Midtown Minneapolis Incinerator Information

Ding, Dong

2008-06-07T11:20:00.000-07:00

The Midtown burner is dead! The developers released a statement yesterday (June 6, 2008) saying they are giving up their fight to build the Midtown Burner.

But, as Steve Brandt notes in his most recent Strib article, the push to build more incinerators in the Twin Cities has not ended.

Stay informed and stay involved. One thing we've learned from this long process is that we can't always rely on our leaders to take care of our air because they sometimes become investors in projects that can harm us. But we also learned that when ordinary citizens stand up to protect our air and our health against boondoggles we can have an impact.

There will be a meet up at the Acadia Cafe on Tuesday June 10th beginning at around 6 p.m. to celebrate the victory and to discuss the future. The meet up has been arranged by Julonne Glad and the Minneapolis Residents for Clean Air. As they say on their website, everyone is welcome.

Xcel cuts off negotiations

2008-05-29T16:19:00.000-07:00

The burner project is looking deader all the time:

Xcel leaves developers powerless on ‘Midtown Burner’ project

This isn't over but a takeaway at this point is this: if you attended a meeting, talked to a neighbor, wrote the Mayor or a City Councilperson or State legislator, or if you emailed the MPCA or did anything to voice your objections or concerns about the Midtown burner proposal you have had an impact. The only thing that stands in the way of boondoggles like the Midtown Eco-Energy burner are the people who stand up to voice their concerns.

If you stood up, now would be a good time to give yourself a pat on the back.

Cumulative Pollution Impact

2008-05-22T21:01:00.000-07:00

A bill passed the Minnesota Legislature requiring that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency consider the cumulative pollution impacts of the proposed Midtown burner before granting a pollution permit.

Steve Brandt from the Strib has written an article about the bill.

The existing law does not require the consideration of the cumulative impacts, which is kind of like hearing your doctor tell you it's okay to eat another donut even though you've had 10 already today because he doesn't consider the cumulative effects of eating multiple donuts. The neighborhoods near the burner already suffer from a variety of pollution -- considering the cumulative effects of yet another pollution source makes sense.

Mayor Rybak apparently still supports the burner

2008-04-22T08:33:00.000-07:00

Our Mayor, R.T. Rybak, says he still supports the Midtown Eco Energy burner, in part because he has not heard enough public "outrage" to convince him that the burner is a problem.

You can email the Mayor at rt@minneapolis.org.

He apparently needs to hear from you if you are "outraged" by any of the following (even short emails are helpful):

This burner would be located in one of the most densely-populated and poorest neighborhoods in our State,
It would emit up to one million pounds per year of regulated toxins into the air we breathe, including mercury, dioxin, sulfur dioxide, arsenic and formaldehyde,
This would cause generations of people who live, work or play near the Midtown Greenway or 28th and Hiawatha to experience increased levels of cancer, reproductive deficiencies, neurological diseases and a host of respiratory problems such as asthma. Asthma is reaching epidemic levels in our State and even if you don't care about the kids who will suffer most remember that we all pay for these illnesses through higher medical insurance premiums and government support for medical treatments.
The burner WOULD INCREASE WORLDWIDE CO2 LEVELS by an increase in the fossil fuels used by the semi-trucks (25 per day, by the developers' estimates) that would haul in waste and haul out ash. It would also NOT result in a net reduction in worldwide CO2 levels because the plant itself would emit CO2s. The developers like to argue that their plant is good for the environment becuase it would emit fewer CO2s per megawatt of energy than a coal plant. That argument only makes sense if coal plants are taken offline.
If we're truly concerned about protecting the environment we should avoid building incinerators anywhere. Incinerators actually create MORE waste because they rely on it to survive. Waste that could be recycled or conserved is instead burned. See U.S.: Waste Incinerators Making a Comeback for a more thorough explanation.

