From: Jessiaha <jessiaha@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2019 3:09 PM
To: RPS, DOER (ENE); DOER@mass.gov
Subject: Dirty Wood Burning Fuel
To
the Department of Energy Resources,
I
am writing to express strong disagreement with the inclusion of burned biomass,
particularly trees, in our state's definition of "clean" or
"renewable" energy.
First: Burning, whatever the fuel, cannot be clean. No
matter what filtration or sequestration mechanisms are used, burning results in
a net release of carbon into the atmosphere. The DOER website (https://www.mass.gov/service-details/biomass) says
exactly this: "Modern Wood Heat is now able to demonstrate efficiency and
emissions profiles similar to fossil fuels."
Using
emissions standards from fossil fuels as a benchmark for clean energy would be
laughable if it were not so dangerous and disingenuous. Especially at a
time when scientific support of anthropogenic climate change approaches 100%.
Beyond
this, the idea that our state's trees are a "renewable"
resource is simply incorrect over any timescale that matters.
Even the fastest growing trees take a decade or more to mature enough to
provide significant cooling, carbon sequestration, and other benefits. One
might use the same flawed thinking to claim that fossil fuels are
"renewable" because they form over time through natural
processes. The time scale at which burning trees become renewable is
simply not sustainable in the face of climate crisis. It was upsetting to
hear Kathleen Theoharides contradict this fact at the Joint committee on
Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy this Tuesday, especially given her
title as Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs.
Any
regulation that provides financial incentives to cutting and burning mature
trees at an industrial scale has nothing to do with either clean or renewable
energy.
Sincerely,
-Jessiaha
Adamopoulos
Somerville, MA