According to the PFI, at least 27 companies representing 41 pellet manufacturing mills have pledged to support the PFI standards program. PFI’s membership includes approximately 60% of the pellet mills operating in the United States, according to PFI.

Manufacturers of PFI-graded pellet fuels will be allowed to place labels on their packaging that assure consumers and retailers that the pellets meet the new standards. In order to use the PFI certification label, manufacturers must adhere to the PFI standard, which includes third-party mill inspections by an ALSC-accredited inspection agency as a part of the compliance procedure.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which will finalize its own regulations for residential wood heaters later this year, is expected to adopt the PFI standard for wood pellets.

The study, commissioned by the National Alliance of Forest Owners (NAFO) and conducted by Forisk Consulting, a nationally respected market analysis firm, provides the most recent example of the need to amend the Tailoring Rule’s treatment of woody biomass before the rule is implemented on January 2, 2011.

“The Tailoring Rule is a powerful deterrent to forest biomass energy investments and job opportunities,” NAFO President and CEO David P. Tenny said of the study’s findings. “We’re already seeing the economic impact of the Tailoring Rule, as renewable energy projects are delayed or stopped altogether due to regulatory uncertainty. Left unchanged, the Tailoring Rule threatens the long-term viability of the biomass energy sector which, in turn, undermines the renewable energy goals of the Administration and Congress.”

The study finds that the regulatory uncertainty created by the EPA has contributed to stalled investment in at least 23 near-term projects representing 1,519 megawatts of potential electrical capacity while noting that developers of a number of additional projects affected by the rule have chosen to remain anonymous.

Dr. Brooks Mendell, the lead author of the study, cited the conflict between renewable energy goals and the Tailoring Rule, “Pre-Tailoring Rule projections suggest that up to 19 states would be unable to satisfy a minimum renewable electricity standard of 15% by 2021. Taking into account impacts on investment in wood bioenergy projects, particularly in wood-rich states and regions, implementation of the Tailoring Rule could leave up to 30 states unable to meet renewable energy goals.”

The Forisk analysis complements a recent study released by scientists at the University of Washington concluding that the treatment of biomass under the Tailoring Rule will promote the continued use of fossil fuels, increase greenhouse gas emissions from national forests and jeopardize U.S. jobs in the forest products industry (see www.corrim.org/pubs/reports.asp).

It also confirms concerns raised by 113 U.S. scientists in a letter to Congress opposing the Tailoring Rule’s treatment of biomass energy because of its inconsistency with sound science and its negative impact on the development of new emission reducing biomass energy facilities (See www.nafoalliance.org/scientists).

A bipartisan group of Congressional lawmakers along with state and local political leaders across the country are urging the EPA to amend the Tailoring Rule’s treatment of woody biomass energy before the rule takes effect on January 2, 2011.

The one-page summary and the full economic impact study can be found here: nafoalliance.org/impact-study.

EPA is under a current court order to issue final rules on January 16, 2011 and is seeking in its motion to the court to extend the schedule to finalize the rules by April 2012. EPA said additional time is needed for the agency to re-propose the rules based on a full assessment of information received since the rules were proposed.

“After receiving additional data through the extensive public comment period, EPA is requesting more time to develop these important rules,” said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation.

“We want to ensure these rules are practical to implement and protect all Americans from dangerous pollutants such as mercury and soot, which affect kids’ development, aggravate asthma and cause heart attacks,” McCarthy added.

EPA’s original Boiler MACT rule proposal was met with heavy critisism from industry groups who charged that the new rule created excessive air regulations and would have a devastating impact on manufacturing jobs across the country, specifically the wood bioenergy, pulp and paper and forest products industries.

In order to meet a court order requiring the EPA to issue final rules in January 2011, the agency proposed standards in April 2010. While EPA requested and received some information from industry before the proposal, the comments EPA received following the proposal shed new light on a number of key areas, including the scope and coverage of the rules and the way to categorize the various boiler-types. Industry groups and others offered this information during the public comment period after EPA proposed the rule.

