Question:   When I think of Renewable Energy, I think of wind, solar, and geothermal. Why shouldn't development of Renewable Energy Sources just be limited to these clear "green sources"?

Answer:   While we strongly support all Renewables, everyone must recognize current realities that severly restrict the development of these Renewable Energy options:

    Costs: On their website, The Southern Company (the largest electric utility in the Southeast) has listed their perspective of comparable costs of Renewables versus fossil fuel alternatives -- where Green options are 4 to 10 times more expensive than those of coal or natural gas.
    Natural Resources: We stronly incourage you to visit the U.S. Department of Energy website on wind, solar, and geothermal natural resources. You may be surprised that the Southeastern U.S. simply does not have the natural resources of western States. [You can also view U.S. Natural Resource maps for wind, solar, and geothermal].
    Biomass & Coal: Abundant resources that the Southeastern U.S. does have is biomass and coal-fired power plants that can co-fire biomass -- at a fraction of the cost of other Renewable Energy options. Co-firing in just one medium size power plant can create the eqivalent of 18,000 large solar panels!

Question: Since Florida is a peninsula and has prevailing winds to carry pollution off-shore, why should we be concerned about trying to improve air quality?
Answer: An American Lung Association Report (2001 State of the Air in Florida), gave 10 Florida counties an Air Quality Grade of "F". Most of these counties are located in central Florida -- where we are focusing energy crop research.

Question: I heard that co-firing wood fuel with coal just doesn't work. Do you have any documented illustrations?

Answer: According to the U.S. Department of Energy, approximately 20 electric utilities are already co-firing biomass with coal. By clicking here you can review web search engine results on biomass co-firing. Here in Florida, Tampa Electric's co-firing of biomass at its Gannon Generation Station is the primary source of Green Energy for its Smart Source marketing program.

Question: In using energy crop biomass at coal units, why are co-firing rates limited to about 5%?
Answer: While there are numerous factors, perhaps the most significant is reduced efficiency of the power plant -- called a boiler de-rate. Since green wood fuel contains about 50% water, the flame temperature within a boiler is lowered, thus reducing the amount of kilowatts that can be generated. Engineering test burns have shown that at co-firing rates greater than approximately 5%, boiler de-rate can become a significant operational problem.

Question: I believe the current science is inconclusive as to whether Global Warming is even occuring (through the burning of fossil fuels), or that it will be harmful. Why should I support your Renewable Energy efforts in central Florida?
Answer: The next time you drive your car in the summertime, look up at the sky and you should have the answer. What you will likely see is smog (a brown haze) which is formed by the reaction of pollutants such as nitrogen oxide (emitted mainly from cars and power plants) with the heat of the air.

Question: How does co-firing energy crop fuel in coal power plants reduce the formation of smog?
Answer: Smog is formed by a combination of three factors -- all of which are addressed by co-firing energy crop fuel. Nitrogen oxide (NOx) is formed as a result of (1) the nitrogen content of fuel; (2) flame temperature within a power plant's boiler. (3) Smog is formed by the reaction of NOx with high outside air temperatures typically occuring in the summer. Since energy crops have less than ~50% the nitrogen content of coal and a higher water moisture level (lowering a boiler's flame temperature), Power Plant NOx emissions can be reduced. Also, energy crops grown near urban areas (such as our Lakeland project which is less than 2 miles from the center of downtown) can reduce the "heat island effect" of an urban area.

Question: Since you are co-firing such a small percentage of a power plant's total fuel requirements, aren't you exagerating the air quality benefits of using energy crop fuel?
Answer: In engineering tests performed at Tampa Electric's Gannon Power Station, at a co-firing rate (by fuel weight) of approximately 4.5%, overall NOx emissions were reduced by about 7%. When addressing this issue, one needs to recognize just how large power plants are. When time permits, we will do some exact math -- but clearly, achieving a 7% reduction in NOx emissions from a very large power plant has the equivalent of removing thousands of cars (the other major source of NOx producing smog) off the road.

Question: Won't co-firing energy crop fuel let older and dirtier coal power plants to "just sqeeze by" environmental laws, allowing them to pollute longer?
Answer: Many leading Policymakers believe that the model of future air quality federal regulations will be the Clean Air Act of 1990 (CAA) -- which introduced the concept of environmental capitalism. In the CAA, instead of requiring that every power company put pollution control equipment on their smokestacks (called command and control regulation), the U.S. Government told companies that they could reduce pollution in any way that worked. This created market competition to find cheaper ways to reduce emissions and led to cheaper prices for coal and pollution control equipment. We believe that energy crop co-firing should be viewed as another market option in reducing air emissions. The Boston Globe has an excellent article on this subject.