http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120606/NEWS02/706069879
Published June 6, 2012 in the Rutland Herald
Changes made to proposed biomass plant
By SUSAN SMALLHEER
Staff Writer
NORTH SPRINGFIELD – The developers of the proposed wood-fired generating plant in North Springfield have submitted an amended application to state regulators, which includes significant changes in the plant’s design and hopes for a new access road.
Adam Winstanley of Winstanley Enterprises LLC and Dan Ingold of Weston Solutions, the two companies that have proposed the 35 megawatt North Springfield Sustainable Energy Project, said Monday the changes were in response to community concerns raised in the past several months.
The amended application was submitted to the Vermont Public Service Board on Friday, they said.
The biggest change, Winstanley and Ingold said, was changing the 35 megawatt plant to an air-cooled system rather than a water-cooled system, thus drastically reducing the plant’s need for water – either from drilled wells in North Springfield or water from the town’s municipal system.
On peak summer days, the project had estimated it would need upwards of 700,000 gallons of water a day from the Springfield town system, almost equal to the town’s total usage.
But that figure now stands closer to 23,000 gallons a day, said Ingold, although the town last week gave the project a commitment for 30,000 gallons a day.
The project also hopes to “recapture” water from the roofs of Winstanley’s buildings in the North Springfield Industrial Park, most notably 36 Precision Drive, the former Fellows Corp. building, which covers eight acres and is one of the largest flat-roofed buildings in the state.
Additionally, the project plans on building four different sheds for the woodchips that will be burned at the facility, and would capture the water from those roofs as well.
Ingold, project engineer, said that would add another 3.5 acres of roof space.
A one-inch rainstorm would produce 250,000 gallons of runoff from the 12 acres of roofs, Ingold said. The project will have storage of 950,000 gallons, since the project plans on buying the town’s now off-line Davidson Hill storage tank in North Springfield, which holds 750,000 gallons.
Together, the project would recapture about 6.3 million gallons of water a year, close to the project’s annual requirement of 8.4 million gallons.
Ingold said that while the vast majority of wood-fired power plants are water cooled, there is a similar air-cooled biomass plant serving the Fitchburg, Mass., area.
Winstanley said the project’s capital costs would be higher as a result, but that its long term operating costs would be lower with an air-cooled system.
Winstanley also said the project was working with Bob Flint of the Springfield Regional Development Corp., on a potential new access road to the North Springfield Industrial Park from Route 11, which would bypass County Road, a residential neighborhood that currently is the main access point to the industrial park.
Winstanley said that the energy project had pledged 20 percent of the eventual cost of the project, and that Flint was pursuing federal and state funds to cover the cost of the new access road.
Flint on Monday declined to be specific about the potential for a new access road, but said that access to the industrial park had been a problem for years.
“We’re working actively to improve access to the industrial park,” he said, noting there had been a study of truck traffic in and out of the park in 2008. “We continue to work on this issue,” he said.
Winstanley, who said he had been working on the wood-fired project for the past four years, said the new access road would be built “at no cost to the people of Springfield.”
Springfield Town Manager Robert Forguites said he had received a summary of the changes to the project, but that traffic problems had not yet been addressed.
“Traffic is an issue that’s been brought up a number of times,” said Forguites.
Winstanley said that so far his company had invested $2 million in planning for the project, and in all would put in about $28 million toward the eventual $120 million construction costs of the 35-megawatt project.
Ingold said it was important for the changes to be submitted to the Public Service Board by June 1 in order to keep on schedule for the state review. He said public hearings on the project would probably be held in the fall.
The project also has a new forestry plan, Winstanley and Ingold said, after it consulted with state agencies to address concerns that the plant would put undue pressure on the region’s forests.
The sheds for the woodchips, which they said would resemble recent structures for riding facilities, would address the public’s concern that the woodchips would blow onto adjacent properties.
The changes also include a $350,000 pledge to help residents in the area around the plant switch their existing woodstoves to help air quality. The money would be given to a regional agency to administer the program.
Additionally, the power plant has offered to give upwards of enough steam and hot water to heat 100 homes in the immediate North Springfield area.
The heat and hot water would be enough to heat about 100 homes, Ingold said, and possibly more if the homes were retrofitted for energy efficiency. The proposed residential loop would be on Main Street/Precision Drive and Main Street/Fairbanks Road.
They said a residential heating district would be established to handle the residential thermal loop.
Virtually all businesses in the industrial park have signed letters of interest in receiving the hot water and steam heat, Winstanley said.
I can't believe that this project ever got considered but that what happens when you are held hostage because of your own economic policies. You start letting less than favorable industries set up in your back yard. You allow prisons and biosmass. What's next rendering plants or waste disposal? Stop letting the clowns sell you out. Grow some cojones and get rid of this nonsense and the people that are promoting this before it is too late..
ReplyDeleteMy guess is
DeleteSpringfield will be the next dispensing location for Medical pot.--well that may be better than a soot infested area where folks cant breath--don't know.
You folks opposing medical marijuana dispensaries now too?
DeleteWaste Disposal sounds like a good idea!
ReplyDeleteThe nation is still searching for a permanent place to dispose of that toxic nuclear waste......I am sure there would be money and jobs in that.
DeleteRight - let's get rid of all the evil employers!!!
ReplyDeleteThat must be why Massachusetts finally passed regulations recently limiting ratepayer-funded subsidies known as renewable energy certificates for biomass projects? Wood good! Coal Bad?
DeleteYeah for alternative energy! Let's stop VY from poisoning the enviroment. Burning trees, I mean biomass, is the green energy of the future! It's a progressive's wet dream.
ReplyDeleteGovernment and power plant data show that burning woody biomass releases 1.5 times as much carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour generated as coal, according to the Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance. Also, burning wood releases three times more carbon into the atmosphere than burning natural gas, per unit energy generated.
DeleteIf you build it, they will come!
ReplyDeleteUsing forest timber for heating, electricity generation or liquid ‘biofuel’ could severely harm forests and accelerate global warming, according to a new report from Greenpeace.
ReplyDeleteThe new study, entitled ‘Fuelling a BioMess’, contradicts industry assertions that this kind of ‘biomass’ fuel is clean and carbon neutral. The science behind the report shows how using forests for energy can be worse for the climate than burning coal.
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center/news-releases/New-Greenpeace-report-biomass-report-slams-industry-claims/
Using forest timber for heating, electricity generation or liquid ‘biofuel’ could severely harm forests and accelerate global warming, according to a new report from Greenpeace.
ReplyDeleteThe new study, entitled ‘Fuelling a BioMess’, contradicts industry assertions that this kind of ‘biomass’ fuel is clean and carbon neutral. The science behind the report shows how using forests for energy can be worse for the climate than burning coal.
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/media-center/news-releases/New-Greenpeace-report-biomass-report-slams-industry-claims/
The report describes how in 2009 Canada released more greenhouse gas emissions from the production and use of bioenergy than from every car on Canadian roads.
Delete“We’ve got a decade or two to get a grip on greenhouse emissions, and biomass won’t help because it will take far longer than that to repair the damage we’re doing by cutting down forests in the here and now.” commented Edwards
Who needs water, trees or air, we want green backs for out of state owners. So give up Vermont green for Mass green. Our town fathers want this so it will be.
ReplyDeleteLet's get rid of the town fathers and put some young educated people in there.
Delete