Group Descries Logging in Northampton, MA Watershed

- by Rebecca Everett, March 17, 2014. Source: Daily Hampshire Gazette

Chris Matera of Northampton said he was driving through Whately to go skiing two weeks ago when he noticed piles of fresh-cut logs at the mouth of a trail into a forest.

“I said, ‘Wait, isn’t that the watershed?,’” he recalled recently.

Matera, who heads a statewide group opposed to logging on publicly owned land called Massachusetts Forest Watch, was appalled to think Northampton was allowing logging on the watershed surrounding the Francis P. Ryan and West Whately reservoirs.

Biomass Industry Needs to Prepare for Water Constraints

- by Phil Ciciora, March 5, 2014. Source: University of Illinois News Office

Debates surrounding the sustainability of bioenergy have emerged in recent years relating to water quality and quantity, and those debates will only grow louder as big urban areas in the U.S. start running out of water and environmental groups and the Environmental Protection Agency push for more stringent policies to address nutrient pollution, said Jody Endres, a professor of bioenergy, environmental and natural resources law at Illinois.

“From a bioenergy standpoint, that’s when we’re going to have to figure out how we prioritize growing crops for bioenergy,” said Endres, who also is an affiliate of the Energy Biosciences Institute, a collaboration involving the U. of I., the University of California at Berkeley, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and BP, an energy company.

Biofuel Producer Warns of Default, Bankruptcy

- by Christopher Martin, March 18, 2014. Source: Bloomberg Businessweek

[Read more about Khosla: Cellulosic Ethanol: A Bio-Fool's Errand -Ed.]

Kior Inc. (KIOR:US), the Vinod Khosla-backed operator of the first U.S. commercial-scale cellulosic biofuel plant, fell the most on record after management told regulators they have serious doubts about staying in business.

Kior declined 41 percent to 63 cents at 10:23 a.m. in New York, the most intraday since its June 2011 initial public offering at $15.

The company needs additional capital by April 1 and its only potential source of near-term financing is a March 16 commitment letter from billionaire investor Khosla, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday.

220,000 acres of Colorado’s White River National Forest to be Logged for Biomass Energy

Demand for biomass energy in Colorado will require logging in 220,000 acres of the White River National Forest. -Ed.

- by Allen Best, March 6, 2014. Source: Mountain Town News

For most of the last decade, Coloradans have been talking about how to make good use of their mountain forests, dying and gray. Something is finally happening.

In Gypsum, 140 miles west of Denver, a biomass mill began operations in December, burning wood to create 10 megawatts of round-the-clock electricity.

In Colorado Springs, the city utility began mixing biomass with coal in January to produce 4.5 megawatts of power.

In Pagosa Springs, a 5-megawatt biomass plant may be launched next year, producing one-sixth of the base-load demand in Archuleta County

UK Biomass Project Halted, Developer Blames “erosion of support” for Biomass

UK biomass project halted, developer blames “erosion of support” for biomass

– by Nina Chestney, March 7, 2014. Source: Reuters

Renewable energy developer RES has stopped a 300-million-pound ($500 million) project to build a biomass plant in Northumberland, northeast England, due to what it called inconsistent government subsidies.

The 100-megawatt (MW) plant was scheduled to be built at the Port of Blyth, creating 300 construction jobs and 50 operational jobs, RES said.

The company received permission to build the project from the government last year.

"It's bitterly disappointing for RES that we are unable to bring this exciting project forward, and deliver the significant boost it would have represented for the Blyth and Northumberland economy," RES Chief Operating Officer Gordon MacDougall said in a statement.

"However, the gradual erosion of support for dedicated biomass leaves us with no other option," he added.

Fanning the Northeastern Biomass Flame

[The biomass industry is teaming up with environmentalists to increase the amount of forests burned for polluting energy in the Great North Woods.]
Fanning the Northeastern Biomass Flame
- by Joseph Seymour, March 11, 2014. Source: Biomass Magazine
Migrating 1 million homes to biomass heat is optimistic—let alone 6 million—but recent developments in the northeastern U.S. are driving this vision ever closer to reality, says Biomass Thermal Energy Council Executive Director Joseph Seymour.
Bill Strauss, the Biomass Thermal Energy Council’s chief economist, recently reported that 1.34 million jobs would be created if the 6 million rural homes using expensive fossil fuels like propane and heating oil switched to domestically produced wood pellet fuel. Migrating 1 million homes to biomass heating fuels is optimistic—let alone 6 million—but recent developments in the northeastern U.S. are driving this vision ever closer to reality.