Contact Mayor Rybak today! Why is this important? Because the burner is not a dead issue. Even though the current land deal has stalled out the developers have invested substantial time and effort into their project and they will do anything they can to push the project through. The Mayor needs to hear from you.

Double blow for incinerator

2008-04-09T09:13:00.000-07:00

The City of Minneapolis re-confirmed its decision to deny the land sale yesterday! This is a big deal because the developers obviously can't build their incinerator at 28th and Hiawatha unless they have the land.

And at the State Capitol, legislators added language to an existing bill that would prohibit the MPCA from issuing a pollution permit for the incinerator.

The developers aren't giving up. A Steve Brandt piece in the Strib summarizes the latest developments.

To the bitter end...

2008-03-27T20:59:00.000-07:00

Things are happening quickly as Midtown's investors struggle to meet the conditions of the City's agreement before the March 30, 2008 deadline. Here are two recent articles that will bring you up to speed:

(1) "Midtown burner project hits a snag with the city," another Steve Brandt piece in the Strib.

(2) "Minneapolis 'Midtown burner' plan could go up in smoke," a "Finance and Commerce" article.

The Midtown investors are finally playing the lawsuit card. It looks like they're on the ropes. But you shouldn't count them out -- contact your City Councilperson today and remind them that you oppose the burner at Hiawatha and 28th Street!

Lastest Strib Article; if it looks and smells like a boondoggle...

2008-03-23T09:27:00.000-07:00

An article by City Hall beat reporter Steve Brandt appeared in the Strib on Friday: "Wood-burning plant embroiled in local politics."

The article highlights the controversies about the project developers' connections with the powers that be, suggesting that the public interest has been taking a backseat to greasing some friendly palms:

"Public officials say Havey and Krause, familiar figures at City Hall [and lead developers in the Midtown burner project], began a successful lobbying effort for Kandiyohi to bid for the site."

"During [Havey's] five years as director of Minneapolis' federally designated economic development zone, the city hadn't approved any of its $130 million in tax-exempt bonds. Havey said that federal requirements made that too tough. Yet federal records show such bonds have been issued in nine of the other 14 Empowerment Zone communities nationally designated in the same year as Minneapolis."

"The city will net little from the land deal...."

The article brings some of the pieces of this boondoggle into relief. The story would be sad enough if this project didn't have a public heath impact. But what makes it truly outrageous is the tangible ways this burner would harm generations of Twin Cities residents if it goes up (see posts below).

It is more critical than ever that you contact your City Councilperson and Mayor Ryback to tell them you do not want another burner to go up in your City.

SENA letter opposing burner

2008-02-21T14:32:00.000-08:00

Earlier today the Standish Ericsson Neighborhood Association (SENA) sent a letter to the Minneapolis City Council Members who represent the neighborhood (with copies to the Mayor and our State legislators). After hearing about the concerns and after hearing from the Midtown Eco Energy developers, SENA has decided to oppose the project.

SENA February 21, 2008 letter in opposition to Midtown burner.

"Public Money for Private Business"

2008-02-13T16:49:00.000-08:00

Dan Gordon, a writer for the Twin Cities Daily Planet, a local online newspaper, has written a piece summarizing some of the latest issues related to the Midtown burner proposal. His article includes an excellent overview of the federal Empowerment Zone program, which is the proposed source of the $78M in public bonding that the Midtown developers want to use to build and operate the burner.

"What can I do?"

2008-01-05T07:46:00.001-08:00

Do you live or work within three miles of 28th Street and Hiawatha? Would you rather not be breathing the mercury, dioxin, formaldehyde, lead, sulfur dioxide and all of the unregulated nanoparticulates that would be pumped out of the new smokestack? Would you rather not see your property values decline? Do you really want to pay more for heath care insurance (and more in taxes) to cover all of the kids who will develop asthma and other respiratory illnesses over the next 40 years if Midtown Eco Energy gets their burner?

