[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8961-8962]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       BIOMASS ENERGY EQUITY ACT

  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, last Thursday, I introduced the Biomass 
Energy Equity Act of 1999. I was pleased to be joined by Senator Boxer, 
my colleague from California, as an original cosponsor. This 
legislation makes a common-sense change to the renewable energy 
production tax credit by expanding it to include additional types of 
biomass plants. I would like to take a few minutes now to discuss the 
need for this important bill and to describe what it would do.
  Simply put, biomass energy production uses combustion to turn wood 
and organic waste into energy in an environmentally sound process. 
Biomass takes a public liability, organic waste, and converts it into a 
public asset, energy.
  The renewable energy production tax credit enacted in 1992 provides 
incentives to the solid-fuel biomass and wind energy industry to 
develop economically viable and environmentally responsible renewable 
sources of electricity. In enacting that legislation, Congress 
recognized that biomass energy offers substantial environmental 
benefits, specifically a reduced dependence on oil and coal, a 
desirable alternative to open field burnings and the landfilling of 
organic material, and a net reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
  Unfortunately, an error was made that nullified the potential 
societal benefits that incentives for biomass energy production offers. 
The 1992 act narrowly defined an eligible biomass facility as including 
only so-called closed-loop biomass facilities. Closed-loop biomass is a 
hypothetical form of electricity generation where the fuel is planted, 
grown, and harvested specifically and solely for the fuel of the power 
plant. Not only does this definition rule out the significant 
environmental benefit of disposal of organic waste otherwise destined 
for a landfill or to be field-burned, but also this scenario is not 
feasible and therefore remains unused. Since the biomass tax credit was 
passed, no taxpayer, not one, has taken advantage of the tax benefit. 
Simply put, the closed-loop tax credit is not a sufficient incentive to 
develop a costly ``fuel plantation,'' which entails large-scale land 
purchases, property taxes, and growing material for the sole purpose of 
burning it. By demanding that newly grown material be used rather than 
organic waste, the closed-loop biomass definition flies in the face of 
the commonly accepted environmental principle that products should be 
put to as many ``highest value'' uses as possible.
  Mr. President, several states, including Maine, are deregulating 
their energy industries. Starting March 1, 2000, electricity consumers 
in Maine will be able to shop for electricity as they now shop for 
long-distance telephone service.
  While the specifics remain very much up in the air, the country is 
progressing toward restructuring electricity generation and 
distribution. While there are many clear economic benefits to a 
deregulated energy market, without incentives like the one I am 
proposing, green, renewable energy production like biomass is unlikely 
to be able to survive in deregulated market.
  The legislation that I have introduced would expand the eligibility 
of the biomass tax credit to include conventional biomass plants. This 
legislation is designed to encourage a source of energy generation that 
offers substantial air quality, waste management, and greenhouse gas 
reduction benefits. The national biomass industry currently uses over 
22,000,000 tons of wood waste a year. The waste the biomass industry 
converts into energy otherwise would be disposed of in one of three 
ways: burned in an open field, which generates pollution not energy; 
landfilled, where it fills limited landfill space and biodegrades, 
emitting methane, carbon dioxide, and other gases, or left in the woods 
or fields, increasing the risk and severity of forest fires.
  The air quality benefits of biomass energy are of particular 
importance. According to the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use 
Management, an organization of all the Northeastern States Air Quality 
Bureaus, biomass energy produces less nitrogen oxide than biomass 
alternatives, and furthermore, it generates virtually no sulfur 
dioxide, particulate matter, or mercury. Biomass energy production also 
results in a net reduction of greenhouse gases, as I have previously 
stated.
  In addition to their environmental benefits, biomass plants 
contribute to

[[Page 8962]]

the economy of many rural towns throughout America. Because of their 
dependence on organic waste, biomass facilities are usually located in 
rural areas where they are often important engines of economic growth. 
For example, in the small town of Sherman, ME, a biomass facility 
provides 56 percent of the property tax base. It also directly employs 
23 individuals and indirectly provides work for hundreds of truck 
drivers, wood operators, mill workers and maintenance contractors.
  In another small town of Maine, Athens, ME, a biomass facility 
provides a third of that small town's tax base and directly employs 20 
people, while supporting a local wood operator who, in turn, employs 40 
people.
  The point is, the economy in many of the small towns in Maine, in 
towns such as Livermore, Ashland, Greenville, Fort Fairfield, Stratton 
and West Enfield benefit considerably from these biomass facilities. In 
total, there are over 100 biomass facilities in the United States, 
representing an investment in excess of $7 billion. These facilities 
contribute jobs, property taxes and a disposal point for waste 
products. In addition, rural biomass facilities also provide ash for 
use by local farmers, reducing their purchases of lime. I understand 
there is regularly more demand for the ash produced by these biomass 
plants than there is supply.
  With biomass energy production, nothing is wasted. Biomass turns 
waste products--the byproducts of timber, paper or farming operations--
into needed energy, wasting nothing. Even the ash is returned to the 
Earth to grow organic matter yielding both crops and waste to generate 
still more electricity.
  We in Congress often discuss ways to help rural America. I know that 
is of great concern to the Presiding Officer. This proposal offers an 
opportunity to do so in a way that not only benefits the economy of 
small towns in rural America but also in a way that generates 
considerable environmental benefits that we all can enjoy.
  This measure makes both economic and environmental sense. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation and 
working for its passage.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

                          ____________________