Judith Johnsrud

Judith H. Johnsrud
July 1, 1931 – March 9, 2014
Judith H. Johnsrud of State College, PA, a highly-respected hero to opponents of nuclear energy in the United States and around the world, was born July 1, 1931, and grew up in Hammond, Indiana.  As a teenager Judy, as she was known to her friends, was very interested in social justice – a concern that would permeate her life and set the course for her life’s work as an anti-nuclear activist and expert.
A former “professor” of geography, she sacrificed her own academic advancement, health, and financial well-being to write, speak and testify about the dangers of radiation. Considered by many to have been one of the best informed nuclear opponent in the U.S., Judy called for increasing radiation protection standards, the control of radioactive waste and an end to nuclear electric generation.  
Her many decades of activism included work on the geography of nuclear power and its entire system of production, utilization, and waste isolation; radiation impacts on humans and the environment; and the problems of sequestration of “high-level,” “low level,” and recycled radioactive wastes.
Beginning with her first anti-nuclear involvement in 1967, successfully fighting against Project Ketch (an Atomic Energy Commission proposal to explode 1,000 atomic bombs underground in northern  Pennsylvania to create  containments for natural gas --- and the first time in U.S. history that a citizens’ coalition successfully halted such a federal project) to her creation of the Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power in 1970 and that group’s original intervention against the siting and licensing of Three Mile Island, to her active involvement in a multitude of projects over the decades, the breadth of Judy’s contributions is truly astounding. 
In what is a very partial list of “citizen nuclear successes” in Pennsylvania alone, Judy was a key player in the defeat of the Project Ketch Plowshare Project; the Meshoppen  Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor; the Newbold Island reactor; Fulton 1 & 2 reactors; and the Energy Park proposal (10 candidate sites: 20,000 megawatts, 10 coal plants and 10 nuclear reactors); the decommissioning of the Quehanna, Waltz Mill, and Saxton Experimental reactors; the halt of the Quakertown Hatfield food irradiator and the Park Township plutonium fuel fabrication and radwaste incinerator; and the closure of the Kiski Valley Water Pollution Control Authority incinerator ash lagoon.  She was also instrumental in championing legislation, both in Pennsylvania and nationally, concerning the storage and measurement standards for nuclear waste products, testifying regularly before congressional committees.  Judy was very modest and humble and so few people knew of her accomplishments.
Judy devoted her life to fighting for the end of the era of nuclear power, worried deeply about the future of our species in an ever-thickening of the radiation environment.  As an expert on the biological and health effects of radiation exposure, she traveled twice to Chernobyl’s damaged Unit 4 complex and witnessed first-hand the wide range of health problems -- not just the cancers and leukemia -- affecting the region’s residents, especially the children, and did all she could to expose the lie of a “safe” level of radiation exposure.
An excellent speaker and educator, she spoke to groups large and small throughout the United States, as well as abroad, about the problems of radiation in general and, more specifically, of nuclear power, food irradiation, nuclear waste, and related subjects.  If an individual or group wanted her to speak, Judy was there, frequently at her own expense.  In addition to testifying before the U.S. Congress, she was also a guest speaker for parliamentary bodies and symposia in Europe, Japan, the former Soviet Union, Sweden, and other countries throughout the world.  
Judy fought not just against the releases of radioactive materials into our environment from nuclear power plants and incinerators, but also against their being recycling into products – from children’s toys to coins in our pockets to larger items to be found around us every day that constantly expose us to multiple sources, additive and cumulative radiation doses, with unknown, possibly synergistic, effects.

DC's Waste and Environmental Racism

by Mike Ewall

Few in our nation's capitol city think twice when they throw stuff "away" -- nor do they think about who lives where "away" is. Fitting a national trend of environmental racism, it should be no surprise that DC's waste has long impacted communities of color in one of the most segregated metropolitan areas in the country. (Black-white racial segregation in the Washington, DC area is considered "extreme" and is 17th worst in the nation.)

