SPRINGFIELD — Nearly 30 organizations in Springfield are lending their support to the Springfield City Council’s fight against a recent ruling that revives a controversial biomass plant proposal by Palmer Renewable Energy.
Springfield Climate Justice Coalition lead organizer Naia Tenerowicz sent a letter to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that urges the SJC to put PRE’s biomass plant proposal to rest by taking up an appeals request by the City Council.
The letter was signed by the 30 organizations, according to SCJC, including Arise for Social Justice, Public Health Institute of Western Mass. and Climate Action Now Western Mass.
The organizations argue that a buildout of a biomass plant would invite an environmental catastrophe to the city of Springfield.
“This case is about more than a permit — it’s about whether our legal system protects people or polluters,” said Tenerowicz. “Our community has done the work to prove that the laws have changed, the stakes are higher and the public interest is undeniable. Now we need the court to show that same courage and conviction.”
Despite years of opposition from environmental advocates and Springfield city councilors, the Massachusetts Appeals Court decided on May 8 that PRE’s previously expired permits for a 35-megawatt biomass power plant project were actually valid due to a post-Recession law meant to stimulate development.
In response to this ruling, the City Council — which has been battling against PRE for 14 years — voted 7-0 in favor of appealing the court’s decision during a late spring meeting.
“We are hopeful that the SJC will hear our case and put an end to this seemingly interminable dispute,” said Springfield City Council President Michael Fenton at the time. “The law in Massachusetts says a building permit is only good for six months, but the developer contends that a building permit from almost 14 years ago is still valid. Allowing such an old permit to avoid expiration would be, in my opinion, the definition of an absurd result. It’s time to let this bad idea go.”
As previously reported by Reminder Publishing, the city originally granted a special permit to PRE in 2008 for the buildout of a biomass power plant at 1000 Page Blvd. in East Springfield. Since that time, the council and PRE have gone back and forth in court as opposition for the plant among councilors and residents continued to grow.
In 2021, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection revoked the air permit it granted PRE in 2012, ostensibly ending any chance of the project from advancing. But the project is now revived after the Appeals Court decided to reinstate building permits that the city granted to PRE in 2011.
The recent litigation says state building code requires commencement of construction to occur within 180 days after a building permit is granted, but PRE argued that their failure to comply with that law was because of the City Council’s decision to make zoning amendments in 2013, which required special use permit from the council for projects as large as the biomass one.
Advocates and representatives of the council have been distraught by the Appeals Court decision to reinstate the 2011 permits.
“The court decision is disappointing, especially considering that Springfield community members and elected officials have said no to this plant for a decade,” said Suhasini Ghosh, staff attorney for Conservation Law Foundation, the body representing the council in court. “The developer’s permits don’t reflect today’s laws, and the facility will bring harm and pollution to a community that does not want or need more dirty air. CLF will not stop in its fight for clean air for everyone in Springfield.”
The SCJC’s letter to the SJC delineates the dangers of biomass plants, stating that the plants typically emit harmful air pollutants and disproportionately affect low-income communities and communities of color.
“The Springfield community is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of the climate crisis, as are many low-income environmental justice communities,” the letter states. “Many households in our community cannot afford to install or pay the bills for air conditioning, so they have no choice but to suffer through the extreme heat, often with windows left open for air circulation, which allows outdoor air pollution in.”
The SCJC also argued that environmental realities have changed in the 14 years since the biomass plant permits were first granted, and a buildout of the biomass plant would go against the state and city’s current climate policies, They shared that the type of plant PRE wants to build emits 50-60% more carbon dioxide than modern coal plants and 200-300% more carbon dioxide than natural gas plants per unit of energy generated.
The letter mentions that many Springfield residents suffer from asthma and other health conditions. As of 2024, the city was ranked the 4th “asthma capital” in the nation and was as high as 1 in 2019.
“SCJC and our allies have worked to prevent Palmer Renewable Energy from building a toxic and highly polluting biomass power plant in East Springfield since the plant was first proposed over 15 years ago,” the letter states. “Our community has cheered at this power plant’s defeat repeatedly, only to see it rise from the dead again and again.”
The SCJC states that the granting of a further appellate review application by the SJC would help put the biomass matter to rest.
Readers can visit previous Reminder Publishing for more information on the biomass plant saga at tinyurl.com/y66fusn8. People can also read the SCJC’s full letter at tinyurl.com/3b54k5kv.
