Humboldt Sawmill Biomass Plant ‘good for the environment,’ Says HRC
Press release from the Humboldt Sawmill Company:
Humboldt communities benefit from renewable power when forest residuals are used as fuel to create steam, which generates power, at the Scotia Power plant. Biomass power is efficient, economical and good for the environment. The steam generated at the plant serves a second function of drying wood at the mill. Woody debris from the forest and sawdust from the mill serve as the fuel for the plant, which brings a great economic benefit to our company and the communities we serve. Humboldt Sawmill Company utilizes all materials derived from the lumber making process, which creates a massive reduction in waste and transportation of products, and that is good for the planet.
Compliance with State And Federal Air Standards
The North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District issued a Permit To Operate (PTO) for the biomass plant owned by Humboldt Sawmill Company. The PTO requires ongoing testing for Particulate Matter (PM) and Visible Emissions Monitoring (VEM) which is how operators view the opacity coming from the smokestack to monitor for issues. The facility opacity monitors maintain 6 minute average data continuously. Calibrations are performed daily on the monitoring system and all data and documents are available to the NCUQAMD on request. In 2022 a 6.4 magnitude earthquake struck, which impacted the power plant. This resulted in Notice of Violations (NOV) being issued by the NCUQAMD which were addressed by performing neccesary repairs. Regulations are the containers that guide the work at the power plant. If a violation occurs, repairs are quickly made to remedy the situation. The plant continues to operate in compliance with our Title V Permit by following all regulations applicable.
Biomass Power Helps Reduce Wildfire Risk
According to the California Air Resource Board, California has more than 25 million acres that are classified as very high or extreme fire threat. Eleven million people live in that high risk area. Wildfires are not only more frequent, but far more devastating. To reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire the governor of California has pledged to reduce fuels by 1 million acres on an annual basis by 2025. This includes acres managed under Timber Harvest Plans. The byproduct of the logs milled by Humboldt Redwood Company are used as fuel at the HSC biomass plant. These forest treatments protect California forests and people from wildfire, and the residuals are used for clean energy.
The Carbon Footprint of Biomass Power
Using biomass power is supported by the California EPA and the California Natural Resources Agency as reported in the California Forest Carbon Plan. In California, fuel for biomass facilities consists of byproducts from forest treatments, lumber production, and agricultural residues. When biomass is produced in this way, the full lifecycle emissions of the material have to be considered against the alternative fates of that material. When wood in the forest rots or decays it releases methane, or it could burn in a pile or potentially a wildfire. No matter the outcome, it will create some form of emissions at the end of it’s lifecycle. Here’s what the California Forest Carbon Plan has to say about it.
“Biomass energy cuts methane- a super potent short–lived climate pollutant that is also a greenhouse gas- by 98 percent compared to pile and burn of forest or agricultural waste.”
Source: California Forest Carbon Plan, Prepared by CA EPA and CA Natural Resources Agency
See also Forest biomass diversion in the Sierra Nevada: Energy, economics and emissions https://calag.ucanr.edu/archive/?article=ca.v069n03p142Humboldt Redwood Company has a long-standing tradition of taking people to see the property at the place of their choosing. This includes our manufacturing sites. To find out more, visit https://www.hrcllc.com/contact to schedule a tour.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
Awesome thanks. I buy all my electricity from here.
I work around Scotia all the time and never notice particulate fallout. So the wacky ecofreaks are not so honest.
Mr. Clark, I’m curious how you buy all your electricity from the biomass plant? From what I’ve discovered, the plant uses 1/3 of what they produce in-house to run the mill, along with generating steam for their plant. The other 2/3 of energy production is purchased by RCEA as a credit, making up about 20% of their energy portfolio. Scotia and Rio Dell residents are more likely to have their power sourced from the biomass plant as that is where the energy enters the grid, but the bill should still be paid to PG&E. Talking about working around Scotia makes me think you don’t live there so I’m curious about your statement. (I find energy and distribution through the grid endlessly fascinating.)
They have takeout.
And your comments are mostly lies!
List the lies. All is the only word in his post that’s off.
lol ! Have you ever read Rollins comments?
Why would a reporter question a commentor on the veracity of their comment? A Little biased are we ?
What?
Kym, after all these years of having to look at the content on here, how can you be surprised at the abysmal ignorance of logic or reasoning in a majority of the posters?
I had a vast capacity to love and see the good side in my fellow humans. My family is constantly annoyed by this trait. Luckily for them, this comment section is draining the reservoir.
What bias are you accusing me of?
