Coos Conversations

Alternative Energy Boost by NH House

The good news? The legislature is adjourned except for a one-day session to pass the buck on solving the education funding crisis. What's good about the adjournment is that they can do little harm while adjourned.

In reality though, fans of alternative energy developments should be ecstatic about a session that advanced the cause and moved the state closer to energy independence. We have a long way to go to reach that goal but at least the legislators recognized the issue as requiring immediate action.

One key victory for alternative energy, especially in Coos County, was actually a defeat.

Defeated was the original intent of SB 140 sponsored by Sen. Gallus and Reps. Theberge and Remich of Coos County. The stated intent was to enable PSNH to build a biomass plant anywhere in the state.

You see, following the state's efforts to deregulate the power industry it forbade PSNH from building another generation facility resigning them primarily to be distribution and transmission operators. They were allowed to maintain their present generation facilities (some hydros, numerous coal burners and the new, Newington plant (a biomass burner).

Instead the NH Legislature overwhelmingly supported heavily-amended SB 140 providing an important shot in the arm to alternative energy investors looking to plow a half billion dollars in wind and biomass energy projects in Coos.

What started as a PSNH-bill was altered by two key amendments and subsequent refinements to the bill.

Most important is language directing the NH Public Utilities Commission to accelerate discussion leading to upgrading the power transmission lines in Coos County that would allow alternative energy companies to ship their power onto the New England Power grid. Presently those lines offer about 51 megawatts of capacity or the output of a good-sized biomass plant.

Already Noble Environmental Power is in the Independent Systems Operator (ISO) queue for new power projects for 100 MW of wind generation from its proposed Phillips Brook project. Depending on what project comes on line first the others could be SOL in connecting and moving their power to market. (Kind of like I-93 from Manchester to Salem being so clogged with cars that other lanes are needed to relieve congestion).

.PSNH last built a generation facility in Newington (near Portsmouth) when it replaced a dirty, soft-coal burning plant at its Schiller Station with an equivalent 50 Megawatt wood-burning plant called Northern Wood Power station. That plant, now in operation, is burning a heavy diet of wood chips trucked in from development projects on Cape Cod and from southern New England.

Efforts to amend the bill from the House floor were thwarted by House Speaker Terry Norelli who ruled the Rep. John Thomas amendment "non-germane" to the bill.

The vote caps a wildly successful session for the alternative energy interests in the 2007 NH State Legislative session.

In addition to SB 140, both chambers supported creation of a Renewable Portfolio Standard which requires all electric utilities servicing NH customers to use increasing amounts of renewable energy in their power supply mix. This in turn creates demand for alternative energy investment meaning wind, hydro, biomass and solar power generators receive incentives, in the way of Renewable Energy Credits, for producing energy from renewable sources. A goal of 25% of the state's power from renewable sources by the year 2025 is part of the operating plan.

But there are several small flies in this sweet medicinal ointment and one is that: there are very few RECs in the current legislation somewhat defeating the incentive for alternative energy investments. Secondly, there is no language addressing efficient operation of any new or existing generation facility.

As I've said in this space previously, most thermal power generators turn fuel into steam which drives a turbine creating electricity. These units are notoriously inefficient (about 30% efficiency) meaning that if they are a biomass plant about 70% of the energy value in each ton of wood chips is pissed off in steam, thermal loss, condensing cycles and so forth. The problem with that scenario is fairly self-evident. Our finite wood resources are gobbled to fuel a wasteful power generation facility.

None of us would purposely buy a 5 miles per gallon vehicle if a 25 m.p.g vehicle were available. Nor would we install a 40% efficient oil burner in our homes. Why then would or should we condone a multi-million dollar power generation facility in our neighborhood that's the equivalent of a 16 cylinder Hummer?

If you are PSNH and operate with a mid 19^th century mindset, making power is your focus. Nowhere in their business plan does the words co-location/co-generation appear. The concepts are too new for them to cozy up to.

