Archive for February, 2010
ACC – Who is buying the Energy?
February 18th, 2010 | 
Author: ** B.C. Hydro says it has no agreement from the Aboriginal Cogeneration Corporation to purchase power from its planned micro-gasifer at Mission Flats.
** Domtar says no plans to purchase heat or electricity from this project.
** BC Hydro says – The project would require designation from the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources to be considered as Clean or Renewable Electricity.
** Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources states –
Clean biomass – British Columbia’s Clean or Renewable Electricity Definitions
http://www.empr.gov.bc.ca/EAED/AEPB/Documents/CleanEnergyJune.pdf
Clean biomass does not include organic material that has been treated with inorganic substances such as paints, coal-tar creosote, pentachlorophenol or chromated copper arsenate, to change, protect, or supplement the physical properties of the materials.
Stay Tuned………
Posted in 
CBC News – Doctors oppose Kamloops gasification plant
‘The large, large majority said we don’t want this thing. It’s a bad thing, and it shouldn’t be here.’—Dr. Steve Rollheiser
One hundred B.C. Interior doctors have joined the fight against a plan to turn old railway ties into so-called clean energy at a plant in Kamloops.
The Aboriginal Cogeneration Corporation (ACC) says the proposed plant would first chop the creosote-soaked railway ties into small pieces and then use a combination of heat and steam — a process called gasification — to extract a synthetic gas.
That gas, which is similar to propane or natural gas, would then be burned in two one-megawatt generators to produce electricity, which the company would then sell to BC Hydro.
Both Interior Health and the Ministry of Environment have given the project the green light, but residents, environmental activists and politicians from all three levels of government have spoken out against the plan.
Dr. Steve Rollheiser, speaking for the group of physicians, said the gasification plant would be a bad fit for Kamloops.
“Not one of the physicians polled spoke in favour of this thing. Some people were equivocal. The large, large majority said we don’t want this thing. It’s a bad thing, and it shouldn’t be here,” said Rollheiser.
“Kamloops is basically a couple of valley bottoms and hillside communities and the air shed or the environment makes us prone to inversions, particularly in the winter. Our concern is that if this project goes ahead and it does end up releasing a significant amount of air pollution, that’s going to challenge an already somewhat jeopardized air shed,” he said.
Minimal emissions, says minister
B.C. Environment Minister Barry Penner said he understands the concerns, but said emissions from the gasification plant will be minimal.
“The emissions profile from that plant will be very small, roughly equivalent to a single wood-burning stove. So when you think about what a single wood-burning stove produces in the entire community, that’s what we’re talking about for this particular project,” he told CBC News.
“We listen to what people have to say, but we also have to make decisions based on science. That’s the role of the ministry of environment and I think that’s what most people viewing this thing from an impartial view would want the ministry of environment to do,” said Penner.
But Rollheiser counters that the project was only tested in North Dakota, on a much smaller scale.
“They’ve taken a scale model of this thing, shown that it performs according to their expectations as far as environmental safety is concerned, but there’s no evidence of a fully scaled up, industrial-sized project of this type, particularly in an enclosed air shed area like the Kamloops one,” he said.
In April, the B.C. government approved the project for up to $1.5 million in funding.
Kim Sigurdson, the president of ACC, acknowledged the company hasn’t done a good job of communicating with the public but said he hopes some of the fears people have will be alleviated when company officials appear at a Kamloops Chamber of Commerce public forum on March 11.
Gasification and Incineration – Are they the same?
Of course the Proponents will say they are not the same.
Gasification, Pyrolysis and Plasma!
Despite the grandiose claims of industry, the facts prove that these technologies are in reality “incinerators in disguise” that heat the waste materials, and then burn the waste gases and emit dioxin and other pollutants into the air.
All of these technologies emit dioxins and other harmful pollutants into the air, soil and water, and they are defined as incineration by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the European Union – [1] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Title 40: Protection of Environment, Hazardous Waste Management System: General, subpart B-definitions, 260.10, current as of February 5, 2008.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency distinguishes pollution from mass burn incinerators and starved air gasification units by the amount of pollution emitted, not by the type. In other words, both starved air and excess air combustors emit the same pollutants into the atmosphere, but in different amounts. For example, EPA data show that gasification units emit more nitrogen oxides and dioxins than incinerators, and equal amounts of mercury.
