Proposed legislation would end subsidies for wood-burning power plants in Massachusetts by removing biomass as an eligible fuel source for the Commonwealth's two primary clean-energy programs.

Currently, fuel from biomass plants is included in the Renewable Portfolio Standard and the Alternative Portfolio Standard, but environmental groups noted burning wood is more polluting than burning coal, and leads to major health impacts in surrounding communities.

Caitlin Peale Sloan, Massachusetts vice president for the Conservation Law Foundation, said subsidies for biomass need to end, especially as the need to reduce emissions grows because of threats from climate change.

"It's very important that now we clarify what we're calling renewable," Peale Sloane urged. "So that we can increase our subsidies of renewables without increasing combustion and additional climate impacts from carbon emissions."

Last year, the operating permit for a proposed Palmer biomass plant in Springfield was revoked because of its proximity to an environmental-justice community. Springfield has high rates of asthma and other respiratory illnesses. A letter from more than 100 groups urged the Legislature to pass the bill, so biomass cannot be subsidized in any area of the state.

Sen. Eric Lesser, D-Springfield, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said the proposed plant was aiming to build in the middle of a densely populated neighborhood where many residents are immigrants, people of color or low-income.

He argued ending subsidies for biomass will help push back against the history of racism in where these plants have been put.

"The greater Springfield area has one of the worst asthma rates in the entire country," Lesser pointed out. "Part of the reason for it is this industrial legacy, and a legacy of pollution tied in certain respects to these power plants."

He emphasized moving forward, it will be important to ensure front-line communities hit hardest by the effects of climate change and pollution get the most focused protection from climate-mitigation efforts.

Naia Tenerowicz, a Springfield resident and environmental advocate, said while Massachusetts is a leader in the transition to net-zero emissions in many ways, subsidies for biomass set the Commonwealth back.

"The idea that biomass could be subsidized as clean energy, when it's polluting your community when it's making it harder for you and your loved ones to breathe," Tenerowicz remarked. "It's not something that I want to happen to anyone in any community."

From conservation to sportsmen's groups, the U.S. Supreme Court is getting plenty of backlash over its most recent ruling, which weakens federal protections for wetlands.

The 5-4 decision in Sackett v. EPA means wetlands are only protected by the Clean Water Act if they have a "continuous surface connection" with a larger, navigable body of water.

Sam Sankar, senior vice president of programs for EarthJustice, warned the ruling puts millions of acres of wetlands at risk, including in Pennsylvania.

"According to the National Wetlands Inventory, there are just over half a million acres of wetlands in Pennsylvania, and all of those wetlands are threatened by the decision of the Supreme Court," Sankar asserted.

The ruling is a victory for an Idaho couple who sued the Environmental Protection Agency after being denied a federal permit to build a home on land which included wetlands. Sankar noted some farmers, developers, and landowners may cheer the decision but might not understand the benefits of wetlands to the environment, in terms of flood control, water quality, and wildlife habitat.

Sankar added the ruling imperils the safety of drinking water for millions of Pennsylvanians whose drinking water sources are downstream of wetlands no longer protected from pollution or development following the court's decision.

"If wetlands aren't protected, there's going to be more pollution, more flooding, more drought,"
Sankar projected. "And that means that surface waters that are inextricably intertwined with the wetlands are going to be degraded as well. Those surface waters are often the place where our communities get their water from, and so, eliminating protection for wetlands threatens drinking water."

Sankar stressed Earthjustice is among the groups asking Congress to use its power to negate the ruling. Some states also have said they will enforce their own, state-level protections.

Environmental groups in Tennessee have an urgent call to action for the Tennessee Valley Authority to cut fossil-fuel emissions and replace their coal plants with renewable energy.

The TVA provides electricity for 153 local power companies and serves 10 million people in Tennessee and parts of six surrounding states.

Gabriella Sarri-Tobar, energy justice campaigner for the Center for Biological Diversity, which is a member of the Clean Up TVA Coalition, wants to see the Kingston and Cumberland power plants replaced with renewable energy alternatives.

She explained local environmental groups including The Clean Up TVA Coalition are working daily to encourage fossil-fuel-free energy production by 2030.

"One of our key demands is that the new board should take back and should reclaim the decision-making authority that was previously delegated to the CEO Jeff Lyash," Sarri-Tobar pointed out. "The TVA board did take back that authority."

Sarri-Tobar emphasized the importance of TVA being a leader in the transition to clean and renewable energy and the coalition is working to ensure workers and communities most impacted by TVA's decisions are represented in the energy discussions.

Sarri-Tobar noted a recent Appalachian Voices report looking at the job market specifically focused on the Cumberland coal plant retirement plan, and what the shift from coal to gas would do in terms of jobs versus clean power and energy efficiency.

"They found that shifting to gas would actually result in fewer jobs than renewable energy and energy efficiency," Sarri-Tobar stressed. "There is a transition, that's gonna happen because those coal jobs will no longer exist, but they can become clean energy jobs."

The Cumberland plant is set to retire one unit by the end of 2026 and the second unit by the end of 2028. The Kingston plant is currently undergoing an environmental review process.


get more stories like this via email

Despite the veto of a key piece of Montana environmental legislation, advocates are not giving up on the measure becoming law - even though the state Legislature has already adjourned.

Senate bill 442 would have infused $30 million into the coffers of Habitat Montana, the state's premier conservation program created by the Legislature.

It protects wildlife habitat and access to public lands for hunters, hikers and fishermen - as well as roads, veterans' programs and mental-health services.

Alex Blackmer, communications manager with Wild Montana, said the bill had unwavering bipartisan support - which is why it shocked him and other supporters when Gov. Greg Gianforte vetoed it after the session ended.

"It's supported by farmers and ranchers and veterans and hunters and local governments and business organizations and conservationists and EMTs and you name it," said Blackmer. "So, for the governor to have vetoed it the way he did is really disappointing."

Gianforte cited some technical and funding issues in his veto letter, but Blackmer said supporters are attempting what's known as a "poll override" - which involves sending questionnaires to lawmakers who could still choose to override the veto, even though they are no longer at the Capitol.

The poll override works like this: The Montana Secretary of State sends out the questionnaire, which has to be completed and returned within 30 days.

Blackmer said this amounts to a last-ditch effort to save a critical piece of environmental legislation.

"Because the Legislature has a constitutional right to address a governor's veto, this is just a way for them to do that when they're not all gathered in the same place," said Blackmer. "Everyone has gone home. A lot of folks are back to work, back on their land. It's a chance for everyone to participate in the democratic process."

136 of Montana's 150 legislators voted in favor of the bill. Two-thirds of the Legislature would have to vote to overturn the veto during the mail-in poll override effort.




get more stories like this via email