As for asking a question, I’m generally interested to know as the grid and energy production as well as how energy procurement works, is fascinating to me. From my understanding of the grid and how power is distributed through the grid, one cannot choose their source as much as they can choose who they pay as a supplier. Those that live nearest a biomass plant would be utilizing the biomass energy event if they opted for 100% renewable energy. It’s a system of credits and allocation from what I’m told. I was generally curious how he could be getting all of his energy from a designated source if he didn’t reside near there. Just as some may prefer solar to wind, or wind to hydrogen power, they can choose a supplier that sources those energy types but unless they live near that supplier, the energy delivered to their home is that which is inputted nearest their home, regardless of their preference. The choice to pay for a specific type of energy, if allowed, may finance that procurement but doesn’t mean that is actually the source of your energy, again, from my understanding.
From Mr. Clark’s comment, I reached out to RCEA to further delve into how energy distribution works.
Wendy Ring on the Scotia biomass – speaking the Arcata City Council, August 16, 2023:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNoVukIQPJE&t=162s
I own a home in Scotia.
As far as I know, residents do not benefit from the power generation of the Scotia Mill. My power bill does not mention credits, and we pay roughly the same rates as my mother does in fortuna.
Some or most of the power likely comes from the mill but we pay PG&E just like everyone else.
And honestly, all the talk and issue with the mill is a bit silly. Why burn the gas to truck waste products to another facility? Why burn additional gas or fuels to create steam for the wood manufacturing process?
In-general it’s all a non-issue for me. But I’d be a lot happier with cheaper power costs.
It is interesting how it all works, huh. Everyone in Northern California who is tied to the grid, pays for power through PG&E. PG&E owns the lines the energy is delivered on. There are multiple energy generators throughout their area, including some owned by PG&E.
If you don’t choose to have your energy by RCEA, you aren’t paying for biomass energy though it is likely the vast majority, if not all of your power since once it is inputted into the grid, goes to where it is being pulled to/used regardless of our bills.
The credits come into play, as it was explained to me, like an atm machine. If you bank at coast central in Fortuna, but are driving through Garberville and use the ATM at Vocality, you can still pull out money from your acct, though it’s not your physical money. It’s not even money from your institution. Yet you can access it bc it is monitored and is essentially yours.
All of the available biomass energy put into the system is owned by rcea. If you live in scotia, you’re withdrawing from them even if you opted to only get pg&e power & distribution instead of rcea power & pge distribution (it always comes as a pg&e bill either way). You may pay PG&E power for your energy even though you’re receiving it from an RCEA source.
I’m hoping to have a show with energy producers to explain this much better than my limited understanding can. A lot of people in our area still don’t understand why they may have an RCEA charge or think they’re being double billed, or very limited knowledge on the grid. The grid capacity issues and now this biomass controversary has allowed me to understand what happens when I turn on a switch at my house, much more than I ever understood, and I still have a ton to learn.
For what it’s worth, the RCEA rep said they price their energy at 1/2 of a percent lower than PG&E. You still pay PG&E to deliver that energy whether the energy is sourced from PG&E or RCEA.
I look forward to more discussions around energy and grid issues.
That was awesome information Lisa, Thank you.
In your reporting and research; did you ever figure out who has regulatory oversight over the RCEA selling electricity or the HRC for producing electricity as a public or private utility?
I did find this on the RCEA website:
“As a not-for-profit public agency we are not subject to regulation by the California PUC. The CPUC oversees privately owned utility companies, including PG&E. Our primary oversight comes from our Board of Directors which is made up of elected officials from each of our member agencies. However, as a retail supplier of electricity in California, we are subject to laws that implement State’s clean energy and reliability goals. Compliance with these laws is enforced by several state agencies, one of which is the CPUC, who most notably enforces the Renewable Portfolio Standard program for retail electricity suppliers.”
https://redwoodenergy.org/cce-faq/#1502718185113-d7ecafc7-b364
I wonder why Humboldt LAFCo does not oversee the RCEA, since LAFCOs are independent regulatory commissions created by the California Legislature to control the boundaries of cities and most special districts.
https://humboldtlafco.org/common-questions/
RCEA buys all kinds of power. On your billing with them you can specify if you want ONLY green production$$$. I do not check that box.
Producers pump electricity into the ”grid”. People/entities buy it. RCEA buys form all over the country. Some gas and coal i hope, to be cost effective, and some wind and solar too. They know what goes in and we pay them for some of that.
Seems like a lot of, on your honer, to me. But i guess someone is minding the store.
As a socialist operation, RCEA really dose work for the people, so far. You can call them and ask questions. As a reporter they would be very open door to you. I hear them on KINS sometimes.
