The National Association of Forest Owners Needs Your Help Defending Renewable Biomass Energy Standards

Congress has gone home for the August recess and House and Senate members will be home from August 9 - September 10. The imminent mid-term elections will further focus the attention of elected policy makers and no single voice is more persuasive than a well-reasoned voice from home.

It is vital that you take time to personally contact your Senators, U.S. Representative, and their staff to urge them to weigh in with the EPA in support of the carbon benefits of forest biomass energy and to urge USDA to keep its commitment to work with EPA to ensure that biomass energy is encouraged as a carbon-beneficial energy source.

Biomass energy opponents continue to aggressively contact members of Congress (weekly biomass alert example (PDF) and letter asking Senators not to sign the letter to EPA Administrator Jackson in support of biomass energy (PDF)) and are unlikely to let up their campaign that Congress retain EPA's misguided promotion of fossil fuel over biomass energy in the Tailoring Rule. NAFO members and allies must ensure that Congress hears the facts and as such need to make high quality contacts with legislators and their staff.

Here is how you can help support renewable forest biomass energy:

1. Call your local office and request time for a 15-30 minute meeting with the Senator, Representative, or key staff while they are in the state.

2. If they are not available for a meeting, ask if there is a town meeting scheduled in the area that you can attend.

3. If that is not an option, leave a message and ask for a letter in response or hand deliver a letter to the office with supporting materials (see below). Working with the local office, as opposed to the D.C. office, underscores it is an opinion coming from a voter and the staff you talk to in the state are more likely longer-term staffers who will raise the issue as important to the Member.

Background

What did the EPA do in the GHG Tailoring Rule?

As part of the process the EPA is undertaking to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act, the agency issued its final GHG Tailoring Rule on May 12, 2010. The rule established a phase-in program under which "stationary" sources of greenhouse gases, such as industrial facilities, must obtain permits under the Clean Air Act. In an unexpected action, and without a basis in science or explanation, the rule treats GHG emissions from biomass energy the same as those from fossil fuel combustion. This runs counter to long-settled international conventions, U.S. greenhouse gas inventory data, and EPA's long established policy recognizing that energy produced from forest biomass in countries where forests are a net carbon sink, like the US, does not increase carbon in the atmosphere.

At the urging of Congress (see House and Senate letters below), EPA issued a "Call for Information" on July 15 seeking input from the public by September 13 on the appropriate accounting for carbon emissions from forest biomass combustion. This modest action, however, has no clear connection to rulemaking and is unlikely to resolve the matter before the rule takes effect on January 2, 2011.

What did USDA do in response to EPA's Action?

Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack is a committed supporter of renewable forest biomass for energy. On the same day the EPA issued the GHG Tailoring Rule, Secretary Vilsack issued a statement underscoring a commitment he received from EPA Administrator Jackson to "seek further comment on how to address the greenhouse gas benefits of bioenergy under the Clean Air Act." He reiterated the carbon benefits of bioenergy, including woody biomass, and stated that USDA is committed to working with EPA to ensure that any regulations and rules "encourage the development and utilization of biomass energy resources and avoid unnecessary regulatory impediments and permitting requirements."

Why is the EPA's action a concern to forest owners and forest product manufacturers?

The forest products industry generates 65% of its power needs from biomass energy, and biomass energy accounts for half of all renewable energy in our country. If GHG emissions from using biomass are regulated, it translates to an additional costly permitting process for existing boilers and subjects all biomass energy to any cap on carbon emissions the government may impose. Additionally, it stifles any expansion of the biomass energy marketplace because biomass loses a key advantage over fossil fuels, which produce energy more efficiently. This could both increase the use of fossil fuels and create additional economic pressures on forest lands to convert to more economically competitive non-forest uses.

EPA's regulation of biomass carbon emissions could also result in new federal regulation of private forests under the Clean Air Act. Depending on how EPA chooses to account for carbon emissions from biomass energy, they may impose new regulations or restrictions on private forest management to differentiate between practices EPA determines will increase carbon in the atmosphere and those that don't. This would be tantamount to bringing private forest lands and forestry under a carbon emissions cap.

How else is EPA Regulating Biomass Emissions?

In an entirely separate Clean Air Act regulatory process, EPA has issued for public comment a series of proposed rules on "maximum achievable control technology" (MACT) for the regulation of hazardous emissions from boilers at various facilities including wood products, pulp, and paper mills and other facilities that may use woody biomass as fuel in industrial boilers. As a result of EPA choosing to impose stringent emission reductions regardless of the risk, these regulations will impose costly new requirements on industry facilities separate and apart from the regulation of GHG emissions. A coalition with AF&PA is pursuing changes to these rules, including an advocacy campaign in Congress. As part of the rulemaking, EPA is also defining whether certain fuels, including forest biomass, should be considered "solid waste" and subject to burdensome RCRA requirements. Please note these are distinct EPA initiatives, either of which could cause a substantial reduction in use of biomass depending on EPA's positions in the final rule.

Advocacy Toolkit

NAFO has a compilation of materials that will be helpful to you as you make your case to policy makers. Available on NAFO website are:
• Talking Points for Congressional Meetings (PDF)
• A letter from over 100 scientists to the U.S. Senate and House expressing, "Our concern that equating biogenic carbon emissions with fossil fuel emissions, such as contemplated in the EPA Tailoring Rule and other policies, is not consistent with good science."
• A Biomass Energy Q and A that helps policy makers not as versed in biomass energy understand what it is and why it is beneficial (PDF).
• A coalition letter, which many of you signed, to EPA Administrator Jackson urging her to remove biomass energy from the GHG Tailoring Rule because it does not increase carbon in the atmosphere, as the EPA has long acknowledged. The letter was cosigned by 163 organizations (PDF).
• Letters from both U.S. Representatives (PDF) and Senators (PDF) to Administrator Jackson asking her to remove biomass energy from the GHG Tailoring Rule
A comprehensive advocacy toolkit, including recent research, handouts, illustrations, and more is available for your use at www.nafoalliance.org/biomass-advocacy-toolkit.
If you need more information, please contact Dan Whiting, NAFO's Director of Communications, at (202) 747-0746 or dwhiting@nafoalliance.org. You can also contact NAFO at (202) 747-0759 or visit NAFO's Legislative Action Center for assistance.