An energy company that uses poultry waste for fuel can't qualify as a green energy resource under North Carolina's law.
The ruling by the N.C. Utilities Commission means that Peregrine Biomass Development will have to scrap plans to build several industrial boilers that burn chicken droppings as an energy source to make steam and hot water for factories and other industrial applications.
The development is a major setback to the use of farm animal waste as a green energy resource, some believe.
"We just haven't had other viable proposals for poultry waste," said James McLawhorn, director of the electric division at the Public Staff, the state's consumer advocacy agency.
Greenville, S.C.-based Peregrine was considering four potential sites in this state to build facilities that burn poultry waste and sell the steam or hot water to industrial users, said company president Ralph Walker.
Peregrine had also planned to sell renewable energy certificates from its industrial boilers to Progress Energy, Duke Energy or other power companies.
The renewable certificates are a subsidy to encourage development of the state's renewable sector. Electric companies are required to buy a certain amount of the certificates to meet the state's renewable energy targets.
The state's 2007 renewable energy law considers poultry waste as a type of renewable resource -- but only as long as it's used to generate electricity.
Peregrine's use of poultry litter didn't qualify as a renewable, the utilities commission said Friday, because the company planned to generate steam or boiling water, not electricity.
The ruling shows the thorniness of green energy policy.
State law allows solar electric and solar thermal to count as green energy resources for the purposes of selling renewable certificates, even though the latter generates only steam and boiling water.
But state law makes no such allowance for poultry waste, so the utilities commission felt it had no choice but to deny Peregrine's request.
Walker said that the same standard ought to apply to poultry waste as to solar thermal technology, because both offset the use of electricity to generate heat needed to boil water.
"It displaces coal, it displaces fuel oil, it potentially displaces natural gas," Walker said. "We had four industrial sites under consideration to provide competitively priced steam."
Peregrine's request was opposed by a competitor, Fibrowatt, a Pennsylvania company that would like to build small power plants in Sampson and Montgomery counties fueled by poultry litter.
Fibrowatt's plans, under discussion for several years, have yet to lead to any contracts or construction.
Fibrowatt had also proposed a power plant in Surry County, but earlier this year officials in that country said they no longer support the Fibrowatt project.
Walker, Peregrine's president, said the company will likely ask the N.C. General Assembly to modify the state's energy law in such a way as to allow poultry waste to count as a renewable resource for generating steam and boiling water.
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
What shade of green?
Mon, 10/11/2010 - 16:20 — peetiepupIt would be very interesting to know the rationale behind this decision, as well as, of course, what politics are involved. And how much does anyone want to bet that this use of chicken waste is actually more efficient than the electric production alternative?
It seems to me that the rural economy would benefit more from this than from dealing solely with power utilities. So, is this yet another example of the hostility towards the rural (with environmental groups pulling strings in the background?)
Something must be done with the chicken waste, but it appears as though some interests would rather see waste matter remain a burden on the rural chicken industry, rather than this energy alternative. Did the chicken business not make the right campaign conributions? The waste IS going to affect the environment, whether it is used to displace fossil fuels or not.
During times like these, when just about any safe alternative to fossil fuel energy (essentially energy = coal) would seem preferable to more fossil fuel consumption, this is what the public gets - interference to a sensible plan to simultaneously help the rural economy AND reduce fossil fuel consumption.
There is very little explanation behind the decision provided in this article. Farms are constantly under siege by greater economic forces - environmentalism and development, (ironically). Neither has the public interest at heart.
Is the chicken industry one that environmentalism and/or development would rather see outsourced to China?
From the standpoint of energy independence, this doesn't make sense to me.