A state court has said that North Carolina's power plants can burn whole trees harvested for fuel, and count the lumber toward their mandate to use green energy resources.
The N.C. Court of Appeals' ruling resolves a dispute between Duke Energy and two organizations: the Environmental Defense Fund and the N.C. Sustainable Energy Association.
The two nonprofit groups had contended that letting power companies harvest trees for fuel, rather than using wood scraps and logging debris, would open the way to clear-cutting forests and other environmentally irresponsible practices.
But the appellate court upheld an October ruling by the N.C. Utilities Commission that said the state's 2007 energy law did not specify which kind of wood qualifies as biomass.
"All wood fuel is encompassed by the meaning of the term 'biomass,'" the court said this month. "Any resource that can be considered a biomass because it is organic and renewable is a biomass resource within the plain meaning of the statute."
Charlotte-based Duke had applied to the utilities commission in March 2010 to register two coal-burning power plants as renewable energy facilities because the company conducted trials at both plants using a blend of wood chips and coal.
Environmental groups opposed the request, setting up a commission hearing and a decision supporting Duke's request. The environmental groups challenged the commission's ruling at the appellate court, losing there as well.
"The language of the REPS [Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard] statute is clear and unambiguous: the only woody biomass resource mentioned as a renewable energy resource is 'wood waste,'" the Environmental Defense Fund wrote in a May legal brief. "Whole trees are not 'wood waste,' and therefore not a 'renewable energy resource' according to the plain language of the REPS statute."
Power companies in this state are required to derive 12.5 percent of their retail electricity sales from renewable resources, such as solar, wind or biomass, as well as energy efficiency programs and demand side management programs that reduce electricity usage.
Duke Energy has 1.8 million customers in North Carolina, including about 170,000 in Chapel Hill, Durham and other parts of the western Triangle.
John Murawski has been a full-time newspaper reporter since 1991, with stints at Legal Times and The Chronicle of Philanthropy (both in Washington, DC), The Philadelphia Inquirer and The Palm Beach Post (in South Florida) before arriving at the N&O in December 2004. At the N&O he covers energy (nuclear, coal, renewable, efficiency), hydralic fracturing (or "fracking"), public utilities (both electric and natural gas) and health care. His beat includes Progress Energy, PSNC Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas, PowerSecure International, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Biogen Idec and others. You can reach him at 919-829-8932 or
Comments
Wood, fire, and wildlife - boy scout merit badge (seriously).
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 12:42 — peetiepupLook for NC forests to become even more beautiful and valuable for wildlife if wood is used widely for bio-fuel. Cutting trees for fuel and pulp is already widely practiced - LARGELY TO THE BENEFIT OF WILDLIFE, even if that isn't always the primary motive. More is needed, however, but our mills are closing and paper mills are being opened in places where there aren't environmental laws like there are here.
This is a perfect opportunity to put people back to work to compensate for the loss of jobs that have occurred in our closed mills.
Trust the people who provide nearly all the clean water in this state and nation - PRIVATE WOODLAND OWNERS. Their land covers over half of this state, but the other (lesser) half produces about 95% of all water pollution.
A lot remains to do, and EDF should help instead of interfere. Tell the EDF to stop hassling landowners and the forest products industry, and pay more attention to the real problems. EDF isn't done yet.
And with the envirokooks war
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 12:26 — LibSlayerAnd with the envirokooks war against the incandescent light bulb, I suggest we return to a natural, renewable resource to light our homes. Whale oil!
Stop going to parklands.
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 13:47 — peetiepupLibSlayer,
I love my fluorescent bulbs. I don't know what i like more - saving $100's a year - or knowing that a ton of filthy coal doesn't have to burn every time i buy $250 worth of electricity.
Our citizens should skip the park next time. Instead visit a place where the wood came from that is used to build houses like the ones we all live in. Environmentalists can't wait to get their hands on as much of them as possible.
Have you ever seen a mountain top GONE for coal? Somewhere in the world, one is lost almost daily. Or, have you seen the NC Forest Svc. presentation at one of the several demonstration forests around the state?
By contrast to the missing mountains, look at the forest on Falls Lake just past the Creedmoor Rd. bridge on the left hand side. It was thinned and burned several years ago. It looks GREAT! It appears due for another thinning and burning. NC reservoir forests have many thousands of acres of such "wildlife habitat" thinning and burning.