DC Trash Transfer Station map
Transfer stations, from west to east, include: Fort Totten, Federal IPC, Rodgers Brothers, WMI Northeast and Benning Road.
Before waste actually goes for disposal, much goes to a transfer station first. Transfer stations exist to move waste from small collection trucks into big trucks for longer-distance hauling. In 2000, the EPA's National Environmental Justice Advisory Council noted that waste transfer stations "are disproportionately clustered in low-income communities and communities of color."

DC's Department of Public Works (DPW) runs two large transfer stations, in black communities at Fort Totten and Benning Road. These transfer stations are large enough to take care of the city's needs, but a proliferation of private transfer stations cropped up years ago, in the absence of regulations. Of about 15 that opened, many have since been closed (after much struggle), and some are still being demolished, yet three remain -- all clustered in Ward 5, in the adjacent black residential neighborhoods of Brentwood and Langdon. Residents of these neighborhoods have been struggling to close these private transfer stations for three decades. They spoke passionately about their experiences at a Feb 5th, 2014 DC City Council hearing where Ward 5 Councilman McDuffie was joined by other members of council in pushing a bill to increase enforcement on these facilities. In addition to nuisances like odors, "vectors" (seagulls, rats), and trucks (and their diesel exhaust), transfer stations are also a source of airborne mercury pollution from sources such as broken fluorescent bulbs.
DC City Council Hearing on waste bills, February 5th, 2014
Michelle Bundy testifying about the experience with the Federal IPC transfer station. See the video of the Feb. 5th, 2014 DC City Council hearing. It starts at 0:56 and goes to 3:58 (it's 3 hours, not five, like it seems). Those testifying include:
1:37 - Mike Ewall, Energy Justice Network
1:43 - Michelle Bundy, Brentwood Community Association
1:49 - Hana Heineken - DC Sierra Club
2:25 - Martha Kinter Ward - Southcentral Community Association
2:40 - Reverend Morris Shearin, Israel Baptist Church
3:48 - Councilman McDuffie
Of the waste collected at the city's transfer stations, the one facility that gets the largest share of DC's trash is the nation's fourth largest incinerator, in Lorton, Virginia. The rest is split among a few southeastern Virginia landfills, far from population centers. We know that the trash incinerator industry in the U.S. is disproportionately located in low-income communities and communities of color.

Some argue that it's not discrimination if it's not intentional, or if a people of color moved to where the polluting industry was first. Academics have argued back that this "chicken or egg" debate is beside the point, as what matters is the community impact, not the intent. Intentional discrimination is hard to prove. Even though the courts no longer allow private lawsuits for Civil Rights Act violations unless you can show intent, it's still considered a violation of the Civil Rights Act when agencies (like the state agencies that grant pollution permits to incinerators) permit facilities in locations where doing so creates a discriminatory effect. [See my environmental justice law journal article for background on this.]
Lorton Landfill
Lorton Landfill, operated by EnviroSolutions Inc., is a construction/demolition waste landfill. The company is currently seeking expansion for 20 more years of dumping, and is being fought by Citizens to Stop the Dump and the South County Federation.
Lorton, VA is an interesting case of environmental racism as it represents both the chicken and the egg. Lorton was home to DC's prisons from 1910 until 2001. The youth prison, added to the complex in 1960, is adjacent to the county's landfill that was located there in 1973. In the early 1980s, another landfill, a private one for construction and demolition waste, opened on the other side of the prison. Just a few years after the youth prison opened, a group of over 50 black Muslim youth inmates rioted, set fires, broke windows and damaged the chapel. In 1985, methane migrating from the county's landfill entered the plumbing system, causing blasts that killed one inmate and critically burned another, forcing the prison to be quickly evacuated. Inmates were returned after several months, once gas vents were installed. Even when not at explosive levels, exposure to the toxins in landfill gas has been found to cause 4-fold increases in bladder cancer and leukemia incidence in women.

