Simpson asks EPA to delay rule on biomass energy

Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, says he's concerned a new rule will discourage energy production from burning of biomass, much of which comes from agriculture and timber.

Simpson joined colleagues in a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency asking the EPA to postpone implementing the rule while it reconsiders the regulation of stationary carbon emissions under the Clean Air Act.

Simpson's Thursday news release follows:

Idaho Congressman Mike Simpson joined Western colleagues in expressing concern about EPA’s efforts to regulate energy production from biomass combustion under the Clean Air Act. Simpson signed a letter to EPA asking that the agency postpone implementing the rule while it reconsiders its decision.

The EPA recently released its final PSD Tailoring Rule outlining which stationary sources of carbon emissions will be subject to EPA’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions control regulations, which will be implemented beginning in January 2011. Although the draft regulation did not propose regulating emissions from biomass combustion, the EPA reversed its decision in the final rule. Both Congress and the Administration have consistently recognized biomass as a clean renewable energy resource.

“We are writing to express our deep disappointment and concern over the EPA’s decision in its final PSD Tailoring Rule to depart from the government’s consistent past practice of excluding biomass combustion emissions in calculating GHG emissions,” the letter states. “This decision contracts federal precedent regarding the carbon neutrality of biomass combustion and will discourage the responsible development and utilization of renewable biomass that could and should play a more significant role in our nation’s energy policy.”

Simpson has long promoted biomass not only as a resource that provides clean, renewable energy, but also as a mechanism through which forests can be properly managed and the risk of catastrophic wildfires on public and private lands can be reduced. Biomass energy product also puts to use a byproduct that would otherwise be wasted or burned in the open.

“There is enormous potential to generate renewable energy from waste products gathered on public and private lands,” the letter continues. “This includes byproducts of preventative treatments that are removed to reduce hazardous fuels, to reduce or contain disease or insect infestation, or to restore forest health…Further, this would help stimulate the economies of rural communities surrounded by federal lands by creating jobs.”

“In light of the EPA’s decision to reverse federal and international precedent and ignore clear Congressional intent regarding biomass utilization, we respectfully request a written detailed response explaining your plan to reconsider the treatment of emissions of biogenetic carbon dioxide under the PSD and Title V programs,” the letter concludes.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Let's see, we don't want hydrocarbons because of greenhouse gases and oil spills. We don't want biomass because of greenhouse gases. We don't want wind power because it'll kill the birds. We don't want solar because it's a blight on the beauty of the desert (seriously, Nancy Pelosi said that!) We don't want hydropower because it kills the fish. We don't want nuclear power because we'll all glow in the dark.

No matter what alternative energy source somebody comes up with, there's some interest group that is against it and armed with attorneys and a budget. And since everybody is entitled to their day in court, nothing new gets done.

Somehow we've managed to turn out enough narcissistic people whose mantra is "my way or the highway" that we, as a country, are going to eat ourselves alive.

Last thought was a good one.


Etiquette is a Social Disease