Waste to Watts
	ELEMENTAL REGULATION
	Editorial
	Wisconsin Favorites Celebrating Wisconsin’s Concrete Park

Waste to Watts
Electricity From Landfill Gas Now On Line

   On a windy, bright morning in June as the crowd attending a dedication ceremony huddled inside a tent to shield themselves from strong gusts, CEO Bill Berg of Dairyland Power Cooperative wryly commented that weather conditions were perfect for generating kilowatt-hours of electricity with wind turbines.

   The remark drew a snicker from audience members. Dairyland had recently dedicated a series of wind-powered generators, but the occasion supporters gathered for on June 24 was not to christen another wind machine—although such an apparatus would have found plenty of reason to spin that day—but a new power plant that uses a different type of renewable-energy resource: landfill gas. Located near Fall Creek, Wisconsin, the windswept hill on which the tent perched for the observance was actually built on garbage and was supplying the new generating plant with some of its fuel. Berg took the opportunity to contrast the two renewable sources of power.

   “There’s something very nice about landfill gas compared to wind,” Berg told local and state officials, industry representatives, co-op directors and staff, and guests at the dedication of the Seven Mile Creek Landfill Gas-To-Energy Station. “The wind doesn’t always blow, and it doesn’t always blow when you want it to blow—when your [electric] loads are highest.” He said the new facility, operated by ONYX Waste Services and located on Eau Claire Energy Cooperative lines southeast of Eau Claire, could literally produce power at full output around the clock.

   “Here we have that capability to generate exactly when our members require the energy,” Berg continued, promising the La Crosse-based wholesale-power supplier would be developing more projects featuring methane as a fuel.

Waste is Placed

   Mark Vinall, general manager of the Seven Mile Creek Landfill, told the dedication-day audience that the hill on which they were to observe a ribbon-cutting ceremony was an old county landfill site that had been closed since the early 1990s. Methane—a gas given off by decaying garbage—is being collected through a series of subterranean wells and miles of piping in several such landfill mounds at Seven Mile Creek.

   Pointing to dump trucks and bulldozers at work offloading and covering waste a few hundred yards away, Vinall said, “That’s the future power of this facility. Probably within 12 months of the time that waste is being placed today, we’ll start getting methane gas out of it, and it will be able to produce electricity.”

   With ONYX continuing to draw waste to the Fall Creek landfill from homes and businesses across several northwestern Wisconsin counties, the prospects for consistent methane production appear good for decades, according to Vinall. ONYX operates 26 such landfills across North America, but in many cases the methane gases are simply burned off without being put to use generating power. That’s the way it was at Seven Mile Creek before a partnership between ONYX, Dairyland, and Eau Claire Energy emerged.

   “I remember we had students brought out to the landfill years ago to view the operation, and one of the questions I’d get was, ‘What are you going to do with this methane gas?’ since there was always a flare burning off the gas,” he recalled. “I would always tell them, ‘Well, we don’t have enough gas and economic factors aren’t right to create such a project to produce electricity, but someday we’ll do it,’” he continued. “I guess now my dream has come true.”

A Cooperative Start

   One of the sparkplugs behind the landfill-gas project was CEO John Luehrsen of Eau Claire Energy, who began promoting the idea to Dairyland Power—Eau Claire Energy’s wholesale-power supplier—more than five years ago following discussions with Eau Claire Energy directors. Luehrsen told the dedication crowd a number of project designs were considered before the final plan won approval by the two co-ops and ONYX. Securing the expertise of general contractor Ameresco, a well-known developer of gas-to-energy enterprises, the principals then formed a business plan.

   “Dairyland agreed to buy the collected landfill gas and make the tremendous investment in the generator and equipment,” said Luehrsen, telling how more than $5 million—from Dairyland and obtained through the Rural Utilities Service—would be spent on the plant’s construction and equipment. He pointed out ONYX in its management practices had already performed much of what was needed “to make the landfill capable of generating the methane and to collect the necessary volumes.”

   Once built and generating, the 3-megawatt facility would send its electricity out onto Eau Claire Energy lines in sufficient quantities to provide power for 2,600 homes. “It’s just a wonderful idea to convert landfill gas to electricity and then to be able to take that and put it right back into the community that supports the landfill,” said Luehrsen.

Economical, Up Quickly

   Dairyland’s Tony McKimmy, project manager, said the cost for building the methane-fired plant compares favorably with the economies of any of the co-op’s new generation facilities, and the time it took to construct was nothing short of remarkable.

   “From excavation to the last engine firing was less than 90 days,” he exclaimed, informing the crowd that much of the work was even performed in freezing weather. “We started in mid-December. The first of the three engines fired on March 3, the last a couple of weeks later.” Electricity on a regular timetable began to flow in April from the trio of engine-powered generators at the foot of the hill that had been the county landfill site.