Taxpayers can see revenue from such tree cutting while at the same time improving wildlife habitat, (which was probably the primary motive of NC Wildlife Commission on Falls Lk.).
Some people think wildlife habitat enhancement is good. And some people also think jobs and sustainable energy are good things too. I wouldn't call them crazy, either. But what's with the EDF?
Love it!!!! Hey
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 12:24 — LibSlayerLove it!!!!
Hey envirokooks, the law of unintended consequences doesn't rest because you have good intentions.
And with the entire "green energy" movement based on the HOAX and FRAUD of man-made global warming, I greatly enjoy watching your efforts smack ya upside the head.
Are you fing kidding?
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 12:22 — JoeTarheelhow is cutting down a forest to burn, 'environmentally friendly'?
Environmental Defense Fund & Friends have hood-winked many
Thu, 08/11/2011 - 14:17 — peetiepupWho said anything about cutting down a FOREST? We're talking about burning wood, not forests. I see that the EDF propaganda has worked on you very well.
The best advice I can give you is to do a little reading. Just an hour or two will do.
Let's burn coal instead? Burning coal is what is prevented when energy is produced from anything else.
Google "fire thinning wildlife" and look at all that comes up. Start with;
http:www.sfrc.ufl.edu/extension/florida_forestry_information/forest_management/thinning.html
Consider that environmental groups, such as Nature Conservancy and Audobon Society have performed just exactly this on their lands. I have seen it myself first person.
When THEY do it, it's "wildlife habitat enhancement". But when rural America does it, it's forest exploitation. How dishonest!
Stop sending environmental groups money. The ones that are silent are part of the problem. They should tap their EDF "buddy" on the shoulder and whisper to 'ole EDF to stop lying to the public in order to promote their agenda. They are partners in crime, though. They won't be happy until they and the government control all the land.
Wood fire is VERY natural.
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 12:39 — peetiepupFire used to be a part of our natural landscape much more than it is today. Fires once burned quite regularly over nearly all of NC - and N. America, too, for that matter. Fires would have killed most of these little weedy trees. In fact, 100,000,000's of tons of wood still burn during an average year on our planet. Maybe over a billion tons in a bad year. More forests burned before humankind affected fire occurrences to the extent we do today.
We can't go back to those pre-historic days, with regards to fire, but using scrap wood and scrap trees for pulp and fuel is, to a large degree, a substitute not only for coal, but a substitute for natural processes that are no longer possible at historic levels.
Let's just level mountain tops for coal instead, EDF. Nice. Solar and wind combined won't come close to meeting our energy needs for many, many years - if ever. Wood can help, and there is little more natural than wood burning.
This is something we can do now. And we need to start doing these things NOW. The real problem here for EDF is that wood fuel would largely be a rural enterprise. Environmental groups treat the rural like thier enemy. Practically anything that involves someone else selling their trees for our building and paper products is going to be opposed by preservationist groups. Now they're opposed to wood bio-fuel.
Burning scrap wood - THANK YOU DUKE!
Wed, 08/10/2011 - 13:43 — peetiepupNo one in their right mind would harvest nice big pretty trees just to burn for fuel. That's the false impression that EDF and other eco-groups promote. Rural USA would like to thank EDF for misleading the public whenever they can about motives of rural people.
The biggest and best trees won't be burned because they're simply far too valuable. Always will be. Sure, a knucklehead here or there might cut them for fuel, but we can't make laws for everybody just because of the 1-in-1000/1-in-10,000. (I guess we could, if we want our economy to continue to plummet.)
I know landowners who own forest land. This can help them tremendously. They can get paid a few dollars per acre for fuel wood instead of paying to have those same junk trees cut and left to rot. (Remember: they are paid zip for the clean water and wildlife that we get from their land.) Contrary to the image that groups like EDF conjure up, virtually 100% of the trees that will be cut to burn will be junky little trees that interfere with the growth of bigger, better trees.
Burning wood has its place, regardless of how many solar panels and wind farms are erected. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine. But that pile of wood scraps is always on hand to pick up the slack.
Wood - the ORIGINAL BIOFUEL!!
So easy even a caveman can do it (tree huggers are challenged, though).