After reviewing the data and the more than 4,800 public comments, the agency said that it believes it is appropriate to issue a revised proposal that reflects the new data and allows for additional public comment.

The anticipated industrial boiler Maximum Achievable Control Technology rule, or “IB MACT,” would regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants, such as certain acid gases, organics, metals, and possibly other pollutants, from industrial boilers and would likely affect biomass boilers like the one planned for Plant Mitchell.

“Georgia Power is committed to furthering the development of renewable energy in Georgia,” said Jeff Burleson, Georgia Power’s director of Resource Policy and Planning. “We’re disappointed to have to delay this large biomass project and the benefits it can deliver. However, by delaying capital spending on the project we’re significantly reducing the cost risk to customers.”

Georgia Power had originally planned to begin retrofit construction at Plant Mitchell in April 2011 with the unit becoming operational in June 2012. A new project schedule has yet to be determined.

The pro-ethanol trade group Growth Energy and 54 ethanol manufacturers petitioned the EPA last March to allow gasoline rated as standard transportation fuel to contain up to 15% ethanol by volume, known as E15. U.S. gasoline is now approved to contain up to 10% ethanol. The group filed the request as an emergency waiver appeal to forego the usual multi-year data gathering and research process associated with such fuel changes. According to agency rules, the appeal required a yea or nay response within six months, but agency officials now say that time frame won’t likely be met.

The head of the EPA said the agency may have to work past the December 1 deadline because it is still reviewing test results on how the higher blend rate would affect engines “across the board,” including cars, trucks, snow mobiles, motor boats and lawnmowers. Pro-ethanol interests have promoted the results of a federal study prepared by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) for the U.S. Dept. of Energy in fall 2008 that looked at the effect of blends as high as E15 and E20 and found relatively few problems in newer autos. Small engine and automotive groups say the study, which was more observational in nature and lacked scientific controls, is inconclusive at best, leaves many questions unanswered and is primarily an indicator that much more research on higher ethanol blends in small engines is required.

Science indicates that a higher “blend wall” is safe for automobile engines, Vilsack said recently in an interview at a conference on global hunger in Des Moines, Iowa. Increasing production of ethanol, made from corn in the U.S., would also meet national goals of energy independence and aid the industry as it attempts to expand. “We will continue to publicly advocate an increase, and privately advocate,” Vilsack said. “Our hope is they understand the significance of this decision as it relates to the future of the industry.”

The U.S. biofuels industry is challenged by infrastructure limitations and a government-imposed limit, called a blend wall, that restricts to 10.2 percent the amount of ethanol that can be mixed with gasoline, the Government Accountability Office said in a recent report. This past spring, a group representing ethanol producers filed an emergency request asking EPA to waive its standard data-gathering process for transportation fuel changes and make E15—a 50% increase from E10 blends—a standard transportation fuel. The emergency waiver request requires EPA to deliver a decision by December 1. The request has encountered resistance from a growing number of interests, including small engine and marine manufacturers and more recently major auto manufacturers that claim greater biofuels content may hurt engine performance and increase corrosion and that more research is needed.

Through the LCSFA, participants along the whole value chain (from biomass feedstock producers, gasification and F-T technology providers, and project developers, to consumers of the product and manufacturers of affected engines, vehicles and equipment) can speak with one voice to achieve needed improvements and incentives.

On September 25, the LCSFA urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its comments to promote clean, renewable advanced biofuels that improve air quality, reduce GHG emissions, and are compatible with the existing engines, equipment and fuels infrastructure. This week, the EPA will begin considering comments on its “Changes to Renewable Fuel Standard Program” (“RFS2 Proposal”). The LCSFA’s comments are endorsed by a range of partners including Auburn University, Audi America, Chemrec AB, Mercedes Benz USA, Pacific Renewable Fuels, Renewable Energy Institute International, and Volkswagen.