“Carbon is absolutely not an issue with our plant.”

Below is a response to my letter of 22 September 2010.

-jsq

Date: On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 3:16 PM
From: Brad Lofton <blofton@industrialauthority.com>

John:

Thank you for your e-mail and the professional way in which you have come and met with our staff to discuss these issues. I certainly respect your concerns, especially since you felt it important enough to take the time to meet with us a number of times to pursue dialogue and exchange information.

You are absolutely correct in stating that we provided you peer reviewed scientific literature proving that biomass plants are indeed carbon neutral. Dr. Carl Manning, an environmental professor at VSU who has done significant research in biomass, agrees and completely supports our project. It is also important to note that we will be using inert landfill material that would otherwise produce methane if left to rot in a landfill. As you know, methane is considered a greenhouse gas. This is another very positive environmental benefit of our project (one of many). Carbon is absolutely not an issue with our plant.

Rest assured that no trees will be harvested for this plant. The plant’s EPD permit is very specific about this point, and federal tax credits require the use of “wood waste.” Any deviation will result in plant closure by the EPD. Our Authority would not have supported “whole log” production, because of the environmental impact and also because of the competition it would create for several of our large existing industries (PCA, Langdale) that count on whole logs for production. We made the use of “wood waste” a condition of moving forward.

A couple of other areas of misinformation that we would like to correct:

1.) Despite what Mrs. Touchton stated, we’ve been in touch with the Massachusetts and Florida EPD, and in no way, shape, or form is either state banning biomass facilities. In fact, there are 15 scheduled now for New England, many in Mass, and a number in Florida. There have been discussions regarding the level of incentives (tax credits) allowed, but no moratorium. We’ll be happy to share our contacts with you.

2.) We are not spending $110 million in taxpayer’s money to build this facility. The funding is private and financed by Wiregrass Power, LLC. We’ve read this in circulated e-mails Mrs. Touchton has authored. In fact, our facility is actually paying substantial dollars per year to the community.

Finally, I think the raw facts dispute any ongoing issues related to environmental racism.

Have a great day!

BL

Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Verizon

2 thoughts on ““Carbon is absolutely not an issue with our plant.”

  1. Brad Bergstrom

    “Dr. Carl Manning, an environmental [sic] professor at VSU who has done significant research in biomass, agrees and completely supports our project.”
    Who? There is a Dr. Tom Manning, a VSU Chemistry professor. Not surprisingly for a chemist who likes to collaborate with industry and provide hands-on experiences for his students, Tom is a perennial advocate of LVIA projects (remember Sterling Chemical?). But, where is his peer-reviewed study of the bioenergetics of biomass combustion?? I’ll be eager to read that if you can post a link.
    “It is also important to note that we will be using inert landfill material that would otherwise produce methane if left to rot in a landfill.”
    Over a VERY LONG period of time, yes. Why not use the material as mulch (i.e. a soil amendment), in which case it would be broken down by aerobic processes, releasing CO2, still slower than combustion, and without the particulates.
    “Rest assured that no trees will be harvested for this plant. The plant’s EPD permit is very specific about this point, and federal tax credits require the use of “wood waste.” Any deviation will result in plant closure by the EPD.”
    The EPD permit absolutely does not prohibit burning of whole trees. And, note, BL admits there are, indeed, federal tax credits (!), right before he pretty much denies spending taxpayers’ money. What’s more, its’ not at all clear that federal criteria prohibit burning of whole trees (and once they’re pelletized over in Waycross, they’re not “whole” an longer!).

  2. Leigh Touchton

    How are they going to determine whether or not whole trees have not been pelletized or chipped at some other location and then slipped into the Valdosta Wiregrass Incinerator fuel stream? How is that even possible?
    Good point about the tax credits, tonight at the VBOE Brad Lofton said 30% of cost of Wiregrass plant was tax subsidized. And there are tax incentives on both the growing and the selling of the trees, courtesy of Tim Golden’s legislation. The statement that the plant is entirely privately funded is patently false.

Comments are closed.