Biomass in Springfield

1. Biomass in Springfield Nicole Loeffler-Gladstone Lena Amick Sid Salvi

2. Palmer Renewable Energy (PRE) Biomass Site

3. Palmer Renewable Energy Biomass Plant Proposal Springfield Jun 08 Jul 08 Aug 08 Sept 08 Oct Nov Dec Jan 09 Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan 2010 Opposition by environmental-ists in Russell PRE plant receives MEPA certificate Public hearing in Holyoke: community opposition State temporarily suspends permit East Springfield Neighborhood Council approves biomass plant Springfield City Council approves biomass plant 7-2 vote. Over 100 community members speak out against biomass at the Pine Point Community Center

4. What is Biomass? • Burning organic material (wood) for fuel • Burning wood heats water • Steam powers turbine • PRE plant would burn: • 700 tons/day of construction and demolition debris (CDD) wood • 200 tons/day green wood chips

6. Recommendation: Do Complete Benefit-Cost Analysis Why? • Helps policymakers do the most good given the choices available • Compare benefits and costs in standard units • Components • Economic Benefits and Costs • Environmental Costs • Health Care Costs

7. Emissions • 470,000 tons of CO2 per year1 • 134 tons of NOx per year2 • 46 tons of particulates per year • 156 tons of CO per year3 • Volatile Organic Compounds, arsenic, copper, chromium (from pressure-treated wood), lead (from paint), and chlorine (from glues and plastics). 1. Data for proposed biomass plants. Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance. http://www.massenvironmentalenergy.org/plantdata.html 2. Mary Booth’s presentation, Springfield Public Health Council Meeting, 11/18/09 3. Palmer Renewable Energy, LLC, Major Comprehensive Plan Application. Nov 21, 2008

8. Potential Environmental Costs • Lower air quality (e.g. increased CO2, VOCs, particulate matter, ground level ozone)1 • Greater deforestation • Destruction of wildlife habitats • Deterioration of water resources • 1 Mary Booth, Springfield Public Health Council Meeting, 11/18/09

9. Health Concerns • NOx: precursor of ground-level ozone, linked to asthma • Particulate Matter (also DPM): linked to asthma, heart disease, cancer; Diesel PM from trucking, logging. • Hazardous Air Pollutants: asbestos, chloroform - persistent, bio-accumulative, and toxic • Metals: non-degradable, accumulative (lead, mercury)

10. High incidence of respiratory diseases in Springfield • Twice the state average hospitalization rate for asthma • Among the highest non-cancer respiratory risk and carcinogenic risk in the country. Source: Massachusetts Department of Health and Human Services, 2006

12. Potential Health Costs • Deaths due to increased incidence of respiratory diseases • Increased hospital and medical expenditures • Increased school absences1 • Lower productivity2 1 Rivkin et al. “Does Pollution Increase School Absences?” The Review of Economics and Statistics; November 2009, 682-694 2 Ho, Chau-Sa & Hite, Diane. “Toxic Chemical Releases, Health Effects and Productivity Losses in the United States.” Journal of Community Health; August, 2009, 539-546.

13. Economic Benefits and Costs • Costs • $170 million to build • $250,000 loan from Massachusetts Technology Collaborative • Loss of value to property near power plant site • Benefits • 50 full-time jobs • 200 temporary jobs • PRE has agreed to make $667,000 in infrastructure improvements • PRE will give a $25,000 annual green education grant to the Springfield schools • Generate electricity for 23,000 to 30,000 homes (approx. 1% of total power generated in Mass.) Source: “Developers of proposed Springfield biomass plant tell Public Health Council: 'Nothing less than the best,” Masslive.com, 12/2/2009.

14. Policy Recommendations • Complete a comprehensive benefit-cost analysis for all proposed biomass power plants. • Develop alternative renewable energy options to compare with status quo and current Palmer Renewable Energy biomass proposal. • Include all stakeholders in decision-making and research processes.

15. “My wife and I became interested in the biomass issue mainly for health reasons. We are an avid outdoors family, so the environmental issues of forest abuse due to increased demand for wood was a major second issue for us. My family focused on fighting the Springfield plant as the most dangerous for our health. Even though the approval process was in the final stages at the state level, we felt that judgment calls were made at the highest levels of our state agencies that were reversible if sufficient public outcry was made.” - Stuart Warner local activist along with Lee Ann Warner “We feel that [local residents with illnesses] will die if the plant comes here.” - Betty Agin community activist, coordinator of the Springfield Health Disparities Projects and administrator of Universal Community Voices Eliminating Disparities “The first time I saw the pictures [of forest destruction] it was the visceral connection- we’re all connected with the trees.” - Beth Adams “If you took a tree and if it’s worth $100 going to Canada, the owner gets absolutely nothing for biomass chips – it’s an economic disaster to buy into biomass harvesting.” - Mary Wigmore, local independent forester We can’t look to Washington to solve our problems – we have to work right here! - Francis Crowe “We don’t need it. Lots of seniors have asthma, lots of children have asthma. We don’t need that plant.” -Emma Johnson