SOS Forests

Bipartisan House Coalition Introduces Legislation to Fix Biomass Definition in Renewable Fuels Standard

We previously discussed the language in the new Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, in particular those clauses that eliminate federal forests as a source of biofuels material [here, here]. The protests in that regard by numerous involved citizens has borne fruit.

Last week a bipartisan coalition of representatives introduced H.R. 5236 to correct the language in the Energy Act. The following is taken in its entirety from Greg Walden’s website [here].

Herseth Sandlin - Walden Bill Would Promote Development and Use of Cellulosic Ethanol Derived from Wood Waste on Federal Lands

February 7, 2008 - WASHINGTON, D.C.

Last night, Rep. Herseth Sandlin (D-SD) and Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) introduced the Renewable Biofuels Facilitation Act (H.R. 5236), legislation that would promote the development and use of cellulosic ethanol derived from woody biomass on federal lands. The bill would significantly broaden the definition of cellulosic ethanol within the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) to include more biomass gathered from federal lands.

The Herseth Sandlin – Walden bill addresses a flaw included in The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which included an historic 36 billion gallon renewable fuels standard (RFS). Unfortunately, the legislation’s definition of renewable biomass prevents almost all federal land biomass, such as trees, wood, brush, thinnings, chips, and slash, from counting toward the mandate if it is used to manufacture biofuels. This provision not only discourages the use of such biomass, but in doing so could result in a decrease in responsible forest management by denying land managers an important outlet for the excessive biomass loads that often accumulate on public lands. The Herseth Sandlin – Walden bill would promote the use of energy from waste products gathered on federal lands, including those that are byproducts of preventive treatments and are removed to reduce hazardous fuels, to reduce or contain disease or insect infestation, or to restore ecosystem health.

The Renewable Biofuels Facilitation Act was co-sponsored by a geographically diverse and bipartisan group including Representatives Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Bart Stupak (D-MI), Mike Ross (D-AR), Chip Pickering (R-MS), Emerson (R-VA), Emerson (R-MO), Goodlatte (R-VA), Bonner (R-AL), J. Peterson (R-PA).

Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.):

“The energy bill recently signed into law does a great deal to advance America toward a smarter energy future,” Walden said. “Unfortunately, it woefully underappreciated the role biomass must play in our energy portfolio by excluding biomass produced in federal forest health projects from the country’s new 36 billion gallon renewable fuels standard. Additionally, the energy bill placed onerous restrictions on the use of biomass from private lands.”

Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD):

“Currently, the energy bill provides great incentives for innovative entrepreneurs, often working in conjunction with government and academia, to create new ways to make clean, homegrown renewable biofuels in this country,” Herseth Sandlin said. “Unfortunately, current law prevents biofuels made from biomass that originates on public lands or any biomass from private land that is not ‘planted’ and ‘actively managed’ from being counted toward the RFS. This is unfortunate, unnecessary, and unjustified.”

The Renewable Biomass Facilitation Act would change the definition to clarify that federally sourced biomass is eligible for consideration under the renewable fuels standard and is identical to the language included in the Senate’s version of the Farm Bill which passed 79-14 on December 14, 2007. Additionally, the bill would allow RFS credit for broad categories of biomass from non-federal and tribal lands including agricultural commodities, plants and trees, algae, crop residue, waste material (including wood waste and wood residues), animal waste and byproducts (including fats, oils, greases, and manure), construction waste, and food and yard waste.

Walden added: “This bipartisan bill corrects those problems by using language already agreed to by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the United States Senate and many members of the House who wanted to see it included in the energy bill. The Northwest is leading the movement to switch to smart, renewable fuels, and biomass will undeniably play a major part in this effort. In fact, according to the U.S. Forest Service, biomass has surpassed hydropower as the largest source of renewable energy in the country. Ensuring that biomass gathered from federal land counts toward the country’s renewable fuels standard is a win for the health of our forests, and a win for America’s smarter energy future.”

Herseth Sandlin added: “By amending the definition of renewable biomass in the energy bill will greatly improve our ability to manufacture renewable energy from our forestlands, both public and private, all over the country. This would bring tremendous benefits, not only to our environment, to forest health, and to our national security, but it will also provide an economically viable outlet for forest byproducts that could revitalize the local economies of hundreds of small forest communities across the country.”

Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.):

“Biomass utilization is an important component of our energy independence,” DeFazio said. “This legislation will help many innovative companies around the nation that are actively developing new biomass technology. I am pleased to co-sponsor this legislation which will ensure that we take an environmentally sensitive and yet active approach towards stewardship of our federal forest lands and biomass development.”