   Landfill gas, McKimmy explained, is 50-percent methane the way it gets extracted from the various wells sunk into the garbage mounds. “It’s cleaned up in the system to remove the trace chemicals and moisture, and then we burn it,” he said. Each of the 12-cylinder Waukesha engines powers a generator that produces more than one million watts.

   “The entire system is designed to run 24/7, providing continuous, renewable energy to our members,” he stated. “The best reason for this project is that it generates electricity without creating additional pollution, and that’s great in anyone’s book.”

Resource Savings

   “Every year that these generators run, there are 13,000 fewer tons of coal being burned,” asserted Luehrsen, detailing that the savings equates to reducing the carbon dioxide emissions of 22,000 cars or the effect of planting 30,000 acres of trees to absorb that quantity of CO2. “It’s also like avoiding a quarter million barrels of oil per year being burned,” he said. “It’s a tremendous project.”

   As he spoke to the audience assembled for the dedication ceremony, Berg gestured toward the flare burning near the then-idle generating plant. “That’s what would have to happen with this landfill site were we not taking that methane gas and producing electricity,” he said, explaining that onlookers would see the flare’s flame reduce to nearly nothing once the plant’s engines were switched on for the crowd to see and hear. “So we’re taking something that would have been wasted and are turning it into something useful for our members,” said Berg.

   Refreshments available to dedication attendees afforded Luehrsen the chance to amplify Berg’s comment: “All of us working together have taken what is the perceived lemon that is a landfill and have made lemonade.”—Perry Baird

 

  

Elemental Regulation
State Goes It Alone On Mercury Control

Editor’s note—In July, a statutory deadline passed without legislative objection, freeing the Department of Natural Resources to implement an administrative rule mandating deep cuts in power-plant mercury emissions. Wisconsin will thus have single-state mercury regulation, and Wisconsin Energy Cooperative News (WECN) asked contributing writer Dave Hoopman—also director of regulatory affairs–electric for the Wisconsin Federation of Cooperatives and the federation’s representative on the DNR Citizen Advisory Committee involved in developing the mercury rule—what it will mean for the people of this state.

WECN: First of all, what will the rule require?

HOOPMAN: The first stage is reducing power-plant mercury emissions 40 percent by 2010, but the bottom line is cutting 75 percent by 2015 for four utilities: Dairyland Power Cooperative (with the least emissions of the four) plus Alliant Energy Corp., WE Energies, and Wisconsin Public Service Corp.

WECN: Why just power plants and why just those four utilities? Are they the only mercury emitters in the state?

HOOPMAN: No. The rule only covers utilities with annual system-wide mercury emissions of 100 pounds or more. Altogether, the four emit about two tons annually. There are many other sources. Some emit more than any power plant but aren’t covered. Coal-burning power plants are conspicuous and politically easy targets.

WECN: But mercury is toxic. Isn’t two tons a lot to be putting out there?

HOOPMAN: Not compared with what Mother Nature puts out. Half of worldwide mercury emissions can’t be regulated because humans aren’t involved. That’s roughly half because nobody knows what volcanoes may do from year to year, and they’re probably the biggest single source. Forest fires are another. So is vaporization of mercury from rocks and soil and water. Don’t forget mercury’s an element; it’s essentially everywhere. We always hear power plants are the single biggest source, which might be true if you mean only human-induced emissions. But all U.S. power plants combined account for—again roughly—a whopping 1 percent of worldwide emissions.

WECN: Twice you said “worldwide.” Why does that matter if we’re concerned about emissions right here in Wisconsin?

HOOPMAN: It matters because mercury from any source can suspend in the atmosphere and travel on air currents for many months and thousands of miles. If we closed every U.S. coal plant and tried getting by on half our electric generating capacity, 99 percent of the mercury in the global pool would still be there. No matter how virtuous you are about controlling emissions, you’re going to have mercury from somewhere. So, what matters is are people harmed? Exposure to natural toxins at levels that do no harm is a daily experience we don’t even notice. Conversely, if swallowing a whole bottle of aspirin might kill you, is aspirin a threat to humanity?

WECN: What about the number we’ve heard—600,000 children born each year with mercury levels that could harm their development?