I'm not picking on PSNH as I hold any biomass development by the same standards and would amend the RPS legislation in the next (2008) session to address generation efficiency, co-location, co-generation and throw in Renewable Energy Credits for upgrades to transmission lines that support alternative energy generation.

While admittedly a less than perfect bill (the old chestnut about not wanting to watch legislation or sausage being made holds true here), there is hope that the RPS legislation will evolve and mature into a true "green" bill which celebrates local initiatives, weans us from highly politicized and costly imported fuels and advances the causes of conservation and efficiency.

But how do we get from our present Point A to that end point of a truly "green" state energy policy?

Let's count some no-brainer initiatives we could adopt that would have a dramatic impact with little re-engineering to do.    

• Ask the legislature to ban the sale of incandescent light bulbs. Oddly Wal-Mart is the largest seller of energy efficient Compact Fluorescent Light bulbs spawning an energy conservation effort on their own.
• Ask them to enact strict energy conservation building codes with specifics about appliance efficiencies. (LEEDS and Energy Star are both national building standards that could be mandated for every new home constructed or substantially remodeled in the state).
• Reward major investments in customer energy conservation programs by utilities with incentives. This action is called "decoupling" and a Public Utilities Commission docket is considering this policy right now.
• Move more data-entry jobs to telecommuting functions avoiding needless vehicle travel.
• Encourage district-heating in communities using local energy sources.
• Insist that Renewable Energy Credit eligibility requires high efficiency ratings for generation.
• Insist that any green and clean generation be accompanied by a decrease of dirty generation facilities.

Those are just a couple of talking points for legislators and regulators as they look to further evolve energy independence for the state.

As a region that stands to gain much by alternative energy investments, we as a county, should be looking at ways to benefit from these developments with something more substantial and sustainable than merely jobs and some tax receipts.

Thanks to Peter R. for guest blogging today. 

To guest blog - send your blog in a word doc or email body to mpinard@kdpaine.com

Proof that "Madame Delahaye" certainly does care about Coos County

Katie Paine was asked to be the keynote speaker at the annual AVER dinner held at the White Mountain Chalet in Berlin, NH on June 14th, 2007.  If you have ever thought that her drive is not for the people of Coos County and this area, please take a few moments to read a transcript of her speech here.

Congratulations to Larry Kelly - AVER's Citizen of the Year and to NCIA - AVER's Small Business of the Year!!

Also, here is a link to the Federal Reseve Bank of Boston's newsletter where an article by Katie was featured this month.  Check it out..., it really shows a great "vision" for our area!

Things are happening in Coos County!

Things are definitely happening in Coos County, NH!  From biomass proposals - such as in Groveton and perhaps Berlin, new businesses like KD Paine & Partners in Berlin and the new French bakery in Colebrook to high speed internet access in Colebrook as well as the ATV Park off Route 110 in Berlin..., there is a change in the wind and it is blowing through the county.  To see a great show that was put together by New Hampshire Public Television, click here!

Alternative Energy Push Back

Alternative energy Push Back

by Guest Blogger Peter R.

Great comments from Pete B and Rocky on alternative energy/biomass future for Berlin and beyond.

Lest I be confused with the ash-holes who predict Berlin will revert to the ice-age from many feet of ash precipitate from a biomass plant, let the record show wood to energy plants must meet exacting air emissions standards to qualify for Renewable Energy Credits.

In fact those standards are tougher than NH Air Resources permits allow, which themselves are pretty tough. That is not my concern, nor should it be any one else’s. Let’s stay on topic and remain focused on the critical issues facing developers of these plants.

My larger concern is the potential cyclic economic nature of these plants and the uncertain economic future they evoke for Berlin and Coos County if the wood supply is not constant and sustainable well into the future.

Berlin and the county have a unique opportunity to largely remake the economy. Not an easy task and a daunting one but there literally is no place to go but up. What that future looks like is, as others have said, up to us. It’s not the exclusive purview of the Berlin City Council or the Coos County Commissioners. It’s all of us participating in a larger dialogue to determine that future course.

