BioEnergy Producers Association

In June 2009, the University of California - Riverside completed a landmark report on the environmental performance of thermal conversion technologies throughout the world. The 41-page report identified more than 100 facilities that are treating (converting) biomass, principally municipal solid waste, in the process of producing energy. It concluded, "Results from the analysis indicate that pyrolysis and gasification facilities currently operating throughout the world with waste feedstocks meet each of their respective air quality emission limits. With few exceptions, most meet all of the current emission limits mandated in California, the United States, the European Union, and Japan. In the case of toxic air contaminants (dioxins/furans and mercury), every process evaluated met the most stringent emission standards worldwide. Facilities with advanced environmental  controls are very likely to meet regulatory requirements in California." This peer reviewed study presents independently validated emissions data from operating facilities in five nations.  Click Here to read this report.

Previous Studies and Reports

A California Waste Board study of conversion technologies, conducted in 2005, states, “Thermochemical technologies can process a wider variety of feedstocks and can have a greater effect on landfill reduction.  Thermochemical technologies can also produce a larger variety of products, which can displace the need for non-renewable sources of energy and fuels.”

The study referenced many of the legislative goals that are embodied in AB 222, as did the Governor’s Bioenergy Action Plan, prepared by the Bioenergy Interagency Working Group in 2006.  The Working Group identified the following topics for legislative action:

• Amend existing law to revise existing technology definitions and establish new ones, where needed.  In particular, review the definitions of gasification, transformation, fermentation, pyrolysis, and manufacturing.  Such statutory clarification would enable the utilization of biomass residues through combustion or non-combustion technology. 

• Amend existing law to provide incentives to local jurisdictions for energy production activities.

In 2006, under contract to the California Waste Board, the University of California-Riverside completed a further study of emissions data for these technologies.  The report concluded, "Thermochemical conversion technologies are technically viable options for the conversion of post-recycled municipal solid waste (MSW) and offer better solutions to landfilling and transformation. This conclusion is based on the peer-reviewed information from the Evaluation of Conversion Technology Processes and Product report prepared by UC Riverside and Davis, the Life Cycle and Market Impact Assessment of Noncombustion Waste Conversion Technologies prepared by RTI International, the independent evaluation of emissions from three US facilities, and reports from other organizations.  Thermochemical conversion technologies possess unique characteristics that have potential to substantially reduce the amount of material that is ultimately landfilled.".

When AB 939, the landmark legislation creating the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) and the attendant system of tracking and reducing waste passed the Legislature in 1989, conversion technologies (also referred to as CT’s) were just beginning development, and the state was landfilling 40 million tons of municipal waste per year.

In 2008, even with a claimed recycling rate of 58% (12% of which is green waste that is been placed in landfills for use as alternate daily cover), California landfilled 35.5 million tons of MSW.  When factoring in the substantial decrease in the amount of waste being generated as a result of the recession, the progress in recycling has been totally offset by population growth and increased per capita disposal.

It is unrealistic to believe that the post-recycled fraction of municipal solid waste that is being placed in California’s landfills can be significantly reduced through source reduction, traditional means of recycling and composting alone.

The state’s population is expected to grow by some 10 million people over the next 25 years.  If the legislature fails to achieve final passage of AB 222, California will landfill more than one billion tons of municipal solid waste during that time--and a major opportunity to advance energy independence, reduce AB 32 GHG emissions and advance the production of Low Carbon Fuels will be lost.