HOOPMAN: Knowing the history of that number may help you decide how worried you should be. In the1980s, a medical study was done in the Faroe Islands, where people eat lots of mercury-contaminated whale meat. The study had some problems, but the researchers said they may have detected about two months’ delay in some psycho-motor development among children of mothers with blood mercury levels above 58 parts per billion (ppb). So far as I know, these are the most troublesome findings in any study of seafood-related mercury exposure.
Federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Academy of Sciences later adopted one-tenth of the Faroe study’s benchmark amount, or 5.8 ppb, as their official level of concern. Late in the 1990s, the National Institute of Health started using its National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) to check mercury concentrations in women of childbearing age. The first round tested about 2,000 women and found about 8 percent of them at or above 5.8 ppb. No one’s blood mercury reached 58 parts per billion, the lowest level where actual harm was suspected, and subsequent testing of larger sample groups showed a slight decline in mercury levels. But some advocacy groups have applied the 8-percent figure across all live births in the U.S. to claim more than 600,000 kids at risk.

WECN: You said the Faroe Islands study had problems…

HOOPMAN: The biggest was cross-contamination of the islanders’ whale meat with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which are said to mimic mercury toxicity. The researchers contend they recognized this and adjusted for it. But there’s another, lengthier study done over a decade in the Seychelles Islands. The mothers there averaged 12 fish meals a week, had mercury exposure comparable to the Faroese, and the kids showed no ill effect. The exact words from a statement by researchers at the University of Rochester (NY) a couple of years ago were “no detectable harm” from mercury in seafood. But choosing between them, the federal government decided to base its mercury policy on the more worrisome—and less conclusive—of the two studies.

WECN: Those studies are from the North Atlantic and the Indian Ocean. What about Wisconsin, with a fish advisory on every lake?

HOOPMAN: We too easily forget those advisories didn’t come to us by immaculate conception. The coverage, severity, and very existence of those warnings are decided by a state agency that’s wanted a mercury regulation since the mid-1990s. Other state agencies have been flummoxed by requests for examples of Wisconsin residents with health problems traceable to mercury in fish; we’ve asked repeatedly. I think it’s absolutely striking that only now, with the DNR already moving ahead with its rule, the Department of Health and Human Services is out looking for volunteers for the first study to ever assess actual mercury levels among Wisconsin residents.

WECN: Is that bad?

HOOPMAN: No. I’m glad they’re finally doing it. I’ve been in this stale argument over mercury for three years, and it’s refreshing to see somebody besides the handful of us who have been more or less politely referred to as “outliers” trying to discover what’s really happening instead of demanding costly fixes for dubious problems and implying you’re backward and cruel if you have a question or two.

WECN: Define “costly fixes.”

HOOPMAN: A year or two ago, activated carbon injection—the only known method of capturing 70 to 90 percent of mercury emissions—was essentially a custom technology costing about $70,000 per pound of mercury. We expect technology to improve, but I haven’t heard about this changing.

WECN: Will fish advisories be pulled back as emissions go down or if this new study shows low exposure?

HOOPMAN: I suspect they’re here to stay. It’s not hard to envision them hanging on long after people forget why we had them. For one thing, you could go back to the dawn of time and not find a fish with no mercury in it. Remember, it’s an element. It’s not an alien presence in the environment; it’s part of the environment. One story that hasn’t exactly been worn out by the media is that during public hearings, the DNR finally had to admit it has no expectation of fish advisories being lifted because of its rule.

WECN: You’ve opposed the DNR on this from the start. Is it simply a matter of cost?

HOOPMAN: High cost, low benefit. When we first met in September ’01, the Citizen Advisory Committee went around the table to hear what each member hoped we’d achieve. I said I hoped we’d develop a sound estimate of the environmental and public health benefits of complete success in implementing the proposed rule. Nothing remotely resembling such an estimate has been produced. I think that’s because people who best understand the issue expect the results to be negligible, maybe undetectable, and it’s frankly offensive to me that Wisconsin electricity consumers are going to be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars for an empty gesture. Some people have no qualms spreading fear and demanding that kind of expenditure; far too many make their living that way. As membership organizations governed by majority rule, the co-ops don’t feel quite so free to order up priorities for others.

The federal government is expected to adopt its version of a mercury rule—calling for a 70-percent reduction in mercury emissions—later this year. It would become effective in the spring of 2005.

Editorial
by Perry Baird

Off the Hook, Out of Luck

   Adams–Columbia Electric Cooperative, Wisconsin’s largest cooperatively owned electric-distribution utility, recently discovered that diligence in paying off money it owed the government evidently comes with a surprising penalty.

   Virtually all cooperative utilities have periodically borrowed money to finance construction of their systems. Many of these loans have come through U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs such as the old Rural Electrification Administration (REA) or more recently the Rural Utilities Service, REA’s successor. Such loans have been available since the 1930s to offset higher costs associated with building and maintaining sprawling electric systems to serve rural areas.

