The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously today, with Second District Supervisor Michelle Bushnell absent, to send a letter asking an affiliate of the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) to extend the public comment period on a draft environmental impact report for a controversial biomass energy project by 30 days.
The letter, brought forward by Fourth District Supervisor Natalie Arroyo, notes that the environmental document stretches more than 1,300 pages, with the proposed 60-day review period stretching across the presidential election and the Thanksgiving holiday, asking that it be extended through Jan. 22 to “promote informed public participation.” Additionally, the letter asks for public meetings scheduled to gather input on the document in the coming weeks be postponed or that additional forums be held in the future.
Representatives of Golden State Natural Resources (GSNR), a nonprofit public benefit corporation created by RCRC, who addressed the board today indicated they would take the extension to the GSNR board for consideration at its meeting next week.
Created by RCRC in 2019, GSNR is proposing two build large scale facilities in Tuolumne and Lassen counties that would combine to manufacture a projected 1 million metric tons of wood pellets to be shipped overseas and burned in biomass power plants. Humboldt County’s connection to the project comes by way of First District Supervisor Rex Bohn, its appointed representative to RCRC, who also serves on the GSNR board.
RCRC President and CEO Patrick Blacklock told the board of supervisors this morning the project is primarily designed to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires and increase forest resilience by reducing accumulated fuel loads in the forests.
Blacklock said the project would see forest debris — slash, cuttings and downed trees — hauled from a 100-mile radius to proposed facilities in Lassen and Tuolumne counties, where they will be pressed into industrial wood pellets. The pellets would then be shipped by freight to the Port of Stockton, from which they would be shipped overseas to be burned in biomass power plants.
In addition to the current environmental review process, Blacklock said the project will need discretionary permits from Tuolumne and Lassen counties, as well as the Port of Stockton, as well as from various resource agencies.
When the matter opened for board questions, Arroyo noted that through Bohn the county does have a “leadership role” in the project and questioned why prescribed fire was not considered as an alternative to reduce forest fuel loads in the environmental review document.
Blocklock said controlled burns weren’t assessed as an alternative because the project considers them complimentary, saying some forest areas can’t be treated with prescribed burns, while others would benefit from both burns and “mechanical treatment.”
Fifth District Supervisor Steve Madrone noted the project is “huge,” and questioned whether it might mitigate fossil fuel emissions if it were instead focused on building more, smaller locally sited bio mass facilities. He also noted that GNSR’s working with the British energy company Drax, which has been tied to a host of air quality violations in the southern United States and with which GSNR has signed a non-binding memorandum of understanding on the project, is a “public relations nightmare.”
About 10 people addressed the board during public comment, all of them supporting sending the letter to request more time for public review of the environmental document and collectively expressing a variety of concerns about the proposed projects, from its potential impacts on the climate crisis and neighboring communities to forest health.
After the board voted to send the letter requesting the extension, Madrone said he was concerned the board may not have time to actually weigh in on the EIR itself, suggesting it send a statement that it is not in support of the project due to projected greenhouse gas emissions, climate impacts and “significant environmental justice impacts.” After some discussion, it was decided it was premature to weigh in on the project as a whole but Madrone would draft a letter expressing concern over particular aspects of the environmental review for the board to consider at its next meeting.
Bohn then questioned whether this would “open it up” for the board to question the decisions of any entity one of its members is appointed to serve on, noting this project has been in the works for eight years. He then said he felt like the board was missing the more urgent goals of the project.
“We’re kind of forgetting what got us into the forest, and that’s the fires,” he said, wondering aloud whether “we’re getting to a place” where they wouldn’t send helicopters and fire trucks to battle a wildfire “because of emissions.”
Humboldt County Administrative Officer Elishia Hayes then addressed Bohn’s question.
“When a board member is appointed to an outside commission or board, then you represent the county as a whole in those decisions and obviously there are times where, case in point right now, the board isn’t in lock step on an issue,” she said. “Should any board member feel another board member has not done that appropriately or disagrees, then any board member does have the right to bring forward a discussion such as the one that’s taking place today.”
“Great,” Bohn responded. “Thank you. Fun stuff.”
Read more on GSNR’s proposed project here, and find the full project draft EIR here.
This article appears in Why California Housing Costs are So High.