Incineration and gasification two sides of the same coin. Both have smokestacks which emit pollution into the atmosphere. Both burn the same type of fuel: municipal solid waste. Both expose waste to similar temperatures: 1000 to 1600 degrees F. Therefore, it should be no surprise that the lists of toxic air pollutants emitted by both are identical. Pound- for-pound comparisons of the levels of emissions from gasification units and incinerators are for some compounds higher, some identical, and some lower, but in every case represent an unnecessary risk to environmental protection and public health.
Gasification units emit 83% more furans and dioxins than mass burn incinerators. Dioxin is one of the most toxic substances known; there is no safe level. Dioxin is a known human carcinogen.
The short track record of pyrolysis, plasma and gasification incinerator technologies has shown even higher costs, less dependability, and inconsistent energy generation. In addition, data show that dioxins, furans and other toxins are formed in these systems, and in some cases, toxins are formed in higher quantities than in conventional mass-burn incinerators.
INCINERATION AND GASIFICATION: A TOXIC COMPARISON
http://savekamloops.ca/Docs/gasification-massburn.pdf
Incineration of Municipal Solid Waste
http://savekamloops.ca/Docs/FS2pollution.pdf
An Industry Blowing Smoke
http://savekamloops.ca/Docs/BlowingSmokeReport.pdf
Incinerators in Disguise
http://savekamloops.ca/Docs/Incinerators-in-Disguis.pdf
Gasifier plant is “unacceptable”
February 1,2010
By JASON HEWLETT
Daily News Staff Reporter
There are few if any good places in the world to build a creosote gasification plant, and Kamloops certainly isn’t one of them.
That was the message a pair of university professors delivered to more than 250 people Sunday afternoon at a public forum addressing health issues related to a gasification project in the city.
It was received with thunderous applause from the crowd, many of whom attended a related rally and march from city hall to Kamloops-North Thompson MLA Terry Lake’s office the day before.
“This is unacceptable and should not be tolerated,” Douw Steyn of the University of B.C. said of the gasification project.
Steyn, an air pollution specialist in atmospheric sciences, and Thompson Rivers University nursing instructor Penny Powers spoke for about an hour in the university’s Alumni Theatre on Sunday.
Steyn focused on air quality in Kamloops while Powers talked about the health risks of burning creosote.
Aboriginal Cogeneration Corp. received a permit this month from the Ministry of Environment allowing it to operate a demonstration gasification plant that will use a gasifier and combustion engine to create two megawatts of electricity from railway ties.
The proposal has come under fire from opponents, who have banded under the Save Kamloops moniker. They say the province is allowing testing of technology in a valley where it is not suited or wanted.
Steyn and Powers said people should be outraged that the province approved the plan after City council turned it down.
Steyn said Kamloops already has poor air quality caused by wood, vehicle and industrial emissions. Pollutants are frequently trapped in the valley bottom due to atmospheric inversion.
The City should have developed an air quality management plan years ago and must do so now before conditions worsen, he said.
“From an air quality perspective, you should absolutely not consider (the plant),” said Steyn, adding any energy produced by the project is not worth the risk.
“You do not use the energy you gain as justification for the incinerator. That’s putting the cart way before the horse,” he said.
Powers said even dust particles created when creosote-laden railway ties are sawed up prior to burning are bad.
The particles are suspended in the air for long periods of time, travel great distances and, when inhaled, cause a variety of ailments including lung cancer and asthma, she said.
And the toxic by-products created after ties are burned are never destroyed, said Powers. They stay in the air, collect on water or end up in the sewer.
“Such a facility is quite a danger to the people of Kamloops and other regions,” she said. To make matters worse, there is no way to monitor the plant to make sure it is operating properly.
Councillors Denis Walsh and Nancy Bepple attended the forum and were present at Saturday’s rally and march — which as many as 800 people participated in.
The group met in front of city hall at 10:30 a.m. and were escorted by police to Lake’s office on the 600 block of Tranquille Road. RCMP blocked off that section of street so the rally could continue safely.
Anita Strong took part in the event. She said the large turnout speaks to how strongly the issue has resonated in Kamloops.
“It’s definitely an issue that touches everyone in the community and everyone is passionate about,” she said.
A number of people spoke at Lake’s office. Strong said each speaker had the same concerns.
“The absolute big thing is health. They don’t want to live here and breathe these toxins.”