Rep. John E. Peterson (R-Penn.):

“Renewable energy produced from biomass on federal lands and Indian reservations should categorically count toward meeting the recently mandated Renewable Fuels Standards. Alternative energy producers looking to invest in federal regions will simply go elsewhere if this fix is not made, which will neither help us move in the direction of meeting the RFS, nor will it help small, forest communities. I am very pleased to join with a strong, bipartisan group of House members in offering this commonsense legislation. This correction should be made quickly, as our colleagues in the Senate have already passed legislation addressing this critical issue,” said Peterson, whose district includes most of the Allegheny National Forest.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.):

“Not only does the current definition exclude a significant source of renewable biofuels, it creates a logistical nightmare for any ethanol or biodiesel plant that attempts to use woody biomass,” Stupak said. “The prohibition is neither practical nor prudent. Timber is not sorted based on what type of forest it comes from.”

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.):

“The waste wood created through careful stewardship of our national forests can be put to good use as cellulosic ethanol. This bill will promote an important technology to supplement American energy independence with domestic, renewable fuels,” U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson said.

Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.):

“The timber industry in South Arkansas plays a major role in the overall economic well-being of our state, and changing the definition of renewable biomass improves our ability to manufacture renewable energy from forestland including cellulosic ethanol,” Ross said. “I am proud to join this bipartisan group committed to help sustain timber-related jobs across this nation.”

Rep. Chip Pickering (R-Miss.):

Rep. Pickering said “The mission to increase and promote renewable energy through public-private partnerships and cooperatives should not be derailed because of needless restrictions on biomass from public lands. We can strengthen our domestic energy independence using smart land and resource management practices, and do it in an environmentally safe manner. Biomass is an inexpensive, safe, renewable energy source that provides great promise if we encourage it with smart public policy and private incentives.”

Biomass projects that would be conducted under the authority of the Herseth Sandlin -Walden bill on federal lands would still have to comply with federal and state law and applicable land management plans. There is an additional requirement for old-growth maintenance, restoration, and management on federal lands as defined in the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003.

More from Greg Walden:

The Herseth Sandlin – Walden Renewable Biomass Facilitation Act (H.R. 5236)

It’s not the catchiest name, I’ll admit. But don’t judge a book by its cover. This bill is important to the renewable fuels industry and jobs in our forests. Let me explain how we came to write this bill.

As you may know, the energy bill recently signed into law helps nudge America toward greater energy independence by spurring research and production of alternative fuels. You see, scientists have figured out how to turn woody biomass from forests into fuels for vehicles. Several weeks ago the Department of Energy awarded a $24 million grant to an Oregon company to build one of the first cellulosic fuels refineries in the country. Given the amount of thinning and brush removal work needed in our forests, it only makes sense to turn that material into a clean-burning fuel.

The energy bill calls for the country to produce 36 billion gallons-a-year of biofuels. This renewable fuels standard (RFS) is aggressive, but also provides incentives to move away from corn-based ethanol and into fuels made from biomass.

But then the new law—as only Congress could write it—severely restricts what type of woody biomass will count toward meeting the new renewable fuels goals. Basically, the law puts off limits biomass from federal forests and even limits what counts off of private lands.

Well, from my point of view, either woody biomass when converted is a biofuel or it is not. Where that wood comes from shouldn’t matter, since other forest practices acts govern harvest issues.

That’s what the Renewable Biomass Facilitation Act (H.R. 5236), introduced by Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD), myself, and a group of eight bipartisan House colleagues, is all about. It mostly corrects those problems by using language already agreed to by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the United States Senate and many members of the House who wanted to see it included in the energy bill. The Northwest is leading the movement to switch to smart, renewable fuels, and biomass will undeniably play a major part in this effort. In fact, according to the U.S. Forest Service, biomass has surpassed hydropower as the largest source of renewable energy in the country. Ensuring that biomass gathered from federal land counts toward the country’s renewable fuels standard is a win for the health of our forests, and a win for America’s smarter energy future.

And as we all know, as that biomass collects on our forest floors, the chances for catastrophic fire go up and up. I keep telling my colleagues on the Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming: If you want to get a handle on carbon emissions, you need to address the conditions that contribute to the record wildfires we’ve seen in recent years, which have spewed an incredible amount of carbon dioxide and other pollutants into the atmosphere. And, like the biomass facility I plan to visit next weekend in Josephine County demonstrates, we can prevent wildfire and create clean energy at the same time.