Biomass Plant Sparks Controversy Over Clean Air Compliance and Economic Impact

The Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) has entered the ongoing controversy surrounding the Humboldt Sawmill biomass plant in Scotia. Yesterday, EPIC issued a pointed press release addressed to the North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District (NCUAQMD), challenging the district’s handling of the biomass plant’s permit renewal.

The Coalition for Clean Energy (CCE) triggered the dispute, alleging that the plant has been operating without a permit since February 2022, in violation of federal Clean Air Act regulations and North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District (NCUAQMD) rules.

Dr. Wendy Ring, a local retired physician and key figure in the CCE, initially raised concerns about the permit renewal application’s timing, asserting that it was submitted a year and a half after expiration. NCUAQMD responded, conceding to a procedural violation but steadfastly defending the plant’s legality until a final decision on the renewal is made.

The CCE admitted to an error regarding the permit’s expiration date in their follow-up statement. However, they continued to challenge the plant’s legality, citing federal regulations requiring a “timely” renewal application. The group took aim at NCUAQMD, accusing the district of displaying favoritism towards the biomass plant.

Jason Davis, Deputy Air Pollution Control Officer for NCUAQMD, provided a detailed response, clarifying the EPA’s delegation of authority and emphasizing the procedural violation related to the timing of the renewal application. Davis justified the ongoing operation of the plant, highlighting the district’s enforcement efforts, a comprehensive review process, and the addressing of emission concerns and health risks.

In a phone interview with Redheaded Blackbelt, Davis shared that like many deadlines in life, a late submission often results in a fine, however, isn’t grounds for permit revocation. Further stating in their written response, NCUAQMD stated, “When a violation occurs, the permit holder is allowed a reasonable amount of time to correct it.”

However, EPIC contends that based on environmental regulations, the biomass plant is actually operating without a permit to do so, or a shield to cover operations in a grace-period situation. EPIC’s letter asserts that NCUAQMD erroneously informed Humboldt Sawmill Company (HSC) and the public that the biomass plant could operate without a permit until the renewal process is complete. EPIC contends that, as per the Clean Air Act and its regulations, major sources of air pollutants must operate with a Title V permit. The only exception, an “application shield,” allows continued operation during the permit renewal process if a “timely and complete” application is submitted.

According to EPIC, HSC’s renewal application, submitted on May 12, 2023, was neither timely nor complete. The district, however, notified HSC on July 28, 2023, that the plant could continue to operate under an application shield. EPIC argues that this decision was an error and a violation of federal law and district rules.

The letter calls on NCUAQMD to immediately notify the plant that operating without a renewed permit is in violation of regulations and issue a press release correcting previous statements. EPIC contends that the plant has been operating without a valid permit or application shield since July 19, 2023.

Beyond permit expiration dates, and thick policy guidelines, the crux of the issue for many environmentalists is the greenhouse gas emissions of biomass generated energy. In their press release, CCE wrote, “In 2022 the Humboldt Sawmill biomass plant emitted 312,559 tons of CO2e, which is equivalent to 70% of the greenhouse emissions from all the county’s passenger vehicles, Humboldt’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.”

Biomass energy production raises both environmental concerns and potential benefits. On one hand, biomass is regarded as a unique form of renewable electricity that deviates from the carbon-neutral attributes of solar, wind, and hydropower. When biomass is burned for heat or electricity, it releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, challenging the concept of carbon neutrality. The carbon impact of bioenergy is intricately linked to factors such as combustion technology, biomass harvesting methods, regrowth efforts, biomass type, timing, and the energy resource being displaced. For example, while burning woody biomass emits carbon dioxide, the regrowth of trees helps offset these emissions; however, the speed of regrowth and sustainable practices significantly influence its carbon neutrality. Despite its renewable nature, biomass energy is not inherently clean, and its environmental impact hinges on intricate factors that shape its carbon footprint.

