While this is an issue that dates back to this time last year, I think it is important to again revisit a report released in opposition to the proposed FibroHills plant in Surry County. On May 6, 2009, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League (BREDL) released a study that was said to show results which demonstrate that this proposed plant would not be able to meet North Carolina’s stringent air permitting requirements and would endanger local residents. This report was widely distributed and BREDL held meetings around the state to present their findings.

However … as it turns out … this is a seriously flawed analysis that relies on faulty assumptions, omits key information, and distorts the facts.

Soon after this BREDL study was released, Fibrowatt completed a review of BREDL’s study and released an accurate presentation of the facts (opens as .pdf; file is 1MB). When the BREDL report is corrected and updated using accurate/factual data, their report shows that the planned Fibrowatt plant in Surry would easily meet the standards that BREDL was concerned about.

Nonetheless, this BREDL report continues to surface and has been referenced by opponents as “credible evidence” against the development of a plant in Surry County.

While we support a healthy debate on the merits of the FibroHills plant, a process that would naturally include the very extensive permitting process, we will not sit back idly and let a flawed report continue to be used against the project or to attack the Surry County Board of Commissioners. To have a healthy debate on the FibroHills project requires a debate built around credible evidence – not the BREDL report.

Here are a few examples of where BREDL’s analysis is misleading and wrong:

  • The BREDL report fails to acknowledge that a Fibrowatt plant would actually meet North Carolina standards using the same model they used.
  • The report did not include the full results of their modeling that would have shown this.
  • BREDL used a second model that is simply not valid for this type of analysis.
  • Actual testing conducted for emissions at the Minnesota plant show that emissions are 10 to 95 times lower than the levels used in the BREDL analysis.
  • Using this actual testing data shows that each of the emissions are more than 100 times below the applicable North Carolina risk-based standard.

We respect organizations that rely on facts as the basis for their position. If BREDL wants to remain a credible player in the debate over the FibroHills project, I think it is time that BREDL acknowledges that their report is flawed, retract the report, and regain their credibility through factual discussion.