BILL ANALYSIS
AB 222
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator S. Joseph Simitian, Chairman
2009-2010 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 222
AUTHOR: Adams and Ma
AMENDED: July 8, 2009
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE: July 13, 2009
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Caroll
Mortensen
SUBJECT : ENERGY: BIOFUELS
SUMMARY :
Existing law :
1)Requires retail sellers of electricity to meet 20% of sales
from eligible renewable resources by December 31, 2010.
This is known as the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)
(Public Utilities Code 399.11et seq.).
2)Defines renewable resources eligible under the RPS as
biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel
cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation,
digester gas, municipal solid waste conversion, landfill
gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, or tidal current.
3)Further defines "solid waste conversion" for purposes of the
RPS to mean, a technology that uses a noncombustion thermal
process to convert solid waste to a clean-burning fuel for
the purpose of generating electricity, and that meets all of
the following criteria: The technology does not use air or
oxygen in the conversion process, except ambient air to
maintain temperature control.
a) The technology produces no discharges of air
contaminants or emissions, including greenhouse gases as
defined in Health and Safety Code (HSC) 38505.
b) The technology produces no discharges to surface or
groundwaters of the state.
AB 222
Page 2
c) The technology produces no hazardous wastes.
d) To the maximum extent feasible, the technology removes
all recyclable materials and marketable green waste
compostable materials from the solid waste stream prior
to the conversion process and the owner or operator of
the facility certifies that those materials will be
recycled or composted.
e) The facility at which the technology is used is in
compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and
ordinances.
f) The technology meets any other conditions established
by the California Energy Commission (CEC).
g) The facility certifies that any local agency sending
solid waste to the facility diverted at least 30 percent
of all solid waste it collects through solid waste
reduction, recycling, and composting. For purposes of
this paragraph, "local agency" means any city, county, or
special district, or subdivision thereof, which is
authorized to provide solid waste handling services.
Under the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Act) of
1989 :
1)Requires each city or county source reduction and recycling
element to include an implementation schedule that shows a
city or county must divert 25 % of solid waste from landfill
disposal or transformation by January 1, 1995, through
source reduction, recycling, and composting activities, and
must divert 50% of solid waste on and after January 1, 2000.
(PRC 41780).
2)Defines "gasification" to mean a technology that uses a
noncombustion thermal process to convert solid waste to a
clean burning fuel for the purpose of generating
electricity, and that, at minimum, meets all of the
following criteria:
a) The technology does not use air or oxygen in the
conversion process, except ambient air to maintain
AB 222
Page 3
temperature control.
b) The technology produces no discharges of air
contaminants or emissions, including greenhouse gases, as
defined in HSC 38505(g).
c) The technology produces no discharges to surface or
groundwaters of the state.
d) The technology produces no hazardous waste.
e) To the maximum extent feasible, the technology removes
all recyclable materials and marketable green waste
compostable materials from the solid waste stream prior
to the conversion process and the owner or operator of
the facility certifies that those materials will be
recycled or composted.
f) The facility where the technology is used is in
compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and
ordinances.
g) The facility certifies to the board that any local
agency sending solid waste to the facility is in
compliance with this division and has reduced, recycled,
or composted solid waste to the maximum extent feasible,
and the board makes a finding that the local agency has
diverted at least 30% of all solid waste through source
reduction, recycling, and composting.
3)Defines "solid waste disposal," "disposal," or "dispose" to
mean the final deposition of solid wastes onto land (PRC
40192).
4)Defines" solid waste facility" to include a solid waste
transfer or processing station, a composting facility, a
gasification facility, a transformation facility, and a
disposal facility. For purposes of Part 5 (PRC 45000),
"solid waste facility" additionally includes a solid waste
operation that may be carried out pursuant to an enforcement
agency notification, as provided in regulations adopted by
the board (PRC 40194).
AB 222
Page 4
5)Defines "transformation" as incineration, pyrolysis,
distillation, or biological conversion other than
composting. "Transformation" does not include composting,
gasification, or biomass conversion (PRC 40201).
This bill :
1) Allows energy generated from a "biorefinery" to count under
the RPS as long as the biorefinery conforms to existing air
and water quality laws.
2) Adds a definition of "biorefinery" to the RPS that means a
facility that uses a nonincineration, thermal, chemical,
biological, or mechanical conversion process, or a
combination of those processes, to produce a clean burning
fuel for the purposes of generating electricity or a
renewable fuel from either carbonaceous material, not
derived from fossil fuels or from a solid waste feedstock.
