Activists, industry fight over details of new Minnesota carbon law

Environmental justice advocates are rejecting proposals to include waste incinerators and wood biomass plants among the carbon-free energy sources under a new state law that aims to make Minnesota’s power generation 100% carbon-free by 2040.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC), the governor’s board that regulates utilities, is seeking input on what should be considered carbon-free energy. It has received comments from utilities, the forestry industry and state agencies suggesting that sources that emit greenhouse gases, such as waste incinerators and woody biomass burners, should be included.

To several environmental groups and lawmakers, these suggestions are alarming and contrary to the intent of the law. The law defines carbon-free sources as those that generate electricity “without carbon dioxide emissions,” which would include sources such as wind, solar, hydro and nuclear.

“This should be a very easy question to answer,” said Andrea Lovoll of the Minnesota Environmental Justice Table.

Some state agencies and utilities disagree.

Two top Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) officials have filed a letter arguing that the PUC should designate waste incinerators and woody biomass furnaces as zero-emission facilities because they generate energy from waste that could emit more greenhouse gases in the form of methane, a potent pollutant, if sent to landfill.

Deputy Commissioners Frank Kohlasch and Kirk Koudelka said the PUC should look at emissions more broadly, rather than just focus on the “point of generation” to determine whether an energy source is carbon-free.

They also said the agency has discretion under the law to determine “partial compliance with the standard for such fuels.”

A group of lawmakers and environmentalists said Wednesday that’s not what DFL lawmakers had in mind when they passed the bill.

“Emission-free means emission-free,” said Rep. Frank Hornstein, DFL-Minneapolis.

Lawmakers expect the state to implement the laws, Hornstein said, not muddy the waters. The 100% carbon-free energy bill is a good goal, he said, but there’s no guarantee the 2040 deadline will be met. He noted that the Legislature approved a 2014 mandate for metro counties to recycle 75% of their waste by 2030, but recycling rates have stagnated and the goal seems out of reach.

“I see some resemblance,” he said.

Cecilia Calvo, director of advocacy and integration for the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, said she was disappointed that sources of pollution were being considered. It shows that passing regulations is only the first step and that people need to pay close attention to the implementation process.

“Ultimately, I think the industry and others will find a way to promote and protect their interests,” Calvo said.

Controversial sources

Garbage incinerators are considered renewable energy sources in most Minnesota jurisdictions, but that has long been a point of contention among environmental justice advocates, who point to the significant pollution the facilities produce and their location near diverse, low-income areas. Minnesota lawmakers stripped the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center (HERC) in Minneapolis of its renewable energy status when they passed the 100% Clean Energy Act in 2023. Six of Minnesota’s seven incinerators are still considered renewable energy sources, a lower standard than “zero emissions.”

Woody biomass, the burning of wood chips to produce electricity, has controversially been considered carbon neutral for years. The technology is popular in the European Union, which often sources its wood from the United States and Canada.

Minnesota Power operates a large woody biomass facility in Duluth, the Hibbard Renewable Energy Center, and has filed comments with the PUC arguing that the technology should be considered emission-free. But the facility produces a large amount of greenhouse gas pollution, according to a 2021 study examining Minnesota Power’s operations. The study was commissioned by Fresh Energy, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and the Sierra Club.

A coalition of environmental groups led by rural conservation organization CURE sent a comment letter Friday saying that including trash burning and woody biomass as renewable energy sources would further cause greenhouse gas pollution near diverse and low-income areas.

“Our path to carbon-free electricity should be based on two goals: achieving real emissions reductions while ensuring that already overburdened communities do not bear unjustified costs,” the group wrote.

The PUC has received dozens of comments on its inquiry and plans to hold a hearing in late September to determine what counts as zero-emission sources. However, a commission spokeswoman said no date has been set for the hearing or a decision.