
California biomass plan draws scorn of environmentalists
Alan Riquelmy
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — Plans to build two wood pellet processing plants in Northern California have drawn the ire of environmentalists who say California needs to rethink "falling for the biomass delusion."
The project, spearheaded by the nonprofit Golden State Natural Resources, is being billed as a forest resiliency project, with raw material coming from undesirable forest stock like ladder fuels and dead and dying trees. The nonprofit says the project is needed to reduce wildfire fuel and improve forest health.
Processing facilities would be built in Tuolumne County, in the foothills of the Central Sierra Nevada, and on the Modoc Plateau in Lassen County. The pellets would be sent by rail to the Port of Stockton for international shipping. The nonprofit also touted the project as a job creator — 55 full-time positions in Tuolumne County, 65 in Lassen County and eight in Stockton.
The project currently is in the state’s environmental review process, part of the California Environmental Quality Act. That requires the creation of a draft environmental impact report, which was released Tuesday and is over 1,300 pages. A 60-day public comment period will follow, as will a final environmental report.
People can comment by mail or email, or via three public meetings set for Oct. 28 in Lassen County, Oct. 30 in Stockton and Nov. 4 in Tuolumne County. But several environmental groups pushed back on the meeting dates, saying in a statement that they fall too soon after the release of the draft report.
“The manner in which [Golden State Natural Resources] is undermining public participation by holding public meetings for the [environmental report] in the shadow of the election forces elected and agency officials to wake up to the evidence driving international environmental and human rights organizations to warn against California falling for the biomass delusion,” said Gary Hughes, with U.K. and U.S.-based Biofuelwatch, in a statement.
Other members of the environmental coalition also noted biomass — organic material that comes from plants and animals — increases carbon dioxide levels. Matt Simmons, an attorney with the Environmental Protection Information Center, said in a statement that felling trees for wood pellets, which are then shipped overseas and burned, does nothing to alleviate the climate crisis.
Laura Haight, policy director with the Partnership for Policy Integrity, said in a statement that the science is clear. Logging, shipping and burning wood pellets will create greater emissions than fossil fuels over decades.
“California should not be supporting false climate solutions like woody biomass energy,” Haight said.
Golden State Natural Resources was formed by rural counties looking to stop the massive wildfires that start in overgrown and undermanaged forests. State and federal policy point to science as supporting fuel reduction projects, though many of those projects do nothing to bring biomass to market.
And there's a reason the meetings are planned so soon after the release of the environmental report, according to the Rural County Representatives of California.
“The meetings are intended to occur early in the 60-day review period to provide the public with key information on how to review the document and the various avenues for submitting public comment,” said Carolyn Jhajj, communications director with the Rural County Representatives of California, in a statement. “It is the aim of Golden State Natural Resources to be proactive in outreach with the community regarding the proposed project to ensure they are informed and have adequate time to participate in the review process.”
Authors of the draft environmental impact report stated that the project develops no residential land and has no effect on population growth. The project would have only a few facilities and connect with existing infrastructure. Additionally, it requires no changes to the general plans of Stockton, Lassen and Tuolumne counties.
Golden State Natural Resources must successfully move past the environmental approval process and then gain approval for permits from several agencies. It also needs to secure more project financing, which would include finding a partner in the private sector.
There is no estimated start date for construction or project completion.