As I’ve said before and I’ll repeat here as it bears heavily on these discussions; we need facts and data to inform those discussions, not emotion and nostalgia and a yearning for “the way things used to be”. Our primary goal should be a stable and sustainable economic base to build off for future decades, not one in which here today, gone tomorrow is the watchword.

Pete B does some simplified math to suggest that Laidlaw’s plan will only draw on 40% of the previous fiber demand for the Burgess plant. That completely ignores the wood fiber appetite of the North Country Renewable Energy plant planned for Groveton, a plant that is further along in the planning stages than Laidlaw’s.

Groveton’s plant (bio-energy and bio refinery) has its eyes on 1.2 million tons of low-grade wood as its energy source. Oops! There goes Pete’s mathematical cushion. He mentions that PSNH’s Northern Wood project in Newington is buying wood at $30 per ton. While that’s a nice number it is based on a business climate in which there is a limited and fairly static demand. Add in another 1.7 million tons of low-grade wood demand (from the combined Berlin and Groveton plants) and the price rapidly escalates to the $40 per ton and beyond range. Probably not an acceptable figure for any new plant’s business plan.

But back to the wood basket for a minute. Presently a large portion of PSNH’s wood is coming from development cuts on Cape Cod. The problem with this source is it is not sustainable. Once it’s cut and transformed into shopping malls or housing developments that’s it for that low-grade fiber source. Not exactly a sustainable source. Is that the future you see for the Great North Woods of NH, Pete?

The issue is sustainability.

Let’s try another pricing scenario not easily dismissed. Presume for a moment that turning wood chips into ethanol, butanol and other cellulosic-based (read wood-based) chemicals are commercialized in the next 5-10 years. From my conversation with forest products researchers, these are the highest value-added uses for wood fiber, the goal of any business is to add value and thereby profit. The same researchers rank electricity generation as the least value-added uses (and Pete has admitted power generation is a 30% efficient affair).

So now we have investors jumping on the wood to synthetic fuels industry for a handsome return on profits at several magnitudes beyond those from generating kilowatts (even with REC’s available). What happens to Laidlaw’s investment in the biomass plant in downtown Berlin or the NCRE plant in Groveton?

Specifically, what happens when a ton of low-grade wood starts fetching $45 to $60 per ton? Do the biomass-energy investors walk away from their tens of millions in investment because their business plan, based on their presumed cost per ton of wood, is blown up in smoke ?(steam?)

Is that the stable economy we’re chasing so heartily that we lambaste anyone with a divergent viewpoint? I surely don’t have the answers, only cautionary tales to consider as we move forward. I don’t see the Mayor convening any open forum on Berlin’s or the millyard’s future.

For sure Berlin needs taxable investment. Neither the Federal prison nor the Jericho ATV park bring much of that though they’re touted as great leaps forward). It’s a shame we don’t see the forest for the trees (sorry for the mixed metaphor). As long as we rely exclusively on the property tax to fund our schools, towns and county we’re stuck in this competitive grind with our neighboring communities for the next great economic development project, the next great property tax generator.

This really is a regional issue and a conversation convening in the other 34 Northern Forest communities who are experiencing the same economic downturn borne of timber industry reliance on the paper manufacturing economy.

In short, we’re all in this together and rather than carving the shrinking pie into ever smaller pieces we should be looking for ways to grow the pie. As we carve the pie could we use the sharp edge of facts and data to slice through the malarkey and try to keep focused on that which provides the best return, the most efficient operation, the wisest use of our resources to the benefit of us all for decades to come?

Looking forward to the continuing dialogue.

Special thanks to Peter R.

Proponent for Biomass

How often have you driven down Rt 116 to Littleton and gotten as far as Whitefield and been overwhelmed with "smoke, odor and ash" being emitted by the power plant  there. Have you even realized that there is a power plant about 100 yards off the road? Remember, a power plant is not a pulp mill. The only odor involved will be the smell of wood chips (think Christmas wreaths). Occasionally there will be the smell of wood smoke, but probably less than you will get from any Berlin neighborhood with a few woodstoves going on a cold winter morning.