Here are some simple steps you can take right now to stop the Midtown burner:

(1) CONTACT THE MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR RYBAK

Contacting your city leaders is a good idea because they will need to vote again before the burner project gets the land and the funding. It appears the Council was not presented with all the facts when they initially approved the burner and the $78M in Empowerment Zone bonding. It is extremely important that we voice our concerns about the burner (and the funding) to get them to rethink their votes. Several Councilmembers have indicated that they would like more information on the hazards associated with incineration.

If you live in Lisa Goodman's ward be sure to ask her why she sponsored the Resolutions for the burner given that she co-owns it.

Contact information for the Minneapolis City Council

Contact information for Mayor R.T. Rybak

(2) CONTACT YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS

Contact your Minnesota State Legislators and tell them to oppose any extensions of the State Tax Exemption for Midtown Eco Energy. Not long ago, Midtown Eco Energy sneaked a bill through the State Legislature that essentially gave them and only them a significant tax break. The special tax credits are contained in Minnesota Statute Section 272.02, Subd. 82, in case your legislators are wondering.

Fortunately, the bill is no longer applicable to Midtown Eco Energy. We believe Midtown Eco Energy will be lobbying legislators to extend the tax break. Take a moment of time to email or phone your State Senator and Representative and tell them that you oppose any special tax breaks for Midtown Eco Energy because it is not a green energy source and it will pollute a densely-populated urban area including at least ten schools and three health care facilities within one mile of the smokestack.

You can also tell your legislators that in the future you do not want any more incinerators built in or around places where people live and that you support any legislation that discourages population-centered incineration. In dealing with Minnesota's waste, conservation and reuse should be priority one, followed by recycling. But Minnesota has very few State laws about what to do with the rest of our waste. When deciding what to do with the waste we don't reuse or recycle, burning it near a population center where there are schools and hospitals nearby should be the last option. Burned waste is a "landfill in the sky" and it is extremely harmful to anyone living within a mile or two of the fire.

Click here to find out how to email or phone your Minnesota State Legislator.

Midtown Incinerator Information

2007-12-09T08:47:00.001-08:00

A list of important links are available at the end of this post.

The City of Minneapolis has tentatively agreed to sell land at 2850 20th Avenue South -- the former location of the South Transfer Station -- to a private, for-profit enterprise that plans to build an incinerator to generate electrical power and steam heat. It will pump smoke and toxic particulates into the air we breathe. The enterprise -- called "Midtown Eco Energy, LLC" (MEE) -- has been hailed by the developers as a green and ecologically friendly project because it will derive energy from wood instead of coal.

The project is anything but green (see links below for sources):

The proposed Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) permit will allow the burner to pump ONE MILLION POUNDS PER YEAR of health-damaging air pollutants into the air through a 140 foot smokestack including MERCURY, DIOXIN, ARSENIC, LEAD, AMMONIA, SUFURIC ACID, and FORMALDEHYDE. The people working in the facility will be hit hardest by the pollution but the facility is near many densely-populated neighborhoods, affecting countless Twin Cities residents.

Investors in the MEE incinerator project have said they will not pollute to the extent allowed by the permit because they plan to burn urban wood. Even if the facility only burns wood it will pollute the air we breathe. Trees are nature's air filters -- they do us all a favor by absorbing the toxins in our air. Urban trees contain toxins such as lead and mercury. When we burn these trees we release the toxins back into the air.

The Green Institute stated in a March 2007 report that there is not enough wood available and that a biomass burner at Lake and Hiawatha is not economically feasible. Anders Rydaker, President of District Energy St. Paul, has said that his facility is already buying the available urban wood waste in the Twin Cities metro area and that this wood only accounts for 60% of his facility's needs. The Midtown incinerator will therefore have to rely on other burnable fuel besides urban trees.

