[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6348185,"mediaKeyId","2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1","parentId",2243169,"title","Bill to expand Pacific Northwest biomass RECs draws support from facility operators and opposition from clean-power advocates","audioSeconds",422,"startMs",128626,"endMs",550972,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1&start=128&end=550","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1/thumbnail_128626.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6348185/Washington/Bill-to-expand-Pacific-Northwest-biomass-RECs-draws-support-from-facility-operators-and-opposition-from-clean-power-advocates","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6348185-89029452a10ab149ff48d9b635196523/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141988&Signature=Myj0wjsF68X6L6vEkEwD5wIrbyJKuR0VJ6ubwdPYB9prP~Sst5jmDP2Vw7XeTF~FqdHklMUWN4j4bmGD9obxeet2gfMQ4fTmbs2SMd8HUfoy~vTja4lDY9ywk89lUMD~0DBaxQRhAumz31zmpIIcw7cI-j9tuRTFgqhWkTbRFaMgnc4oo~JYlSu0btljVw9VXKgeSf3qAm543EIfr3~k-rcRg46Un08Zr1HDnLP4msYJb9rBVSivmRGw1hAU0LFTQwVCvUtcYsv2od7sEiESSwB9pSc0raUKvU5yo5Vt57H1G0u88nJyXVrm8BnDcxXGR0eGbv65YXvPuhhsIgeBow__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Environment & Energy ","date","2025-02-06T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 17-12, aimed at changing how \"qualified biomass energy\" is counted under the state Energy Independence Act (EIA), drew sharply divided testimony at a committee hearing.

Megan McFadden, committee staff, summarized the bill: the EIA requires utilities with 25,000 or more customers to meet renewable targets, and biomass is an eligible renewable resource when it meets specific conditions. The proposed change would alter the geographic and delivery requirements for older biomass facilities so that electricity from certain Pacific Northwest facilities could count for Washington utilities’ compliance.

Representative Kevin Waters, the bill’s sponsor, said targeted changes would help small biomass facilities remain viable in a difficult market and described regional benefits such as wildfire-mitigation by using forest residues and wood waste as fuel. \"It makes sense to me to try to make some targeted changes to help this facility stay viable in the face of a challenging market,\" Waters said, noting the facilities can turn wildfire-mitigation wood waste into energy.

Operators and counsel for biomass facilities testified in support. Greg Blair, managing general partner of Biomass 1 in White City, Oregon, said his plant generates enough electricity for about 25,000 homes from nearly 350,000 tons of forest residues and wood waste and pointed to the facility’s role in reducing wildfire risk. Kurt Lumpkin, Biomass 1’s general manager, said he employs 75 people and urged the committee to expand revenue options that could keep the plant operating.

Irene Sanger, attorney for Biomass 1, described the bill as \"a discreet and narrowly tailored amendment\" that would treat legacy qualified biomass like other renewable resources by allowing facilities located in the Pacific Northwest to supply RECs to Washington utilities; she emphasized the amendment would still require the purchaser to be a qualifying Washington utility.

Opponents warned the change could broaden an exception created for a single facility. Charley Thompson of the Northwest Energy Coalition opposed removing the requirement that a qualified biomass facility \"contribute to the utility's load,\" saying the original carve-out for legacy biomass was narrow and intended to apply only to a specific Washington facility. Thompson said it is not clear the bill would yield benefits to Washington customers who would effectively pay for RECs for electricity they would not receive.

The committee took testimony and recessed; no committee vote on HB 17-12 was recorded at this meeting. Supporters asked the committee to consider the bill as one piece of a regional solution to maintain small biomass operations, while opponents urged narrower language or additional protections to ensure Washington ratepayers see direct benefit.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Environment & Energy - 2/6/2025 8:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 17-12 would allow certain older biomass facilities in the Pacific Northwest to qualify renewable energy credits for Washington utilities under the Energy Independence Act; operators said the change could keep facilities operating and reduce wildfire fuel.","taxTitle","Environment & Energy, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20260,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6348181,"Environment & Energy Committee advances several bills; votes, amendments and roll calls recorded",37,246239,283252,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1&start=246&end=283","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1/thumbnail_246239.jpg","/articles/6348181/Washington/Environment-Energy-Committee-advances-several-bills-votes-amendments-and-roll-calls-recorded","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6348181-794d6413ad81f63b61f496e362720943/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141988&Signature=Vpx6m7jYSPFUbmVghoTS5ah5pX1jZjyyVB5NmSNYhlNKvgHobN6CTRhCaX-jcjNL2Y5hBt2alZp1KD3niXI9ZI6cSy5EIvvKWVqwTXbo2nRLzCOSk1d2I11p~9xDhFXQtmjMsLMRrFwSkdPrzfp-~eQIQV-jO3LqPb~34VFMBKNyO~rVi2wIs~Yqe5njw7IEJtBNLAlAku3aoDxCywH8lXth2zB2vYieByT8DZ~yGRcXAvSaftDmKo8tuX99o7EJV1bkgRQsmjXYGNDKCqwOijZA8JdwXAROOIIb2QwU409abrjjrfK7TZEcrdjMsj7BXa9FQUAfx9MrCk7SrluzFg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Environment & Energy Committee took formal action on several substitute bills, adopting an amendment on one measure and reporting others out of committee with due‑pass recommendations.

