If you have been following Fibrowatt in North Carolina, you may have heard news last week that the Yadkin Valley Chamber of Commerce in Elkin backed off of its previous support for our proposed FibroHills project in Surry County. While we know the Chamber continues to recognize the importance of the significant financial investment, new jobs, and economic spin-off that a Fibrowatt plant could have in Surry County, we also recognize the significant pressure that the Chamber has had to endure over its support of this project. It’s a disappointing development, but I think we understand why the Chamber has taken this step – avoiding further controversy that has arisen within its own membership regarding this project.

For some people near the proposed site near Elkin, the Fibrowatt project has become a very divisive issue. This is a result that likely would not have come about were it not for the long time it is taking to secure power purchase agreements (PPA) for each of our projects.

When sites were chosen in Sampson, Montgomery, and Surry (opens as pdf) – we were following a timeline that was laid out to help the utilities, co-ops, and municipalities meet their obligations under the state’s landmark 2007 Renewable Energy and Efficiency Standard (Senate Bill 3) (opens as pdf). For Fibrowatt to provide a renewable energy solution capable of meeting the timelines established in this Bill, we needed to identify sites so that the design of the project could be pursued in support of the key environmental permits. It is the environmental permitting process, something that can not be reasonably pursued without first securing a PPA, which would have addressed many of the issues that have resulted in this Elkin divide.

A Fibrowatt plant can not be built without meeting stringent environmental criteria and Elkin, Surry, and Fibrowatt would have benefited greatly by the information provided as a part of this permitting process. If we thought that the PPA process would have dragged on this long, we never would have announced these sites – avoiding the unwarranted controversy that has arisen due to this lengthy delay.

As we indicated in our March 31 post about the end of the Joint Motion Process, we now feel more confident that the process is moving in a positive direction and the benefits of a permitting process directed by the State’s Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) can clear the air over these controversial issues.