I actually talked to RCEA yesterday morning, twice. They explained to me, in simplistic terms, how the procurement and distribution process works. The REpower+ is renewables only option. Those that don’t choose that opt for their regular mix which includes around 20% biomass energy production. However, the grid doesn’t differentiate where the power comes from so if you’re an RCEA customer, it doesn’t mean you get 20% biomass energy, but you do help support paying for the biomass produced in Scotia. Likewise, Scotia residents, whether they are for or against biomass energy, and whether they are an RCEA customer or not, are likely receiving the bulk if not all, of their energy from the biomass plant. California Independent System Operators monitor what goes in. It’s quite fascinating to me and that’s before even talking about energy storage when demand is low.
Your choice folks. Cheaper, cleaner biomass that actually helps clean up humanity’s messes, or keep paying PG&E for substandard service and maintenance.
Grid customers still have to deal with PG&E as they are the delivery service, if you will, for power. For PG&E customers that opt to source their power from RCEA, about 20% of that power comes from the biomass plant in Scotia. Those that want to opt in for 100% renewable energy can ask for REpower+ program which is, on average, about $5 more a month.
Regardless of the option, PG&E is still involved and paid for their grid use as the delivery source for energy distribution.
True. We can’t be 100% free of PG&Es tentacles. They own the lines. Although I did read that breaking the contract with Humboldt Power that runs the plant will cost customers million$.
And where are most of those lines? On PUBLIC property.
PG&E the evil empire
Just snip that cord coming into your domicile and be free of that evil empire.
The RCEA was a scam from the beginning. Nigerians would be jealous of that one
Correct. There is No Reason for RCEA to exist… they exist to support themselves they don’t actually provide anything and drain tens of thousands of dollars off every month to employ people and maintain their high rent office. The costs can be viewed on their website which shows their monthly expenditures.
The problem is abundantly clear, PG&E is a state sweetheart monopoly. That’s why we pay 50 cents a kWh while the US average is 15 cents. The state, PUC, and the fat cats (read governor pomade) are raking it in at your expense. Are you aware that if their profit falls below a certain point the state, at taxpayers expense, fills the gap. Tax-rate payer double whammy. It’s a criminal enterprise. Who else burns down a town and forces rate-tax payers to pick up the tab for an event they are clearly responsible for?
this is what needs to change at the state level. Vote conservative.
That’s where my mini me micro grid comes into play, and giving me a partial grid defection option, in letting me use most of the power that I generate.
As my solar array grew more powerful, I soon learned that PG and E has a minimum daily electric surcharge of 37 cents a day, with the minimum electric portion of my utility bill being around 12 dollars.
Oh- but they are regulated by the PUC! Whose members are appointed by the governor. Whose election campaigns are always heavily funded by….PG&E. Hmmm….that doesn’t sound corrupt at all oh no nothing to see here! And…we have to increase the rates again
It sure is. Epic and ms. Ring are so full of shit.
And they said the same of Rachel Carson, back in 1962, with her book “Silent Spring”.
Strawman, (woman?)
Some people say that I’m full of shit. That doesn’t make me Rachel Carlson.
Nor does it make you Lucille Vinyard or Susie Van Kirk, who after years of ridicule, worked tirelessly during the environmental movement of the 1960s and 1970s. And through their persistent activism, they helped establish and expand Redwood National Park to protect ancient redwood forests.
Hmm…are you saying Rachel Carson was full of shit? I grew up back in a part of New Jersey in the 50’s where they were dumping lots of industrial waste, barrels of toxic chemicals just getting buried indiscriminately and yes into the rivers also. So we needed somebody like Rachel Carson to make a big noise. She’s a hero back east. I have never heard anybody speak against her, Ernie. Maybe some resulting regulations down the line were annoying? Like every time my car starts beeping at me for some minor reason I say “Stupid old Ralph Nader!” Ha Ha ha.
No, you have to follow the context.
1- Zipline said: Epic and ms. Ring are so full of shit.
3- Ed conflated that simple statement to: they said the same of Rachel Carson.
2- Ernie said: Strawman, (woman?)… which is a false argument by comparing someone who was accused of being full of shit to someone else, who had nothing to do with the issue at hand, and nor by my estimation was “full of shit”.
4- Ernie said: Some people say that I’m full of shit. That doesn’t make me Rachel Carlson… Thus demonstrating the premiss that the comparison was false and a strawman argument.
5- Rachel Carson was the one that exposed that DDT was making eggshells soft and was making birds like the Bald Eagle head toward extinction.
6- So, No, I’m not accusing Rachel Carson of being full of shit.
7-This is the reason that I don’t tell jokes anymore. I tell some of the most humorous side splitting jokes, then it removes all the fun when I have explain them.
