Opposition to the Palmer Renewable Energy plan includes the American Lung Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society and the Pioneer Valley Asthma Coalition.
View full sizeAn artist's rendering of the proposed Palmer Renewable Energy biomass plant off Page Boulevard in East Springfield.SPRINGFIELD – The developers of a proposed 35-megawatt wood-burning plant in East Springfield say the opposition to their project is well-organized, determined and well-funded.
The opponents’ arguments, however, are contradicted by science and engineering that show the plant, as designed, will be safe, state-of-the-art and well within standards set by state and federal regulations, according to developer David J. Callahan, president of Palmer Renewable Energy, and his lead consultants.
The effort to construct a $150 million biomass energy plant at 1000 Page Blvd., at Cadwell Drive, has spanned five years, and has included sharp opposition from a grassroots group, Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield, and its allies.
The opposition includes various health organizations including the American Lung Association, the Massachusetts Medical Society and the Pioneer Valley Asthma Coalition.
Callahan, whose family has owned Palmer Paving Corp. for two generations, said he simply would not put his name and reputation behind a plant that would harm people. The developer needs approval from the state Department of Environmental Protection to begin construction.
Callahan and his consultants said they have the research and technology to back his claim. The team includes Dale T. Raczynski, of Epsilon Associates Inc. of Maynard, and Peter A. Valberg, principal of environmental health for Gradient, an environmental and risk science consulting firm based in Cambridge.
The developer and consultants, in a written summary of the project, said “every state agency and scientific expert that has reviewed our project has found it to be safe and clean.”
The City Council has a hearing on Tuesday, at 4:30 p.m., at City Hall, to consider amending or revoking the developer’s special permit, granted in 2008. The developer has threatened a multi-million dollar lawsuit if the permit is revoked, while opponents said a change in the plant’s wood fuel merits the need for a new special permit.
The change in the project involves burning green wood chips rather than a mix of green wood and construction and demolition debris. Callahan and his consultants, however, said the change reduces the environmental impact.
The plant will burn an average of 1,184 tons of green wood chips per day to create electricity. The state’s former secretary of environmental affairs, Ian Bowles, determined that a full environmental impact report was not required based on his determination that it would not be a major contributor to pollution.
David J. Callahan, head of Palmer Paving Corp., left, is seen with Frank Fitzgerald, attorney for Palmer Renewable Energy, the limited liability company, headed by Callahan, that wants to build a biomass plant in East Springfield.The developers have stated the plant will bring 200 construction jobs and 50 well-paid full-time operation jobs, along with significant new tax revenue to Springfield. In addition, as sought by city officials, the company has committed $2 million to address current health issues in Springfield, and more than $1 million in annual payments in lieu of taxes, Callahan said.
But he, Raczynski and Valberg said the case for the plant goes beyond those factors. The assertion by many opponents that the project will harm public health is unfounded, as shown by science, they said.
Raczynski said safety of the plant is enhanced by such factors as a proposed 275-foot high steel stack and an air pollution control system that “represents the best available control technology” on the market. The plant will have 30 times less of an impact on a nearby houses than if that house was next to a home with a wood stove, according to the consultants.
Opponents, including health-related organizations, say the Springfield area already has unacceptable air pollution, and extremely high rates of asthma, particularly among children, which would worsen with the biomass plant.
Valberg said his firm conducted a voluntary comprehensive health risk assessment of the project and concluded there would be “no significant adverse effects on the health status of the local population.”
The average annual impact on emissions such as nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter would be minuscule, Valberg and Raczynski said.
The company provided Springfield with the names of five other environmental consulting firms to review the findings.
Any new source of emissions “has to follow much more stringent standards,” Valberg said.
Regarding asthma rates, Valberg said there are many theories on the causes of asthma, and that indoor air quality in homes and schools is actually more of concern than outdoor air. For opponents to state that the project will worsen asthma rates “is just not scientifically accurate,” Valberg said.
The consultants also take issue with claims by opponents that the project will result in over-stripped forests and woodland.
Northern Tree Service will provide the wood from its own operations and various contracts, generated from ongoing forestry trimming and waste wood, and roadside trimmings, they said.