In addition to the greenhouse gas emissions, biomass energy production poses additional environmental consequences. Deforestation, often driven by the use of forest timber for fuel, leads to habitat loss, soil erosion, and the destruction of natural beauty. Pollution is another concern, with the combustion of biomass emitting pollutants and particulate matter, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and nitrogen oxides. Unlike carbon dioxide emissions, many of these pollutants cannot be sequestered by new plants, raising the risk of environmental and human health issues if not properly contained. Water use is also a critical factor, as the cultivation of crops and trees for biomass energy requires significant irrigation, exacerbating drought conditions and impacting aquatic habitats and water supplies for various purposes. To make biomass more environmentally friendly, sustainable forest management, careful biomass selection, and advancements in research, technology, and policy development are essential to ensure a more sustainable and responsible approach to bioenergy.

Residents in Scotia have voiced concerns about the emissions from the biomass plant, citing the color, or opacity, of smoke coming from the plant stacks. While the NCUAQMD does not have an air quality meter in Scotia, the regulations for HRC to maintain a permit now require in-stack monitoring. “The [new] plan calls for in-stack sampling to be conducted, widely regarded as the most accurate method available to quantify emissions. The District will require HSC to implement the plan and report the results. If the findings warrant additional analysis, HSC will prepare a comprehensive health risk assessment in accordance with the California Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment guidelines,” NCUAQMD wrote.

Additionally, Eileen Russell, HRC’s Community Outreach Coordinator, stated that HRC employs individuals with ‘Smoke School’ training. Smoke school provides training and certification for individuals conducting visible emission observations (VEO) to ensure compliance with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. EPA laws mandate facilities within a specified range producing air pollutants to perform VEO and submit periodic reports, requiring certified employees who must undergo hands-on testing every six months to maintain reliability and accuracy, thereby avoiding environmental violations and costly fines.

That, though, is little assurance to those Scotia residents that say they can see and smell noxious emissions infiltrating their homes and lives, worrying about the potential harm that may come from their industrial neighbor.

Amidst this ongoing dispute, and prior to EPIC’s statements on March 11, HRC, the owner of the biomass plant, weighed in on the heavily contested matter with a press release titled ‘HRC providing clarification and amplification to recent press releases regarding Combined Heat and Power Biomass Plant in Scotia, CA.’ Though the statement did not address the matter of the NCUAQMD permit, HRC took the opportunity to tout the benefits of their biomass plant, emphasizing its efficiency, economic viability, and positive environmental impact.

Biproducts are a reality of the lumber industry. HRC claims the biomass energy source, when left to break down naturally, releases methane, Additionally, burning biproducts in open piles (slash burning) unleashes a complete range of emissions into the air. However, by utilizing woody debris in the biomass plant, HRC says their controlled systems are able to capture over 90% of these emissions, presenting a more efficient and eco-friendly solution compared to the decomposition or open burning alternatives.

Additionally, HRC pointed out their role as an economic driver in Humboldt County and as an employer to over 300 individuals, providing family-wage jobs with benefits to a community facing economic hardships. “It is important for business to work together with the community to support rural lifestyle,” HRC wrote.

However, the CCE opposes using biomass to generate electricity, which, they say, emits large amounts of carbon dioxide. Instead, the coalition advocates for the replacement of the 38-year-old power plant with a cleaner facility capable of transforming sawmill waste and thinned forest residues into environmentally beneficial products such as hydrogen, liquid biofuels, biochar, building insulation, and hydro-mulch for stabilizing slopes after wildfires.

However, up to this point, the NCUAQMD has affirmed HRC’s ability to operate the biomass plant while their permit application is in process. HRC, in their press release, stated, “The North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District professionals have been instrumental in helping HRC meet the goals of regulations and being a good neighbor.”

Meanwhile, EPIC and CCE continue to contest the legality of plant operations following the permit expiration.

As EPIC challenges NCUAQMD, the community awaits further developments in this environmental showdown in Scotia.

Press release from EPIC:

Biomass Plant Letter No Permit NCUAQMD letter granting app shield 7-28-2023