTE Stockton, Stockton, CAWhat: Refire of old coal plant to biomass. 699 MMBtu/hr stoker boiler; 54 MW (gross).Estimated CO 2 emissions (tons per year): 600,259Permitted emissions (tons per year): NOx: 108 CO: 248 PM 10 total : 58 SO 2 : 70Status for NOx, PM, and CO: Synthetic minor source (avoided PSD)Status for HAPs: Synthetic minor sourceFuel: “Biomass is defined as any organic material originating from plants, not chemically treated andnot derived from fossil fuels, including but not limited to products, by-products, andresidues from agriculture, forestry, aquatic and related industries, such as agricultural,energy or feed crops and residues, orchard and vineyard prunings and removal, stone fruitpits, nut shells, cotton gin trash, corn stalks and stover, straw, seedhulls, sugarcane leavingsand bagasse, aquatic plants and algae, cull logs, eucalyptus logs, poplars, willows,70
switchgrass, alfalfa, bark, lawn, yard and garden clippings, paper (unprinted), leaves,silvicultural residue, tree and brush pruning, sawdust, timber slash, mill scrap, wood andwood chips, and wood residue. Biomass does not include tires, material containing sewagesludge, or industrial, hazardous, radioactive, or municipal solid waste.”Construction and demolition wood or other waste allowed as fuel? YesUse of NCASI or other non-EPA factors to estimate HAPs? YesNotes: As a coal plant, this facility stopped operation in 2009. It is located in a highly polluted area,with “extreme” non-attainment status for ozone. Emissions from the new biomass boilertriggered offset requirements for emissions of NOx, SOx, PM 10 , and VOCs, but rather thanbeing compelled to obtain new offsets, the facility was allowed to treat the cessation ofprevious allowable emissions from the coal plant as mostly offsetting biopower emissions.Although the DTE Stockton boiler is about 50% larger than the boiler at the PSD-permittedSierra Pacific Anderson plant described in this report, the DTE plant claimed syntheticminor status to avoid PSD permitting.Plainfield Renewable Energy, Plainfield, CTWhat: 523 MMBtu/hr fluidized bed boiler; 37.5 MW (net)Estimated CO 2 emissions (tons per year): 449,207Permitted emissions (tons per year): NOx: 175 CO: 239 PM 10 fil : 84.8 SO 2 : 81.3Status for NOx, PM, and CO: Major source (PSD)Status for HAPs: Synthetic minor sourceFuel: 56.54 tons per hour of chipped trees, stumps, branches or brush as defined in RCSA 22a-208a-1; Recycled wood or clean wood, meaning any wood or wood fuel which is derivedfrom such products or processes as pallets skids, spools, packaging materials, bulky woodwaste or scraps from newly built wood products, provided such wood is not treated wood.[CGS 22a-209a][RCSA 22a-208a-1]; Processed Construction and Demolition wood,meaning processed wood from construction and demolition activities which has been sortedto remove plastics, plaster, gypsum wallboard, asbestos, asphalt shingles and wood whichcontains creosote or to which pesticides have been applied or which contains substancesdefined as hazardous under section CGS 22a-115. [CGS 22a-209a]; Other types if properlysized, clean, uncontaminated wood materials, such as sawdust, chips, bark, tree trimmingsor other similar materials. The plant is also allowed to burn up to 781 gal of biodiesel perhour, with no restrictions on number of hours that biodiesel can be burned.Construction and demolition wood or other waste allowed as fuel? YesUse of NCASI or other non-EPA factors to estimate HAPs? UnknownNotes: This permit requires the plant to burn “sorted” waste wood that has had contaminatedmaterials removed, but does not specify what level of contamination is acceptable, aproblem given that no sorting program can remove 100% of contaminated materials. Thepermit contains a requirement for initial testing for emissions of sulfuric acid, ammonia,arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, nickel, copper, benzene, titanium, formaldehyde,lead, manganese, mercury, dioxins (2,3,7,8-TCDD equivalents), selenium, hydrogenchloride, styrene, silver, and zinc. The permit also calls for the facility to meet certain71
- Page 1 and 2:
Trees, Trash, and Toxics:How Biomas
- Page 8 and 9:
The fix: EPA should regulate bioene
- Page 10 and 11:
To test whether the industry emissi
- Page 12 and 13:
Verso Bucksport, Bucksport, MEBurge
- Page 14 and 15:
cycle technologies is $59 - $86, de
- Page 16 and 17:
The physical reasons why bioenergy
- Page 18 and 19:
All three facilities went through a
- Page 20 and 21: supposed to use the technology that
- Page 22 and 23: Bioenergy emissions of criteria pol
- Page 24 and 25: CO 2 and conventional air pollutant
- Page 26 and 27: are federally and practically enfor
- Page 28 and 29: Table 4: Biomass power plants with
- Page 30 and 31: shutdown, when emissions can increa
- Page 32 and 33: Table 5: Biomass power plants with
- Page 34 and 35: Nitrogen oxides (tons per year)Figu
- Page 36 and 37: PM 2.5 , including condensable PM,
- Page 38 and 39: Synthetic minor facilities tend to
- Page 40 and 41: material classified as a commercial
- Page 42 and 43: is regulated under the boiler rule,
- Page 44 and 45: As an incinerator, the facility wou
- Page 46 and 47: Table 8: Industry data helps biomas
- Page 48 and 49: permitting authorities, especially
- Page 50 and 51: La Pine, Oregon, used the NCASI fac
- Page 52 and 53: Connecticut, the permit only requir
- Page 54 and 55: then the load is considered to 100%
- Page 56 and 57: elatively high filterable PM standa
- Page 58 and 59: EPA rules compare contaminant conce
- Page 60 and 61: commodity” - therefore, the facil
- Page 62 and 63: emove obviously contaminated materi
- Page 64 and 65: developmental and reproductive effe
- Page 66 and 67: The Evergreen plant is located in t
- Page 68 and 69: Loophole 4: Most biomass plants hav
- Page 72 and 73: emission limits for HAPs, but does
- Page 74 and 75: company was permitted to use non-EP
- Page 76 and 77: Verso Bucksport, Bucksport, MEWhat:
- Page 78 and 79: Biogreen Sustainable Energy, La Pin
- Page 80 and 81: iomass from land clearing operation