Who's on First? Keeping track of the players
Taxpayer and power company, public and private, corporate and government—stakeholders come in all types, shapes and sizes. Rock-Tenn, the recycling company that is “a victim of good public policy,” is clearly the player with the most at stake in finding a new fuel source for its operations. But by the time that fuel source is identified, built and operating, every resident of Ramsey and Washington counties will be directly affected, with long-term implications reaching even farther afield.
The Burning Question: coal, garbage, biomass and sustainable energy
We invite YOU to weigh in with questions, comments, corrections and opinions at Your Burning Questions—readers and writers talk back, a space for dialogue and feedback for concerned citizens AND involved parties. Friday: Re-fueling Rock Tenn: environmental and economic challenges Saturday: Who’s on First? Keeping track of the players Sunday: Following the money: who pays and who profits Monday: Garbage or green energy: a look at the issues around RDF
Rock-Tenn corporation, the 500 employees in its St. Paul paper recycling plant, and the people who depend on them to recycle more than half of Minnesota’s paper waste need a new energy source because Xcel’s High Bridge plant will convert its fuel source from coal to more environmentally-friendly natural gas this summer. For more than 20 years, the High Bridge plant has supplied the steam to power Rock-Tenn’s recycling operation.
Rock-Tenn is really two players – the recycling plant in St. Paul and the corporate headquarters in Georgia. St. Paul managers made the case to corporate headquarters that it is worth paying the costs of an interim energy source (fuel oil and natural gas) and working out the details of a long-term energy source that will be economically and environmentally sustainable. A strong showing of support from the city of St. Paul and from Ramsey and Washington counties helped make their case to corporate, as did promises of financing assistance from the St. Paul Port Authority.
The St Paul Port Authority, with a mission of job creation and retention, is solidly behind building a new energy plant on Rock-Tenn’s 42-acre campus. According to Lorri Louder at the Port Authority, “We intend to finance, construct and own this power plant facility. They shut down their carton folding plant about 3-4 years ago and we lost about 300 jobs. It is our purpose to prevent this facility and all its great jobs, with a starting wage of about $18 an hour, from leaving.” As a public agency, the Port Authority can issue bonds to finance construction of the new facility, and private investors (individuals, mutual funds, pension funds) will purchase the bonds.
Ramsey and Washington counties and the city of St. Paul are equally determined to keep Rock-Tenn operating. They, too, want to keep Rock-Tenn’s jobs here, but they also have an interest in finding a market for the municipal solid waste (MSW). All of the leading players currently focus on refuse-derived fuel (RDF) as the fuel to be burned at the power-generating plant that will be sited at Rock-Tenn. The two counties are part of the area-wide Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board, which has developed a hierarchy of priorities in waste management. That hierarchy ranks disposal of MSW by incineration as preferable to disposal by burying.
Resource Recovery Technologies (RRT) runs a processing plant in Newport, MN that converts municipal solid waste (MSW) to refuse-derived fuel (RDF). The RRT plant gets municipal solid wastes from Ramsey and Washington counties, which subsidize its operation. RRT contracts with Xcel Energy to deliver the end product—RDF—to Xcel’s power-generating plants in Mankato (Wilmarth) and Red Wing.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA) must approve any new energy plant at Rock-Tenn, and has already approved the company’s plan for burning fuel oil and natural gas on site. MPCA procedures include an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), which may be followed by a more detailed Environmental Impact Study (EIS).
Foth & VanDyke is a consulting firm that has prepared a detailed report on the feasibility of an RDF power-generating plant at Rock-Tenn. The 100+ page report was prepared for Ramsey and Washington counties. Another report, due in July, will focus on non-landfill options for disposal, processing and use of construction and demolition waste (C&D).
The Green Institute, a non-profit environmental organization, is conducting a study of biomass fuel options other than RDF. The study, sponsored and paid for by Rock-Tenn, Ramsey and Washington counties, the City of St. Paul, Eureka Recycling, and the St. Paul Port Authority, will be completed later in March. While discussion among the major players has focused primarily on RDF, with some consideration of C&D wastes, the Green Institute study will look at urban wood waste, agricultural residues, dedicated energy crops (e.g., grasses), agricultural milling residues and forest residues.
District Energy and its subsidiary, Market Street Energy, operate St. Paul’s downtown district heating and cooling systems, and will operate the energy-generating plant at Rock-Tenn.
And then there’s the rest of us—people who live near Rock-Tenn, community activists and advocates, environmental organizations, taxpayers, generators of recycled paper and of municipal solid waste. A citizen advisory committee, currently being set up by Rock-Tenn and District Energy, will have some, as-yet-undefined input into the decision-making and planning processes. After Rock-Tenn decides what direction they want to take, they still face a lengthy process of applying for and negotiating the necessary environmental permits. Citizen input will come both through Rock-Tenn’s advisory committee and through the permitting process, and community councils and other groups will be involved.