Carbonaceous materials include, but are not limited to, any
of the following:
a) Dedicated energy crops.
b) Agricultural crop residues.
c) Bark, lawn, yard, and garden clippings.
d) Leaves, silvicultural residue, and tree and brush
prunings.
e) Wood, wood chips, and wood waste.
f) Nonrecyclable pulp or nonrecyclable paper materials.
g) Waste fat, oils, and greases.
3) Requires a biorefinery to satisfy all of the following
criteria:
a) Meet or exceed standards set by the State Air
Resources Board (ARB), local air pollution control
districts, or local air quality management districts
regarding air contaminants or emissions, including
AB 222
Page 5
greenhouse gases, as defined in HSC 38505(g).
b) Meet or exceed standards set by the State Water
Resources Control Board or regional water quality
control boards regarding discharges to surface waters or
groundwaters of the state.
c) Routinely test the ash or other residue from the
facility at least once quarterly, or on a more frequent
basis as determined by the agency responsible for
regulating the testing and disposal of ash or residue.
Notwithstanding HSC 25143.5, if hazardous wastes are
present, the ash or residue is sent to a class 1
hazardous waste disposal facility.
d) Preprocess the solid waste feedstock to remove, to
the maximum extent feasible, all recyclable materials
prior to the conversion process.
e) Meet all of the requirements of Division 30 of the
PRC commencing with 40000 for solid waste handling
prior to the conversion process.
f) Is in compliance with all applicable laws,
regulations, and ordinances.
4) States that a facility utilizing anaerobic digestion is not
a biorefinery.
5) Requires biorefinery operators to submit an annual report
to the CEC summarizing the percentage of feedstock
processed through the facility that is derived from fossil
fuel sources.
6) Allows only the nonfossil biogenic portion of the feedstock
processed through a biorefinery shall be considered
eligible for RPS credit.
7) Adds a "biorefinery that processes solid waste" to the
definition of "solid waste facility".
8) Deletes "pyrolysis", "biomass conversion" and
"distillation" for the definition "transformation" and
AB 222
Page 6
states that biomass conversion, anaerobic digestion and
solid waste conversion at a biorefinery is NOT
"transformation".
9) Adds a definition of "anaerobic digestion" to mean the
process using the bacterial breakdown of compostable
organic material in the absence of oxygen and meeting other
parameters as established by the IWMB.
10)Disallows solid waste diverted to a biorefinery to 'count'
for diversion credit for the 50% diversion mandated.
11)Allows solid waste diverted to a biorefinery can 'count'
toward diversion credit if the diversion rate is changed in
the future to greater than 50%.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of Bill . According to the authors, the purpose of
this bill is to encourage the production of low-cost
biofuels and green power by converting municipal solid waste
into a fuel source that can be used to produce renewable
electricity. The authors and supporters believe these goals
can be achieved by permitting solid waste conversion
facilities that convert municipal solid waste into
electricity to count toward a utility's RPS and by creating
incentives for local governments to fuel the conversion
facilities with solid waste fuel stocks.
2)What are Conversion Technologies / Biorefineries? According
to the IWMB, conversion technologies, or as refered to in AB
222, "biorefineries", are facilites that can process organic
materials for energy and use three main
pathways-thermochemical, biochemical, and physicochemical.
Forms of energy that can be produced include heat, steam,
electricity, natural gas, and liquid fuels.
Thermochemical conversion processes include combustion,
gasification, and pyrolysis. Thermochemical conversion is
characterized by higher temperatures and faster conversion
rates. It is best suited for lower moisture feedstocks.
Thermochemical routes can convert all of the organic portion
of suitable feedstocks. The inorganic fraction (ash) of a
AB 222
Page 7
feedstock does not contribute to the energy products but may
contribute to fouling of high temperature equipment,
increased nutrient loading in wastewater treatment and
disposal facilities, and in some cases by providing
marketable coproducts or adding disposal cost. Inorganic
constituents may also accelerate some of the conversion
reactions.
Biochemical conversion processes include aerobic conversion
(i.e., composting), anaerobic digestion (which occurs in
landfills and controlled reactors or digesters), and
anaerobic fermentation (for example, the conversion of
sugars from cellulose to ethanol). Biochemical conversion
proceeds at lower temperatures and lower reaction rates.
Higher moisture feedstocks are generally good candidates for
biochemical processes. The lignin fraction of biomass can
not be converted by anaerobic biochemical means and only
very slowly through aerobic decomposition. As a
consequence, a significant fraction of woody and some other
fibrous feedstocks exits the process as a residue that may
or may not have market value. The residue called digestate
can be composted.
