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