Biomass Rejection Democratic not Bureaucratic

Proposed biomass plant would run out of forest biomass in only 3-5 years

The Albuquerque Journal's recent editorial, "Biomass Rejection Looks Pretty Thin," lacked a complete picture of the proposed biomass plant in Estancia and the amount of forest available to generate electricity. Because we live and work in the forests that could be chipped and trucked away, we offer evidence that the forests cannot sustainably supply the facility for its 20-year lifespan, but really just 3-5 years.

Contrary to the assertion that "government bureaucracy" and a "hidden agenda" have stymied the approval of this new and uncertain source of power, the New Mexico Department of Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources (EMNRD) has faithfully fulfilled part of its mission in protecting the environment and making informed decisions.

In their rejection of the renewable energy tax credit application for Western Water and Power Production, LLC (WWP), the staff at EMNRD rightfully expected complete information to grant a $2 million tax break. At issue is the legitimate concern for our natural forests, specifically: Is there long-term production potential for forest biomass energy in the Estancia Basin? The answer is unequivocally no.

The proposed biomass plant will operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, and 52 weeks per year, consuming about a half a million tons of chipped forest annually (55 tons per hour). These forests are not waste, they produce oxygen, regulate water flow, provide wildlife habitat, sequester carbon and shape our cultural identities and lifestyles.

David Cohen of WWP uses a PNM estimate of 21 million tons of dry biomass physically available within a 50 mile radius of the plant. The problem? This figure includes all the forests in the Sandias, Manzanos, and Gallinas mountains as well as all of the lower-elevation piñon-juniper, everything. To operate for 20 years, the plant would need to consume 38% of these forests and to operate for 30 years, 58% would have to be cut and delivered to the facility, assuming no restrictions.

The PNM "biomass availability assessment" and 21 million ton figure presented by WWP in its tax credit application is indefensible. Unlike that document, our citizen's group will soon present EMNRD with an independent analysis of biomass availability, including critical limitations not incorporated in the PNM study.

In summary, there are 1.28 million acres in total of piñon-juniper forests within a 50-mile radius of Estancia (http://ftp.nr.usu.edu/swgap/), assuming none have been cut in recent years. From the science, a reasonable figure of 10 tons per acre of biomass is available from thinned piñon-juniper forests (http://lcrda.com/images/ResourceConceptsAugust2004.pdf). If every acre of piñon-juniper in the 50-mile radius were aggressively thinned, with 75% removal, the plant might be fueled for 7.5 years and 45% removal would result in just 4.5 years of production. That is if every acre were available.

Our analysis demonstrates that only a fraction of those acres will actually be available for thinning. We excluded lands that were recently thinned, reserved lands such as national parks and wilderness areas, 1/3 of private lands due to access, covenants, aesthetics, etc., roads and streams and then applied limits on over-harvest and large tree cutting. The result: the biomass plant could operate at full capacity for just 3 to 5 years.

It is unfortunate that when including biomass in the state's renewable energy platform, our Governor failed to consider all of the implications and uncertainties of this energy source. According to the California Air Resource Board, of 60 biomass facilities listed in that state only half remain operational, 21 are idle or dismantled and 5 were converted to natural gas. It is perfectly legitimate and responsible for our state officials to question whether or not burning the state's forests to generate electricity is sustainable or even viable and in the interest of its 2 million plus citizens.

Ultimately when the plant runs out of forest biomass, will it be forced to burn traditional fuel, including natural gas, which technically it can do, to meet its financial obligations? These are important questions for New Mexico as it leads the country into a renewable energy future, especially pertinent because this forest biomass application is competing for the remaining production tax credits authorized by the state legislature. Its competitor is a wind energy facility, free of air pollution and impacts on our forests and water supplies.

We are glad our state agencies, directed by Secretaries Prukop and Curry, are there to demand answers. Rather than the hidden agenda alleged, it is the very obligation of our government in a healthy democracy.

Bud Latven is an artist living and working in Tajique; Paul Davis is president and owner of EnviroLogic Inc. living and practicing in the East Mountains; Bryan Bird is Public Lands Director at WildEarth Guardians. For the citizen's fuel availability analysis see: www.biomassinfo.blogspot.com

Copyright 2007 Albuquerque Journal - Reprinted with permission


 

All active news articles