Let's look at the amount of ash that is going to bury Berlin;

-The plant will use about 500,000 tons/year of "green" wood chips (35% moisture)

-That equals 325,000 tons/year of dry biomass (500,000x.65)

-Wood is typically 1.0-2.5% ash- Let's say an average of 2%

-Total quantity of ash produced by burning 500,000 tons of wood is 6,500 tons (325,000 x .02)

-In a typical fluidized bed biomass boiler, 25% of the ash is removed from the bottom of the boiler and 75% becomes "fly ash". So total fly ash is 4,875 tons / year (6,500 x .75)

-The boiler is equipped with an "Electrostatic Precipitator" (dust collector). The typical ash removal efficiency for the precipitator is 99.5%. So the amount of ash escaping to the atmosphere is about 25 tons/year.(4875 x.005).  (are we buried yet...?)

-25 tons per year over 365 days is about 140 lb. /day (25 tons/yr x 2000 lb/ton x 1year/365 days)

-So every hour that nasty stack will be belching out a total of FIVE (count them FIVE) pounds of ash. A regular Mt St. Helens!

-How much of that 5 lb will land within 2 miles of the mill after leaving a 320 foot stack... virtually none.

 

I would wager that on a typical summer day you will not even see a plume from that stack. The majority of what is coming out is water vapor (remember that 35% moisture...) and it will not condense once the outside temperature is above about 50 degrees. Take a look at the Cascade mill stacks on your way by today. See anything coming out? Those boilers have NO pollution controls on the tailpipe.

Trucks- Okay,there will be about 50 trucks / day coming into town to deliver wood (and using services in town). The pulp mill had about 100-120/day.. How many chip trucks a day drive through Berlin right now on their way to the Shelburne chip plant, Whitefield power plant, Jefferson power plant, local lumber mills? Will 50 more be that much of a burden?

Let's see- the biomass plant will be producing 50 MW for sale to the grid along with RECs (Renewable Energy Credits) Between those two commodities, they should gross about $80/MW-hr. $80/MW-hr x 50 MW x 24 hr/day x 360 operating days/year = $34.5 MM. Assume they are smart enough to actually make a profit (say $4.5MM/year) and the rest goes out as payroll, wood purchases, contractors, supplies and services, interest & depreciation,  etc.. Of that is $30 MM about 2/3 ($20MM will stay in the local (Coos county) area.

As far as the level of education required to operate and maintain a new biomass boiler and turbine generator, I will wager that you have not ever been inside a modern industrial facility with new process controls. A high school graduate is not going to walk in off the street and start operating this boiler. It is a complex and intricate process, controlled by many layers of computers. Operators need to be versed in the thermodynamics of a boiler, all the mechanical and electrical systems that they have to run along with distributed process control systems... not something that you pick up in your typical high school. There will also be engineers (like me if you hadn't already guessed) accountants, environmental technicians, managers with MBAs, along with skilled tradesmen (electricians, welders, pipefitters instrument technicians, etc) Overall a pretty highly educated bunch. This is not your typical group of "mill workers".

 

To be sure, Laidlaw's feet need to be held to the fire to make sure that they make the place as environmentally benign as possible. Even with the boiler running there

are many opportunities to open up the east riverbank for walking trails and open spaces. The mill should be made as aesthetically pleasing as it possibly can. (I have seen some very nicely kept industrial sites- It can be done. Think of the Budweiser brewery in Londonderry).

I believe that what this country really needs is large investments in renewable energy. Wind, Solar, Hydro, AND Biomass. If not here, where? If not now, when? Here is an opportunity to start the country in the right direction as far as energy goes and we can be a part of it. If everyone has a NIMBY attitude changes will never be made. (BTW, I think they should plunk a couple of BIG wind turbines on top of the other two 320 foot tall smokestacks and make a real statement about renewable energy.)

Thanks to Pete B. for today's guest blog.