Siting major industrial polluters next to prisons is a stark form of environmental racism, as the victims are physically trapped next to the pollution source at all times, not just financially trapped in neighborhoods where spending some time away from the polluters may be possible. In response to comments by this author on a coal-to-oil refinery proposed adjacent to a state prison in Pennsylvania, the U.S. Department of Energy admitted, perhaps for the first time, that a minority inmate prison population constitutes an "environmental justice" community that could be disproportionately impacted in violation of the Civil Rights Act. Unfortunately, the agency concluded (incorrectly) that there would be no violation of civil rights because the refinery would be staying within the pollution levels allowed by their state permits.
Covanta Fairfax Trash Incinerator in Lorton, VA
I-95 Energy/Resource Recovery Facility (Covanta Fairfax trash incinerator) in Lorton, VA. [See us in 2013 CBN TV news]
In 1990, the fourth largest trash incinerator started up, adjacent to the landfill and youth prison, capable of burning 3,000 tons of trash per day. Owned and operated by Covanta, the nation's largest incinerator corporation, the incinerator burns a lot of DC's waste and the resulting toxic ash is dumped in the county-owned I-95 Landfill next door, which closed in 1995 to all but incinerator ash.

Incinerators are the most expensive and polluting way to manage waste or to make energy. They're far more polluting than coal power plants and are worse than landfills. They turn trash into toxic air pollution and toxic ash, making for smaller (but more toxic) landfills.

To make the same amount of energy as a coal power plant, trash incinerators release 28 times as much dioxin than coal, 2.5 times as much carbon dioxide (CO2), twice as much carbon monoxide, 3.2 times as much nitrogen oxides (NOx), 6-14 times as much mercury, nearly six times as much lead and 20% more sulfur dioxides.

Fairfax County race mapFairfax County Income Map
The "chicken or egg" situation flipped when the prisons were closed in 2001 and a large new housing development was built, right up against the incinerator and landfill. The development was populated between 2002 and 2006 with a very diverse community, mainly people of color. The closest neighborhood is 26% white, 32% Asian, 31% black, 8% Hispanic, and 5% multi-racial/other. The further you get from the waste facilities, the average income and percentage of white people increases.

The issue of race vs. class is an interesting one here. We know from studies like Toxic Waste and Race in the United States that race is more of a defining issue when it comes to where hazardous waste facilities are located. For example, if you had a theoretical low-income white community, and a middle-income community of color, and asked which community is more likely to have a hazardous waste facility try to locate there, it would be the middle-income community of color more often than not. In Lorton, you see something similar. Lorton is in Fairfax County, Virginia -- the 3rd wealthiest county in the nation. The median household income in the closest neighborhood is just over $87,000, higher than the state or national averages. However, in the context of affluent Fairfax County, the neighborhood is relatively lower-income.

In the neighborhood closest to the waste facilities, there are walls around the borders of the development. The view over the south wall is of a giant hill (the I-95 landfill) lined with evergreen trees that appear small compared to the mountain of waste. The view to the west is of a tall smokestack, towered over the community. Some of the closest residents, living on the other side of the wall, can hear the constant back-up beepers of the trucks, but had no idea it was an incinerator, thinking it was just construction noise that may go away some time, not the endless sounds of a giant trash-burner being fed.

How did this happen? Was it a form of redlining, where people of color are steered into communities neighboring giant waste facilities? Why were residents not informed of these dangers before moving in? Was it just innocent "market-efficiency" that caused the not-quite-as-affluent people of color to buy here, rather than in the wealthier, whiter parts of the county? No matter how it came to pass, the impact is still unequal, and the health consequences of living next to incinerators and landfills will be felt more by people of color than the white residents of the region.

DC's contract with Covanta expires at the end of 2015. Under the mayor's Sustainable DC plan, the city has a goal of zero waste by 2032. However, this goal is often framed in the plan as "zero waste to landfill," which is code language for "burn it and pretend that the toxic ash doesn't go to a landfill." The "zero waste to landfill" idea is not true zero waste, and incineration has no place in a zero waste plan. However, using $300,000 in DC tax money allocated for Sustainable DC, the city is paying an incinerator-friendly consultant with little zero waste experience to come up with a study of the options. The study is rigged in favor of incineration technologies, even though city officials now know that proposing to build a new incinerator is politically and economically non-viable.