8- I had time on my hands so thought that i would make sure that you knew that I was in was in no way disparaging Carson.
Rachel Carson lived next to a coal fired power plant that was extremely dirty along the polluted dead Allegheny River. The trees were stunted from acid rain and we had to wipe the coal dust off of the car windshield every morning. Asthma was a real problem. She inspired the creation of the EPA which eventually cleaned up the river and air.
They should take this process one step further, and run all the emissions through a giant condenser system. I’ve seen small systems that do that on YouTube. The smoke from burning wood in an oxygen free environment is ran through a condenser with a series of collection points. There is no black or gray look when the gas is coming out of the system, it’s clear. it’s also combustible and can run a generator or a small engine. Then the tar and liquids that are removed in the condenser are distilled in the same manner that they distill crude petroleum. This results in two liquids, one being similar to gasoline, and the other less explosive and more similar to kerosene or diesel.
I mean, I guess Roger Burch’s wallet is technically an environment. So ya, good for an environment.
Forests, Trees and Biomass matters. The ultimate organics for just about everything in life, including producing energy from steam! The children of the hippie windmill people are stumped again. Little did they know that the weekly communal burn/fire dance/Peace pipe partaking that they participated in during the glory days gone by could have led to such a great achievement of human ingenuity. Mind control, S. Marley. The Trees, RUSH.
It is quite simple:
We will be returning to nuclear soon. Europe is building their first new nuclear plant in decades with more to come. Everybody wants lots of electricity, right? It is inevitable due to the choices we have made…Enjoy!
Yeah, 1979 was a bad PR year for nuclear; from banning them in California, Hollywood and No Nukes concerts. But it was very good music if you protested or not…
We were told nuclear power would be too cheap to meter. I remember we all went to see the China Syndrome in theaters and days later Three Mile Island nuclear power plant was releasing radioactive steam contaminating the area around it near Harrisburg, Pa. Being downwind we had to shelter in our homes for days. A few years later a scientist from the power company came to our school assuring us that nuclear power was a safe energy source. Eventually they had the technology to send an unmanned camera into the reactor they realized the core was seconds away from a complete disaster.
“Regulations are the containers that guide the work at the power plant.”
“NCUQAMD”
They can run a power plant, but not proofread a press release or timely apply for permits.
“Forest biomass diversion in the Sierra Nevada: Energy, economics and emissions”
The lead author is Bruce Springsteen, nice.
Interesting how they leave out the fact that the biomass plant is an EPA Title V (worst of the worst) Major Pollution Source. There’s a lot more than steam being emitted!
And that, according to CARB, it emits emits 104 metric tons of methane a year, compared to the 4 metric tons a year for the PG&E gas plant.
Interesting…
A link to that information source would be helpful to peruse, please, if it is, by chance, available…
Thank you.
One cow generates approximately 220 pounds of methane per year.
So, about 1,000 cows would produce very close to your stated 104 metric tons per year of methane produced by the Scotia biomass plant.
How many cows would you say we’re in Humboldt…???
(40,000-71,000 2020)
How about just in Ferndale…???
Air quality sucks in Ferndale.
Why ain’t nobody bitching about that…???
Because our current culture subscribes to animal exploitation at all costs. Government subsidized, and with a free pass from the California waterboard the practice of breeding sentient beings and allowing them to muck up our waterways and air, for the sole purpose of extracting from them by-products and flesh for our (over) consumption is SOP. Before the hyper meat-devotees overreact, I maintain that it’s not the the act of raising and taking an animal or its by-products for food that is in question , because fat soluble vitamins (A,D,E K2) are valuable for health, no, it’s the grotesque excess!
Our opulence is dragging down the collective good.
“Why ain’t nobody bitching about that…???”
They are, however, this article is about the “Humboldt Sawmill Biomass Plant” in Scotia, not cow poop in Ferndale.
Reading Is fundamental, please enjoy:
https://www.yournec.org/exploring-energy-woody-biomass/
Concepts are hard.
Try reading this slower, for increased pleasure…
The discussion moved to the excessive methane production of the biomass burning facility.
Maybe you didn’t notice…???
Cattle and dairy cows in Humboldt represent methane production 40-70 times the methane produced by the Scotia power plant…
Sounds like somebody is focusing on the wrong source of our methane problem…
When it comes to methane, the Scotia power plant methane production that D. Katz deems to be soooo terrible, pales in comparison to all our local belching bovine friends…
Why does perfectly logical reasoning somehow bother you…???
Doesn’t fit in with your agenda…???
As why are you not clamoring, as usual, for actual documentation of his claims…???