   As of last December, Adams–Columbia Electric Co-op (ACEC) had a total of $6 million in government loans ranging in age from 2 to 25 years, and the co-op board decided to take advantage of lower commercial rates and refinance the loans using a private lender. CEO Marty Hillert says that action saved ACEC about $30,000 per year in interest payments, but completely paying off the government triggered an unexpected prohibition. Incredibly, the co-op is now unable to secure a completely different type of government financing to assist local businesses with start-up or expansion costs.

Rural Relief, Rejection

   Numerous times during the past dozen years, ACEC tapped the Rural Economic Development Loan and Grant (REDLG) program, another USDA offering, to obtain a total of about $1 million for business development, mostly in rural Adams County. The projects supported by ACEC with the loans and grants have netted more than 100 jobs and have immeasurably helped the local economy.

   Hillert says he learned a few months ago that the co-op would no longer qualify as a conduit for future REDLG financing. The reason? ACEC had paid off its rural electrification loans, and it had the gall to do so at the full amount owed.

   You see, up until recently the Rural Utilities Service had allowed co-ops a discount (based on a calculation involving the interest difference between federal and private funds) as they totally paid off their electric loans. A published federal rule assured continued eligibility in the REDLG program to those co-ops that cleared their debt using discounted payments.

   Co-ops (such as Adams-Columbia) that paid full value and did not use the authorized discount are not mentioned in the rule’s language. Apparently because they aren’t, a government lawyer has now interpreted the regulation to mean those unmentioned co-ops are to be excluded from using REDLG loans and grants. It’s quite possibly a complete perversion of the original rule’s intent.

The Door Slams

   Whatever the rationale, because the cooperative—and an estimated 20 others across the country—made the unpardonable mistake of paying the government more than it would have under the earlier discount offer, it slams the door to rural development funding.

   This troubles Hillert, since businesses are continuing to approach the co-op for the kind of financial boost given locally in past years. “I don’t know how we’ll do it without government help,” says Hillert. “We don’t have that kind of money just sitting around.”

   He also commented on the irony that a program to promote rural economic development should be designated “off limits” to Adams–Columbia and other electric co-ops that had been perfectly eligible before committing acts of fiscal responsibility. “We still have the same rural focus and serve a rural area. Why wouldn’t a rural development program through the Department of Agriculture continue to apply?”

   Unfortunately, due to one bureaucrat’s opinion, it might now take an act of Congress to get the kind of answer Adams–Columbia and its members need.

Celebrating Wisconsin’s Concrete Park

   Wisconsin counts many folk artists among its past and present citizens, but none has been as prolific as the late Fred Smith, Phillips. A retired lumberjack, Smith began creating larger-than-life concrete statues in 1948 at the age of 65. The self-taught artist built wooden frames for the people, animals, and fanciful creatures, then wrapped the frames in mink wire, covered them with concrete, and decorated them with glass, metal, stone, and other materials.

   By 1964, when illness forced Smith to stop creating his statues, he had finished more than 200, including such well-known figures as Paul Bunyan, Abe Lincoln, and the Statue of Liberty. All were positioned on the grounds of his home and adjacent tavern just south of Phillips. Smith called his Wisconsin Concrete Park his “gift for all the American people.” Today, his work is internationally acclaimed as a masterwork of American folk sculpture.

   Visitors may visit the Concrete Park year-round during daylight hours, but a special celebration is staged each August. This year, the Wisconsin Concrete Park Celebration will be held at the park from noon to 4 p.m. on Saturday, August 14. Organized by the Friends of Fred Smith, Inc., the celebration will kick off with a silent auction that begins at noon and continues throughout the afternoon. At 12:30 and again at 2:30, visitors will be treated to a puppet show in the new studio on the grounds, put on by Once Upon a Puppet Traveling Puppet Theater, Eau Claire. Live musical performances are scheduled under the tent by the Flambeau Ramblers Barbershop Singers (1 p.m.) and the Elk River String Band (1:45 to 4 p.m.). You may wander among the sculptures on your own at any time, but those wishing a guided tour of the Concrete Park can meet the guide at 2 p.m. at the information kiosk adjacent to the historic Fred Smith House, on the edge of the park. Arts, crafts, and park souvenirs are for sale inside the house, where observers can also watch local artists demonstrate their skills at Countryside Artists Gallery and Gifts. The Price County Veterans will provide concessions.

   At this writing, the committee was still working on other possible programs for the celebration. Unconfirmed activites may include an art exhibit, a Smith genealogy display, and a nature trail.

   The Wisconsin Concrete Park is located just south of Phillips on Highway 13 South. Parking is available in the field directly north of the park. If special parking accommodations are needed, please call 715/339-6371. For further information about the Concrete Park Celebration or the park itself, contact the Price County Tourism Department at 800/269-4505 or 715/339-4505.—Linda Hilton