The study is going to look at options to build a new waste disposal facility in the district (which would have to be an incinerator of some sort, since there is no space for a landfill) or to partner with Maryland or Virginia counties on building a regional facility. DC's Department of Public Works has looked into the possibilities of building an incinerator in DC to serve both DC and Prince George's County, MD -- as well as the possibility of partnering with the proposed trash, sewage sludge and tire incinerator planned for Frederick County, MD. The Frederick County proposal has been fought by area residents ever since it was proposed about eight years ago. Even though that incinerator was finally just granted its pollution permits by the state, the project is financially at risk because Carroll County, the other county partnered with the project, sees it as a major financial risk and has set aside $3 million to pay to get out of the contract. For DC or any jurisdiction to step into their place would be economic foolishness.

DC racial demographics map highlighting Benning Road siteWhile the city would be crazy to even try, it's been fairly clear that if there is any attempt to build a new incinerator in DC, the most likely place it would go is Benning Road, where the city has the space and infrastructure already. The Benning Road community has already been burdened by pollution: the city's old incinerator operated there from 1972 to 1994; the oil-burning Benning Road Power Plant operated there from 1968 to 2012, leaving behind a toxic contaminated site; an old leaking Kenilworth Landfill (now a Superfund toxic waste site) is next door, and the city operates one of their two major waste transfer stations there.

Residents in DC, in the Maryland Counties of Prince George's, Frederick and Carroll, and in Fairfax County, VA are all rising up to stop the environmental injustices posed by these industries, and are striving for real zero waste planning, as other forward-thinking communities have been pursuing. Please get in touch and join us!

Maryland Seeking to Becomes the Nation's Burn-Capitol

Maryland's state legislators are at it for a four year in a row, pushing bills that would increase trash and biomass incineration in their state and region. In 2011, the state became the first, and only, to put trash burning in competition with wind power in its renewable energy mandate. Now, over half of the energy used to meet their renewable energy law is from smokestack technologies.

If you're in Maryland, or can share this with those who are, please help us get groups and individuals signed onto this Environmental Community Statement on Maryland's "Renewable Energy" Bills. The legislative session goes until April 7th, so we have six weeks to make sure that none of these misguided energy and waste bills are passed unless they're significantly cleaned up. Email Mike to get involved.

VICTORY: Hazardous Waste Incinerator Defeated in Bucks County, PA

A politically-connected new company hoped to sneak an application through during the holidays for a 60 ton/day hazardous waste incinerator in Bristol Township, near Philadelphia, PA. Once word got out late last year, political opposition grew fast and furious. People packed local government meetings to overflowing.

Energy Justice director, Mike Ewall, who grew up in the adjacent township, presented at a packed local zoning board hearing last month, following the company's 2-hour presentation, tearing down the company's misinformation. One of the most appalling aspects of their misinformation was their presentation of (extremely low) projected air emissions, which represented only the emissions from the small amount of natural gas they'd burn to start the burners up, without presenting any data on the pollutants from burning the waste itself.

The incinerator would have burned alcohols and solvents, cleaners, paints, medicines and pharmaceuticals, aerosols, pesticides, herbicides and adhesives. It would have been located right next to a Dow Chemical plant, in a community already suffering from decades of chemical pollution.

Local politicians were falling over themselves to oppose it, and neighboring local governments, including those across the river in New Jersey, took positions opposed to the incinerator. Today, the company chose to withdraw their application for a zoning change. With the political winds against this company in all of the neighboring towns, it seems that this heavily industrialized corridor is saying "enough is enough" and is sending this incinerator proposal packing in short order. We will continue to work with local activists to ensure that local clean air ordinances are in place to protect these towns from any future proposals for incinerators.

Special thanks to Don Mobley, whose local political efforts made all the difference.  While the company is talking like they might come back with a new application, it's clear that they have nothing to come back to but an even more organized community and to local politicians who want nothing of it.  As we prepare the nails for the coffin of this short-lived incinerator proposal, it's clear that it's already dead on arrival.

See news articles on this on our mapping site's page for this facility.

This is our third major incinerator victory of 2014, and many more are expected this year.


Subscribe to Energy Justice Network RSS