Investors in the MEE project have admitted that they may have to burn "clean" construction waste. Construction waste includes plywood, particle board, strand board, and other types of products bound by glues and resins (all of which is apparently allowed by the MPCA permit). It may also include incidental plastic waste (such as discarded PVC pipe). Burned plastics emit dioxins. Short of oxygen-free air, dioxin-contaminated air is about as bad as it gets for human beings because dioxins never leave your body and even a tiny concentration of dixoins can hurt you. Dioxins are most harmful to breast-feeding infants and cause -- among a host of bad effects -- immunotoxicity, reproductive deficiencies, diminished endocrine production and cancer.

The proponents of this project say it will reduce CO2 emissions by creating electricity with wood instead of coal. But even wood burning -- unlike other energy alternatives like solar, wind or recycling programs -- produces greenhouse gases. Moreover, the project will require an estimated TWENTY-FIVE SEMI-TRACTOR TRAILER DELIVERIES PER DAY. If these trucks are bringing wood from outside the metro area, the CO2 and other greenhouse gases in their fuel emissions will offset any CO2 reductions that have been lauded by the Midtown project.

MEE argues that after we build another incinerator the existing coal plants that we depend on for electricity will reduce their output, resulting in a net reduction in greenhouse gases. The economics behind a supply-side emission analysis are far more complex than this. But there is one thing we do know: coal plants have huge overhead costs and are likely to operate at full capacity so long as there is a supply of coal. Another incinerator in Minneapolis will not reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions because it will not take any coal plants offline. The MEE burner would instead artificially drive demand for electricity because it would be paid for largely by government bonding.

If the burner goes up it will drive out recycling, resource conservation and waste reduction in our city. The burner will depend on fresh new loads of fuel every day -- be it loads of wood or whatever else slips into the fire. The private owners will be driven to burn materials in order to pay off the bonds (unless they default on them, in which case the taxpayers will be left holding the bag). The need to feed the burner will discourage truly green solutions to energy issues in the Twin Cities for years to come.

WCCO-TV recently ran a story about how asthma is becoming an epidemic among children in our state. Even a "clean" wood-burning furnace in the middle of our city will contribute to increased asthma rates among children. The State of Delaware, in recognition of the problem with waste incinerators, has gone so far as to enact a statute forbidding the construction of incinerators within THREE MILES of any residence, church, school or hospital.

Here are a selection of websites and links with more information about the project and about the problems with biomass burners:

"Goodman's Actions on Burner Questioned" - a Dec 24, 2007 Star Tribune article addressing the Minneapolis City Councilperson Lisa Goodman's conflict of interest: she is both an investor in the burner and the lead sponsor of the City Resolutions that would give the burner the green light.

"Project isn't Catching Fire With Neighbors" - a Dec 19, 2007 Star Tribune article.

US: Waste Incinerators Making a Comeback - a 2006 CorpWatch.com article about the current trends and dangers, and about why government officials are often seduced into supporting them.

"Green Fuel or Greenwashing?" -- a Twin Cities Daily Planet article that provides good background information along with a discussion of the issues.

Midtown Eco Energy, LLC -- the private developer's website. The fine print on the actual pollution allowances sought by the project is contained in Midtown Eco Energy, LLC's MPCA Permit Application.

Neighbors Against the Burner -- a Twin Cities organization created to oppose the St. Paul Rock-Tenn Plant and the Midtown project.

"A Kinder, Gentler Smokestack" -- a September 5, 2007 City Pages article.

"Project isn't catching fire with neighbors" -- a December 20, 2007 StarTribune article.

Green Institute's December 7, 2007 comment letter to MPCA expressing its concerns about the current permit.

Green Delaware Alert -- announcing passage of the Delaware ban on incinerators.

Connett, Paul, 1998, “Municipal waste incineration: a poor solution for the twenty first century."

Michelle Allsopp, Pat Costner and Paul Johnson. 2001 “Incineration and human health.” Greenpeace Research Laboratories, University of Exeter, UK.

National Resource Council. 2000. “Waste incineration and public health.” Washington, D.C., National Academy Press.

Ewall, Mike. 2000. “The Burning issues with Biomass.” Green Energy.