Biomass - schmiomass

I will be posting another guest blog later today concerning the proposed biomass power plant, from a different point of view.  For the past several days, I have received many e-mails from concerned citizens that range from outrage to complacency toward Laidlaw, KD Paine, Mayor Danderson and the list continues on and on.  I just want to remind everyone that this is an outlet, not a "lynch Laidlaw site" as one person called it, nor are we a blog site to "promote fossil fuel usage."  We are a blog site that has been created for Coos County - to provide everyone with a place to state an opinion or to post their thoughts.  I will continue to post guest blogs - whether I personally agree with them or not.  This blog site is not filtered by content.  This is a fair and dedicated blog created for all of you to share thoughts, comments, suggestions, ideas and criticisms about Coos County.  So, please continue to share your blogs with me by emailing them to mpinard@kdpaine.com and if you are having any difficulties posting comments, by all means, feel free to email your comments with a little note stating which blog you would like it posted under.  Thanks and lets keep these conversations going.

The "leaders" of Berlin lack any insight

The "leaders" of Berlin lack any insight or creativity in their thinking about how to boost the economy and provide jobs in the area. All of their ideas mimic the defunct paper mill in the areas of pollution, scope of job choices and innovation. The self proclaimed economic developers-AVER-have no business speaking for the region as no one asked them to nor voted them into such a capacity. The 20 million dollars wasted on the research to see if a federal prison would be a good thing (as if another prison could possibly be a good thing) to bring to the north country could have been used to investigate what ACTUALLY WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE AND SUSTAINABLE VENTURE for the north country. The city council is just a bunch of unqualified people who got in the positions they hold because no one else wanted to take or run for these positions. Mayor Danderson thinks expanding the college will bring crime.What does he think another prison will bring? Only 59 jobs are available for people in the area in the federal prison and the builders are coming from NY state. What a joke this all is.

Thank you to Pat B. for writing in.

The results are in!!!

The results are in!!!

To what extent do you support having the Berlin Mill converted into a biomass power plant?

Out of all of the respondents, almost half or 46 percent of the people are opposed to having the mill converted to a biomass power plant, and 14 percent stated they would leave the area if it happens.  Seventeen percent of respondents felt like they did not have enough information to make a valued decision either way, while almost 16 percent felt strongly in favor of having the mill converted to a biomass power plant.  Interestingly, not one person taking the survey chose to respond with “I don’t care.”

So what does this survey tell us?  Thoughts, comments? Would you like to write a guest blog about the subject?  Please email me your thoughts at mpinard@kdpaine.com To view a pie chart of the results, please click the pdf link below.  Thanks!

Download Doc6------.pdf

Coos the Center of Alternative Energy Part 2

Coos the Center of Alternative Energy Part 2

So former Cong. Bass has been hired to “smoothe the way” for Laidlaw’s plans for firing up the #11 boiler on the Burgess Pulp Mill site. Good luck Charlie!

Meanwhile 62% respond to Coos Conversations poll saying they oppose (with a good portion saying they’d leave Berlin if that plan transpires) reuse of the conversion boiler as a biomass plant. And Michael Bartoszek of Laidlaw says “unquestionably the wood basket is there” to supply his proposed plant’s 500,000 ton appetite.

Interesting stuff! But what’s the context? Is there sufficient wood in that wood basket?

Lest anyone think I’m the skunk at the picnic let me start by saying I am pro alternative energy and well planned, efficient biomass plants as a source of investment, jobs and sustainable power for the entire county. In my business it would be foolhardy not to look at $500 million in potential development as a worthy addition to the county’s economy. However, I am not supportive of: development that repeats the unreliable boom/bust economic cycles of the past; seeing unsustainable forestry prolonged in this county; inefficiency using 19^th century technology when 21^st technology and knowledge is available.

Let me peel back the skins of the onion a bit.

Last installment I wrote of stand alone biomass plants being 30% efficient. That’s fact, not fiction and it doesn’t matter who operates the plant that’s just the physical reality of steam generated electricity, 60% of the available energy in the wood chip is shed in unused steam, stack gasses and inefficiencies. Not a very good use of a finite, if not scarce, local resource. At least Laidlaw has said they are looking to co-locate an industry that can use some of their steam which makes the plant more efficient. But developers - please don’t suggest that the beneficent reason you are building these plants is to put loggers back in the woods earning a living. That’s blowing steam up my skirt and I don’t need that rush.