Physiochemical conversion involves the physical and chemical
synthesis of products from feedstocks (for example,
biodiesel from waste fats, oils, and grease--known as FOG)
and is primarily associated with the transformation of fresh
or used vegetable oils, animal fats, greases, tallow, and
other suitable feedstocks into liquid fuels or biodiesel.
3)Concerns with Biorefineries . While these technologies have
been used to process solid waste in some form or fashion,
they have not been widely accepted as alternatives to
landfills in the United States. There are some pilot, bench
scale and other types of projects located in California and
other states and countries. UC Riverside has completed
numerous studies on these various technologies, but
questions still remain regarding proven track records and
consistent emmissions data. This is especially true of the
thermochemical processes that use mixed wastes as
feedstocks. Concerns still remain regarding the safety and
viability of these technologies and the potential impact
they have on the existing solid waste infrastructure and
AB 222
Page 8
recycling markets in California.
4)Renewable Portfolio Standard Background . The RPS was
adopted in 2002 with a primary goal of reducing air
emissions from electricity generation to improve public
health. To achieve that goal the investor-owned (IOU) and
publicly owned utilities (POU), along with other retail
electricity providers, are required to procure 20% of
electricity sales from specified renewable resources. Since
that time more than 900 megawatts of new renewable
generation has been brought on-line. Nearly 6,700 MW of
renewable generation has been contracted to come online in
the coming years.
5)Proposed Definition of "Biorefinery" vs existing definition
of "Solid Waste Conversion" . Current law (PRC
25741(b)(3)), which AB 222 is proposing to repeal, defines
solid waste conversion using noncombustion technologies as
an eligible resource under the RPS program. The primary
difference between current law, and the modified definition
proposed in this bill, is that under current law
"discharges of air contaminants or emissions, including
greenhouse gases as defined in Section 38505 of the Health
and Safety Code" are prohibited. To be RPS eligible AB 222
merely requires that the biorefinery be in compliance with
ARB, local air pollution district air quality requirements
and other required permits (which would be the case whether
the facility and feedstock was RPS eligible or not). The
consequence is that that AB 222 proposes to define, as RPS
eligible, a processes and technologies that are directly
contrary to the goal of the RPS - to reduce air emissions.
The sponsor reports that "independently-verified emissions
test result show that thermochemical conversion technologies
are able to meet existing local, state and federal emissions
limits." As mentioned above, these are existing
requirements and would be required of any new facility or
technology.
Policy Concern . The proposed definition of "biorefinery"
poses a policy problem for RPS in that it sets a different,
and arguably lower, emission standards for these activities
than the other RPS eligible activities. Some contend that
the existing definition of "solid waste conversion" is
AB 222
Page 9
problematic and scientifically inaccurate. If that is the
case, then the existing definition should be amended to
correct those inadequacies.
6)Recycling Markets . According to the Integrated Waste
Management Board (IWMB), the statewide solid waste diversion
rate for 2007, which was calculated and announced as 2008
was drawing to a close, rose from 54% in 2006 to 58% in
2007. Overall, during 2007 Californians were able to divert
about 53.5 million tons of solid waste away from landfills
and into higher and better uses, but approximately 40
million tons of waste were disposed.
Since last fall, recycling markets in California and
worldwide have suffered the effects of the slow-down in the
economy. While markets are rebounding, it does demonstrate
the vulnerability of California's diversion efforts by
depending on foreign markets as outlets for recyclables.
Also, the exportation of recyclable materials to other
countries can pose health and safety and environmental
problems for the receiving counties if there are not
standards in place to safely manage those materials. This
highlights the need to do more to reduce waste generation
and increase traditional recycling markets, including
processing capacity, in California. Efforts that are
consistent with the existing waste management hierarchy of
source reduction and recycling/composting should be expanded
and explored before options such as biorefineries are
accepted as solid waste management options. Uncertainty of
the repercussions on the current recycling markets and
infrastructure is unclear and could be detrimental if it
becomes "convenient" to utilize these types of facilities.
Also, since these facilities require a certain amount of
feedstock to viably operate, there is no incentive to reduce
materials going to these facilities.
Policy Concern . This proposed deletion of the definitions
of "solid waste conversion" (in the RPS area of the law) and
"gasification" (in the waste management area of the law) is
problematic for the diversion related side of the equation.
The existing definitions set forth a more stringent process
for safeguarding recycling markets by requiring operator
certification of the removal of recyclables. The proposed
AB 222
Page 10
definition of "biorefinery" regarding the processing of
solid waste and the removal of recyclable materials is
problematic and does not adequately address the need to
protect existing markets and ensure the establishment of new
markets.
