From:                                         Sean Donaghy <sdonaghy0723@gmail.com>

Sent:                                           Friday, June 7, 2019 12:56 PM

To:                                               RPS, DOER (ENE)

Subject:                                     Preserve the RPS

 

Dear John Wassam,

 

I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed changes to RPS Class I and RPS Class II regulations that would weaken restrictions on the use of wood biomass. Our own peer-reviewed scientific research has shown that the climate impacts of wood bioenergy are worse than coal for decades to centuries under most management scenarios. Massachusetts could be in a position to lead on science-based climate policy – instead the proposed changes would increase emissions of climate pollutants while diminishing the capacity of forests to absorb those pollutants. I write as a scientist and a youth whose future hangs in the balance of the climate choices we make today. I urge you to demonstrate that Massachusetts embraces science-based policy by keeping biomass out of the RPS.

Today wood burning biomass already gets Alternative Energy Credits and very specific qualified sources can get RECS. There is no demonstrated need to change the current standard to allow more bio-mass to be burnt. Massachusetts cannot sustain its power from bio-mass sources and should not be further incentivize  the development of more biomass energy plants in MA.This would also diminish the current value of RECs because it would flood the market with a large amount of bio-mass produced RECs undercutting the price actual renewable energy projects rely on to be built. There is only two resonson possible driving this change. The Governor knows that the Utilities are struggling to meet the RPS that is set in the MGLs, or the Governor is scratching the back of the wood pellet industry. I suspect it is both. This is not a decision based on science or good policy and should not move forward. 

 

Sincerely,

Sean Donaghy