Ask an idled logger. There is no living to be made harvesting low-grade wood alone. Harvesting biomass for power plants is a secondary consideration for loggers mobilizing on harvesting jobs. If there are no saw logs/veneer logs, high-grade, high value wood to harvest and produce a decent return on investment no logger is going to invest $300,000 on a skidder to twitch skinny sticks of low-grade wood to fuel Laidlaw’s plant, or any other. That’s just poor economics. So please! No more impassioned pleas for “helping the poor loggers”. Come up with a sustainable plan for timber harvesting and they will be more than satisfied and able to plan their involvement in their chosen professions and quite willing to make those investments.

The larger question is what is the wood supply? Frankly no one has the irrefutable data to answer that question. There are bits and pieces of data that can help educate your guess whether the supply is sufficient but it would still be agues. So, consider this string of information.

Coos County is 1.2  million acres (more or less). A recent study by the AMC found about half the county’s timber parcels under some form of conservation easement directing management to production of higher value saw logs on long-term rotations (i.e., less frequent major cuttings using prescribed Timber Stand Improvement plans) basically allowing timber stands to recover from heavy cutting by paper pulp producers in the past decades. One timber resource expert said much of the county is even-aged, immature timber stands about 25-40 years from harvest. Will the speaker make that statement on the record? It’s doubtful given his position in the land use hierarchies of the state. So we’re stuck with overused hyperbole in making economic planning decisions instead of solid data.

To supply presently operating biomass plants in the region (Whitefield and Bethlehem) requires roughly 415,000 tons of wood a year. If we assume that each acre can produce a ton of low grade wood annually about a half million acres are required to satisfy existing need. Add in Laidlaw’s need for 500,000 tons and North Country Renewable Energy (Groveton’s) expressed need for 1.2 million tons and we’re up to 2.11 million tons or 2 million acres producing the average one ton per acre.

Just how big is 2 million acres you ask?

Use the footprint of the White Mountain National Forest for context. It represents a fairly unbroken 800,000 acre chunk of land that runs from Bethel to Lancaster and Randolph to Plymouth. Quite a swath. Now double that footprint and you’re about two thirds of the way to meeting the acreage needs of existing and proposed biomass plants.

Now, mind you we’re assuming each acre is capable of producing a ton of biomass. But is that assumption reasonable? I think not. Let me tell you why.

I recently reviewed an aerial mapping of potential wind turbine sites in the county flown within the last month with snowless conditions. What was striking was the number of evident logging sites where substantial acreage had been heavily logged. Add in the 20,000 acre extraction by TR Dillon in Success and other “hot spots” where heavy logging has taken place and the capacity of the Great North Woods to sustain the present 400,000 ton demand is in doubt, never mind the demand for 5 times that amount.

At the Loggers Mud Season breakfast this past week, reports are filtering out that wood supply and Coos capacity to feed biomass to the new plants is seriously in doubt. Several loggers have told me personally that they are presently supplying chips to Whitefield and Bethlehem but that few of the truckloads are carrying Coos chips. Naturally, wood supply has always been a regional issue with timberlands from Maine and Vermont and below the notches being tapped to make up supply. All well and good but what new demands for wood supplies are being contemplated in those neighboring states and what control do we have over those discussions or plans?

This then becomes a regional issue and not simply a Berlin or Groveton issue. And it becomes an issue where good data is desperately needed to answer the many supply and sustainability questions.

If our goal is to create a sustainable, green and renewable alternative energy industry for Coos County, how can we proceed without the information?

Next time in this space we’ll look at the price point of wood and its highest and best value.

Special thanks again to Peter R. for this guest blog.

Poll is closing Saturday morning.

Please take the time to vote ----------------------------------------------------->

The poll is closing on Saturday morning.

Thanks to all who have participated!!!