“Cattle and dairy cows in Humboldt represent methane production 40-70 times the methane produced by the Scotia power plant…”
A link to that information source would be helpful to peruse, please, if it is, by chance, available…
It’s just not that simple. “What is notable about methane, is that it’s possible the amount being emitted can equal the amount being destroyed. For example, if a herd of cattle emits the same amount of methane over 12 years, they are contributing to warming for those 12 years. But afterward the same amount being emitted is the same that is being destroyed through oxidation, and thus warming is neutral..
while both biogenic and methane from fossil fuels are chemically identical, the resulting CO2 from oxidation has a different warming impact. The biogenic carbon from cattle and wetlands is returned to the atmosphere as that is where it started, while fossil carbon is brand new atmospheric carbon, and hence, new warming.”
Conflating methane from cattle and biomass with fossil fuel methane leads to inaccuracy. As long as grass and woods grow, their methane is recycled. It is taken out by new plant growth. It can be balanced. Fossil fuel methane such as natural gas are new additions on top of what plants can recycle. There is a limit to cattle exceeding the ability of plants to recycle their carbon as they need feed which takes out carbon. Can’t have one without the other existing too. There is no corresponding reduction in fossil fuel carbon so in the end it can’t really be recycled.
https://clear.ucdavis.edu/explainers/why-methane-cattle-warms-climate-differently-co2-fossil-fuels
Since you said, “please”, so kindly…
https://cals.ncsu.edu/news/trusting-their-gut-nc-state-spinout-company-knows-cows-hold-the-key-to-quickly-cooling-the-climate/#:~:text=Cows%20pass%20a%20lot%20of,greenhouse%20gasses%20across%20the%20globe.
“Cows pass a lot of gas. And the methane that gas puts out has been proven as one of the main drivers behind climate change. The average cow belches around 220 pounds of methane a year — helping make cattle the largest agricultural source of greenhouse gasses across the globe.”
…………………
A metric ton is 2204 lbs.
Real close to ten cows worth…
D. Katz said the Scotia power plant produced 104 metric tons of methane…
Ten times 104 cows, or approximately 1040 cows…
I rounded that to “1,000”…
There are 40,000 – 70,000 head of cattle in Humboldt as of 2020…
Approximately producing 40-70 times the methane produced by the Scotia power plant noted by D. Katz.
This shows the number of head of cattle in Humboldt in 2019 and 2020…
From a USDA PDF…
71,000 is the total head from 2020…
Humboldt County is line 2…
2020:
17,000 beef head…
plus…
23,000 milk head…
equals…
40,000 adults total…
71,000 total head, calves included…
Multiply that times 220 lbs of methane per year for each cow…
?
Child’s play…
Thank you, Thank you very much. Maybe someone should consider burning cow/cattle manure as biomass…
It’s their belching, I believe, that creates the most methane, not their manure…
How much methane & CO2 comes out of a human per year?
And since we are connecting the dots….isn’t the biomass plant in Scotia producing an excess amount of electricity that just about equals the use tht will be required for the new huge INDOOR weed grow facility down in Redway? Indoor weed must be grown in So Hum, not enough sun down there…yeah, okay I get it now
RCEA probably knows what percent the county uses on these grows since the send them the bill. I read 3% of California’s power goes to growing weed. I’m sure it’s much higher in our area and is the reason we have no additional available power for growth.
https://clear.ucdavis.edu/explainers/why-methane-cattle-warms-climate-differently-co2-fossil-fuels
Pot growing and use creates methane too. Why is no one bitching about that? “pot grown indoors in Southern California has the lowest emissions, with an ounce of dried cannabis resulting in the equivalent of 143 pounds of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere. ” And then it’s smoked…
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/growing-ounce-pot-indoors-can-emit-much-carbon-burning-full-tank-gas-180977240/
Another fact that is largely unmentioned, is that Humboldt, Del Norte, and portions of Trinity/Mendocino could be self-reliant on power generated by a locally sourced, renewable resource at existing harvest rates.
The benefits of a local resource with low transport distances greatly reduces the co2 footprint and providing a market for wood chips also allows small landowners to afford timber management on parcels with marginal timber as a result of legacy timber harvest. Modern forestry is cleaning up the previous logging entries through permit requirements. Modern biomass power generation releases little co2 as most is scrubbed and captured as flyash and can be used for secondary products. (soil amendment, cinder block..). It provides local jobs, clean energy, and environmental benefits for modern forest management. win.
It must be very boring in the Scotia , Rio Dell area.
They don’t call Rio Dell, “Real Dull”, for nothing…
?
I wish they would still accept yard waste like back in the good ol days.