7)Other Policy Concerns . In addition to the issues raised
above, the content of the bill poses implementation
challenges and does not seem to accomplish the authors'
objectives. Currently, there do not appear to be any
statutory barriers to the siting, construction or operation
of these facilities. Further, the proposed changes may
create more challenges than they remove.
Also, regarding diversion requirements, the statute
currently only "counts" for disposal those wastes that are
sent to a solid waste landfill and transformation
facilities. Thus, the currently statutory framework and the
IWMB's guidance documents do not prohibit waste being sent
to nondisposal facilities from counting for diversion
credit. (Note: The July 8th version of the bill states that
feedstocks from solid waste are not eligible for RPS, the
author notes that this is an error and the intent is to
include solid waste feedstocks).
In attempting to address concerns that "anaerobic digestion"
would be brought in under the proposed definition of
"biorefinery" and cause confusion and program implementation
challenges, it creates further confusion regarding how this
proven, viable, and currently well established technology
should be viewed by defining it separately and not
indicating it is part of RPS.
Aside from the outstanding policy issues regarding the role
these types of facilities have in the RPS and/or the solid
waste management hierarchy, the bill does not seem to meet
the authors' objectives and could cause further confusion
and delays in bringing the technologies that they are
looking to encourage to the forefront.
8)Support and Opposition Concerns . Proponents contend that
this bill is necessary to 'level the playing' field for
these technologies and are necessary tools for local
AB 222
Page 11
jurisdictions to meet their diversion mandates. They also
contend that this will save the export of materials to other
countries where concerns for health and environmental safety
are questionable.
The opponents raise issues of lack of data on the safety and
the questionable performance records of these technologies.
They also raise the threat to the existing recycling markets
and the uncertainties that these new facilities bring to the
growth of those markets.
SOURCE : Bioenergy Producers Association
SUPPORT : adaptiveARC
Agricultural Council of California
Alternative Resources, Inc.
American Council on Renewable Energy/Biomass
Coordinating Council
Athens Services
Balboa Pacific Corporation
Blue Line Transfer, Inc.
Biomass Coordinating Council
California Association of Professional Employees
California Chamber of Commerce
California Energy Commission
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Manufacturers and Technology Association
California Refuse Recycling Council
California State Association of Counties
California State Association of Electrical Workers
California State Pipe Trades Council
Card Construction
Cities of Azusa, Bell, Glendale (Public Works Dept.),
Hawthorne, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Pico
Rivera, San Diego (Environmental Services
Dept.), and Vernon
Clean Cities Coalition
Clements Environmental
Commercial Industrial Waste Applications, Inc.
Consolidated Disposal Service
County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
Department of the Navy
Desert Valley Disposal Services
AB 222
Page 12
Enerkem
Fulcrum BioEnergy, Inc.
Global Energy, Inc.
ICM, Inc.
INEOS Bio
Inland Empire Disposal Association
Innovative Logistics Solutions, Inc.
International Environmental Solutions
International Union of Operating Engineers
Interstate Waste Technologies
League of California Cities
Long Beach Coalition for a Safe Environment
Los Angeles County Solid Waste Management
Committee/Integrated Waste Management Task Force
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors
Marin Resource Recovery
Marin Sanitary Service
Mid State Solid Waste & Recycling
Miller De Wulf Corporation
New Planet Energy, LLC
North Valley Coalition of Concerned Citizens, Inc.
Orange County Board of Supervisors
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Palm Springs Disposal Services
Pena's Disposal, Inc.
Phoenix Biomass Energy, Inc.
Rainbow Disposal Co., Inc.
Redwood City Planning Commission
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Remediation Earth, Inc.
Republic Services, Inc.
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors
San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership
San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management
Authority
Sempra Energy
Solid Waste Association of North America
Solid Waste Association of Orange County
Southern California Edison
Sustainable Conservation
Ternion Bio Industries
ThermoChem Recovery International, Inc. (TRI)
AB 222
Page 13
Theroux Environmental
UCLA Recycling and Municipal Solid Waste Management
Certificate Training Program
Valley Industry & Commerce Association
Waste to Energy, LLC
Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
Yolo County Board of Supervisors
2 individuals
OPPOSITION : Alameda County Waste Management Authority and
Recycling Board (StopWaste.org)
American Lung Association
Breathe California
California League of Conservation Voters
California Resource Recovery Association
Californians Against Waste
Center for Biological Diversity
Central Valley Air Quality Coalition;
Legislative Cmt
Clean Water Action
Coalition for Clean Air
Environment California
Environmental Defense Fund
Global Anti-Incinerator Alliance
Greenaction
Natural Resources Defense Council
Planning and Conservation League
City and County of San Francisco, Dept of the
Environment
Sierra Club California