The time frame for decision is now relatively short. Jack Greenshields, the manager of the St. Paul Rock-Tenn operation, hopes for a decision by the end of May, though others predict July as a more likely date.
Tomorrow: Following the Money looks at the costs associated with producing energy for Rock-Tenn and who will pay, directly and indirectly.


Subscribe






Comments
One More Player
Another key player in now ALAN MULLER, by his own report a hired consultant for “Neighbors Against the Burner,” a resident of Delaware, founder of “Green Delaware,” and whose credentials, so far as anyone can tell, are more about political activism than well informed perspectives on energy. He, along with NANCY HONE, chief organizer for “Neighbors Against the Burner,” herself a political activist, are folks to watch politically. The critical reader will attend to their use of rhetoric, their use (or lack of use) of clear citations to peer-reviewed scientific work, and the assumptions behind potentially inflammatory statements.
key players.....
Don’t know that I’m a key player, but Neighbors Against the Burner sure are. And fortunate for the community that this is so.
am
players
I agree that Neighbors Against the Burner are to be considered MAJOR players. It is interesting that in the RCAP process and any process connected with the Rock Tenn burner, or should I say District Energy Burner, NAB seems never to be
considered players. Hello? Anyone listening? If it were not for NAB, the citizens of St. Paul AND Minneapolis would
never have been alerted to the fact that an incinerator was being planned as quietly as possible for both cities.
The Mayors of both cities should have had well publicized public notice and discussions about these burners before
huge public funds were committed for them. Our public officials that have signed off on incinerators being built in their
cities should be ashamed of themselves and without NAB the citizens would not only not known about them but not
been apprised of the worldwide research that shows the dangers of them.
Why was NAB not considered players? Mary?
Players then and now
I agree that Neighbors Against the Burner is now a major player. This article was written in February, 2007. When was NAB founded?
Players then and now
I thought something was wrong, Mary. Sorry. I just could not figure out when it was written as at the top of the page it
said Jan.4,2008 and then Mr. Allchin had some pointed remarks about some of NAB’s leaders written recently in late December.
But then I saw an old comment from one of the NAB Leaders. You are right. If this is a 2-07 article, NAB, I think officially
started soon after that.Sorry Mary and thankyou for the clarification.
What to do?
Maybe they could take all the garbage at Rock-Tenn and bury it in your backyard, because that would probably make all you stupid people happy.
Response to One More Player
If Douglas Allchin defines political activists as concerned citizens willing to spend time, energy and money to help keep our planet and our neighborhoods free of toxic wastes while holding down full time jobs and taking care of their families, then I guess I define myself as well as others as political activists (and proud of it). This is what makes a democracy work.
Please be specific when you accuse others of poor citations and lack of peer-reviewed articles. I will willing check out sources, etc, because I want to make sure I have the best references possible. I have read many of the articles cited on Neighbors Against the Burners’ web site and have found them very sound. On the other hand I have yet to find an article that says incineration is really good for the environment and what we are breathing everyday from the fumes they put out improves the health of our children and ourselves. I have asked many of the people in the city, state and federal agencies involved in this issue to give me some kind of reassurance that building incinerators won’t harm our health. So far no one has stepped up to the plate.
For all of Ms. Ferguson’s
For all of Ms. Ferguson’s “activism” in protecting public health, she has failed to address the immediate source of air toxics in her community: the vehicles on the roads, which produce 90% of the criteria pollutants — as well as mercury and dioxins. See air toxics inventory data provided by the MPCA. Any energy facility at Rock Tenn will add only marginally to that. Nor did we hear from Ms. Ferguson or others when the pollutants from burning coal went into the air from the High Bridge Plant, when it provided steam power to Rock Tenn. (Whose neighbors are we concerned about?) Ms. Ferguon is not a major player, although a frequent commentator.
Thank you for your article.
Thank you for your article. Someone forwarded it on to me. I am also a concerned resident; I would like to retain Rock Tenn and their jobs, but do not want garbage burned in the midst of our neighborhoods. Some of my neighbors are elderly, some have small children and some have health concerns like asthma. I also grow an organic vegetable garden in my backyard and plan to collect rainwater for it. My interests are for the public health. Erin Murphy, my legislator, is also aware of this issue. Biomass was defined in 2005-6 legislatively as including RDF, and we believe that is misleading, since the public would assume “bio“mass was something that at one time had been a living thing. I would be less opposed to actual “bio“mass being burned, but that still generates carbon and emits greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The site has great solar opportunities, wind possiblities, and they already tap into the groundwater which could offer geothermal opportunites. There are solutions beyond RDF, and they would enhance and make a more livable community for Saint Paul. Such a “green” power plant could also be used to generate energy for the Central Corridor LRT, but it would be objectionable if it were RDF burned to fuel the line. Thanks again for your article and interest.
Dear Mary,
Dear Mary,
With all due respect to Lori Lauder,and may I add that she is a real sweetheart,
how can she say no tax money will be spent? Where does she think her funds come from? It can’t all be from bonds.
Nancy Hone
Post new comment