Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-05-31-SLC-ltr 1 of 2 Sustainable Lexington asks the Lexington Board of Selectmen to send the following letter to Governor Baker, Representative Ciccolo, Senator Friedman, Senator Barrett, and to the Department of Energy Resources (Judith Judson, Patrick Woodcock, Katie Theoharides) We, the Lexington Board of Selectmen, request that you support the purposes of H.853, An Act to Assure the Attainment of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Goals in the Alternative Portfolio Standard (Rep. Denise Provost), which would remove incentives for combustion of biomass woody fuel and garbage incineration from the Massachusetts Alternative Portfolio Standard (APS), and to oppose proposals that would increase the use of forest bioenergy now before the Department of Energy Resources (DOER) through changes in the Alternative and Renewable Portfolio Standards. We note the testimony of Professor Emeritus William R. Moomaw of Tufts University who identified in his May 7, 2019 testimony on H.853 that “Massachusetts forests are at an age when they can remove and sequester the greatest amount of carbon dioxide during the next century if they are allowed to grow instead of being harvested for fuel”. We believe that the burning of forest bioenergy is harmful to air quality and to forests and we note that it is not recognized by climate scientists as a reasonable approach to dealing with climate change. It results in a range of environmental harms and should not be subsidized. The Alternative Portfolio Standard should only be used to support clean energy, and not practices that release pollutants and degrade ecosystems. Climate action must be pursued within a context of what is necessary for overall sustainability. The Portfolio Standards were created to usher in the new era of clean energy. The APS was established because it was recognized that combined heat and power and certain other technologies could make a significant contribution to that advance. Existing waste-to-energy facilities are already eligible for Class II RECs (currently worth over $10/MWh); providing additional incentives meant for clean energy technologies is a serious distortion of the original intent of the Portfolio Standards and will retard our progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We note the additional comments of Professor William R. Moomaw of Tufts University to DOER on May 13, 2019 concerning this matter. 07/30/19, 10:29 AM 2 of 2 “Massachusetts prides itself on having one of the greatest concentrations of scientific research in the world. In 2008, the Commonwealth commissioned the Manomet study that concluded that it took many decades to a century for forests that have been cut and burned to make electricity to bring added atmospheric carbon dioxide to the level of coal combustion. In 2014, the IPCC concluded that “The combustion of biomass generates gross GHG emissions roughly equivalent to the combustion of fossil fuels. If bioenergy production is to generate net reduction in emissions, it must do so by offsetting those emissions through increased net carbon uptake of biota and soils…The shortcomings of this assumption (climate neutrality) have been extensively discussed.” Scientists from University of Massachusetts Lowell, MIT, Tufts and from the Woods Hole Research Center and Partnership for Public Integrity have carried out further analysis demonstrating that burning wood is worse for climate than burning coal or other fossil fuels. In January, 796 scientists wrote to the European Parliament urging them to restrict wood burning for energy to a few minor uses. Burning wood for electricity or heat will contribute future temperature increases and the associated severe climate related destruction including increased intensity of storms and precipitation, and rising seas in Boston Harbor. Those who argue that burning wood for energy production helps to reduce heat trapping greenhouse gas emissions do not have any scientific proof that this is true.” We applaud your administration’s recent actions to respond to the threat of climate change. We hope you will act to help Massachusetts continue on the path toward effective energy policies. Incentivizing the burning of forest-derived biomass would go in the wrong direction. Please act to strengthen our record of protecting our forests and maintaining Massachusetts as a leader in clean energy. Thank you. 07/30/19, 10:29 AM