Energy from Biomass in California

Biomass Today 6 % of CA renewable energy supply Currently ~22 operating plants 12 non-operating, idle plants 7.3 million tons of biomass and 532 MW of electricity Facing significant economic challenges, energy contracts expired or expiring

Biomass Today Owner Plant Name County Nameplate MW Price Exp. Contract Exp. Take Forest Material   Expired/ing Energy Price Greenleaf Power Tracy Biomass San Joaquin 23 2014 Oct 2020 Y Idle EWP Renewable Corp DG Fairhaven Humboldt 18.75 2016 Jan 2017 Feb Humboldt Redwood Co Scotia 25 2016 April 2025 Honey Lake Power Lassen 35.5 2016 July 2019 July Rio Bravo Fresno Fresno 24.3 2019 Feb IHI Power Generation Chinese Station Tuolumne 19.5 2017 Jan Rio Bravo Rocklin Placer 24.4 2020 Mar Wheelabrator Technologies Wheelabrator Shasta Shasta 50 2016 Aug 2018 April Energy Investors Fund Burney Forest Power 31 2016 Oct Expiring Contract in 16/17/18 Collins Collins Pine Plumas 12 2016 May No Contact – Idle Community Recycling Dinuba Power Tulare 11 Madera Power Madera Covanta Delano Kern Mendota Burney Mountain Power 10 Mount Lassen Power Pacific Oroville Power Butte 18 North American Power Blue Lake 10.5 Otoka Energy Buena Vista Biomass Amador 16 Shasta Renewable Resources Shasta Renewable Res. 6 Sierra Forest Products Sierra Power 9.5

Biomass Fuel Sources Ag: orchard removals, prunings, vineyards removals Shells and pits: almond, walnut, pistachio, peach In-forest, sawmill residue, slash from forest thinning and lumber production Urban: brush, tree-service, clean wood from demo & construction activities

Environmental Benefits of Biomass Avoided Wildfire prevention Prevents field burning SJVAPCD allowing more agricultural waste to be burned in open piles 4 of 5 worst areas, based on ozone and particulate matter, are in the Central Valley Biomass plants reduce criteria pollutants by 98% compared to field burning State landfill diversion goals California has set a statewide goal of obtaining a 75% reduction in solid waste landfilled. Removing organics such as biomass materials from the landfill is a critical component to achieving this goal.

Environmental Benefits Benefits to air quality by calculating the avoidance of various pollutants and GHG  In Forest Fuel PM 10 NOx VOC/Hydrocarbon CO CH4 Total Avoided Emission (lbs./BDT) 12.5 4.2 9.2 121.3 126   Conversion (ton/lb) 0.0005 Emission Value ($/ton) $1,500 $3,720 $395 $558 $12.73 Biomass Benefit ($/BDT) $9.38 $7.84 $1.81 $33.85 $0.81 $53.7  Ag Fuel PM 10 NOx VOC/Hydrocarbon CO Total Avoided Emission (lbs./BDT) 9.1 6.3 67.0   Conversion (ton/lb) 0.0005 Emission Value ($/ton) $1,500 $3,720 $395 $558 Biomass Benefit ($/BDT) $6.85 $11.76 $1.25 $18.70 $38.55

Tree mortality is a statewide problem

Bad Situation in the Forest Since 2010, 66 million trees have died in the 6 county region of Central and Southern Sierras According to CalFire, in the central and southern Sierra Nevada range, 80% of trees are dead 2013 wildfire in Yosemite National Park discharged as much carbon as 2.3 million cars emit in a year

Air Curtain Burners not a Long Term Solution CalFire spent $1 million on Air-Curtain Burners in 2016 to clear dead trees

Field Burning: Severe Impacts in the Central Valley American Union Elementary School, 10 miles south east of Rio Bravo Fresno near the disadvantaged community of Easton, Friday 2/19

A Rough Road for biomass Governor’s Emergency Proclamation – October 2015 Directed PUC to extend contracts for biomass plants taking fuel from defined high hazard zones. Statewide problem, not just 6 county RAM solicitations ordered set minimum requirements for three IOUs: 1) PG&E at 12 MW; SCE at 12 MW; and SDG&E at 6MW Governor signed legislation that will require utilities and large muni’s over 100,00 customer to: Procure 125 MW of biomass by December 1, 2016 80% of fuel from HHZ on an annual basis 5 year contracts

Conclusions Tree mortality crisis is a state-wide problem – need a statewide solution Not a short-term problem CalFire hoping that they can manage it within a 5 year timeframe Colorado took 15 years Recent legislative activity is a good first step Fuel requirements are challenging GGRF or some other sustainable funding is needed because of the GHG and SLCP reductions associated with biomass Appropriately value the non-energy benefits of biomass Consider regional solutions for areas like the Central Valley