Substitute House Bill 15-43 (clean building standard flexibility): The committee adopted amendment MCPH 113 (technical changes and a tenant-protection clause that prohibits building owners from passing penalties for noncompliance to tenants). Vice Chair Hunt moved that substitute House Bill 15-43 be reported out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation; the committee recorded 20 ayes, 0 nays and 1 excused. The chair announced the result: \"By your vote, substitute House Bill 15 43 is reported out of committee with a due pass recommendation.\"

Substitute House Bill 15-22 (wildfire mitigation plans and UTC review): The committee approved a proposed substitute that requires electric companies to file wildfire mitigation plans with the Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC), extends UTC review timelines (from 60 to 120 days for some filings), requires at least one stakeholder workshop and calls for rules on landowner compensation and cost‑benefit analysis. The committee voted to report the substitute out with a due‑pass recommendation; staff announced 20 ayes and 1 excused.

Substitute House Bill 15-14 (thermal energy / district energy systems): The committee reported a proposed substitute out with a due‑pass recommendation after a roll-call vote. The substitute clarifies regulatory exemptions, requires consultation with gas companies on thermal energy planning, and delays a UTC interoperability report. The roll call recorded 19 ayes, 1 nay and 1 excused.

Substitute House Bill 14-97 (organic material management / food‑waste reduction): The committee reported the proposed substitute out of committee with a due‑pass recommendation following discussion and a roll-call vote. The substitute refines outreach and grant language, adjusts BIN color‑coding and labeling timelines, creates feasibility waivers for multifamily collection, caps small‑business penalties at $10,000 per year, and adds a waiver for certain paper cooking products. The recorded vote was 13 ayes, 7 nays and 1 excused.

Procedural notes: Several bills were discussed in detail before the committee recessed for caucus and returned to vote. Amendments adopted on 15-43 were described as largely technical with the tenant‑protection clause added during committee consideration. Multiple members voiced concern during debates—particularly over housing costs tied to waste-collection or building compliance rules—and those concerns were reflected in recorded nay votes on some measures.

The committee also heard testimony on other bills (including HB 16-30 on methane reporting and HB 17-12 on biomass RECs) but took no votes on those measures at this meeting.

Votes at a glance (committee reported out with \"due pass\" unless noted):
- Substitute HB 15-43: reported out with due pass recommendation; adopted amendment MCPH 113; tally 20 ayes, 0 nays, 1 excused (outcome: approved by committee).
- Substitute HB 15-22: reported out with due pass recommendation; tally 20 ayes, 0 nays, 1 excused (outcome: approved by committee).
- Substitute HB 15-14: reported out with due pass recommendation; roll-call tally 19 ayes, 1 nay, 1 excused (outcome: approved by committee).
- Substitute HB 14-97: reported out with due pass recommendation; roll-call tally 13 ayes, 7 nays, 1 excused (outcome: approved by committee).

Committee members were reminded by the chair to correct their votes if necessary while the tally was displayed; staff posted the final tallies on the record. The committee suspended hearings on some bills and kept others open for additional testimony or follow-up work.","The House Environment & Energy Committee reported several substitute bills out with due‑pass recommendations, adopting an amendment on the clean‑building bill and recording roll‑call results for others.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6348189,"Committee hears bill to require methane reporting from dairies and feedlots; industry and scientists urge caution",0,3627000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1&start=3627&end=3627","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2243169-7f5ceae82e6d94dc0f1f701572b8a6f1/thumbnail_3627000.jpg","/articles/6348189/Washington/Committee-hears-bill-to-require-methane-reporting-from-dairies-and-feedlots-industry-and-scientists-urge-caution","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6348189-f860cb391887cfff5714901d106101f4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771141988&Signature=DJQnLdBIqKRMjWFfLybHYbg~Xhk7eyXkSULv3d-1jtj-eF3qKXu26sY9YMpgD58Q3hdaKM1pcq7fCG4e4o1Lp0M~8KUM7nigWbbFVhdcblyDItLqu4AnHsOKUsxgL6hxxg7LNNC2r-ynKZSX30sQc0tznyJKgAe8Vd5OPnrMtBFFhSU4W~JyLFXxygUgH1VzDyxQjDf3R2g7RHzyTJrERs6ouPzSDgId0iuTLQ21nmgeXrhvIH6Dnv2pDki9uf547LTF5K21H4VZaWGDJii5J0V6Sryz4DBnJh1TVxymcROqx-c3tWletBiuDsOA-PSmIADUbOnjObWDfCszs98TOg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 16-30, a proposal to require annual reporting of methane emissions from dairies and feedlots to the Washington Department of Ecology, drew a mix of support and concern at a committee hearing.

Matt Sterling, staff to the committee, explained the bill’s intent and the statutory context. \"Under state law, greenhouse gas reporting is regulated by ecology under the state Clean Air Act,\" Sterling said, and he summarized that Ecology currently collects GHG reports from large facilities and may charge a fee for reporting.

The bill would require owners and operators of Washington dairies and feedlots to submit an annual methane report to Ecology. Representative Partially, the bill’s prime sponsor, said she brought the measure because \"we need to start with data,\" stressing that monitoring would rely on established algorithms and not on direct sensors attached to animals. She said monitoring could show whether the dairy sector is a material portion of state emissions and noted that management practices vary across farms.

Industry witnesses urged delay or more study. Jay Gordon, policy director for the Washington State Dairy Federation, told the committee Washington has about 1.1 million head of cattle today versus a peak of about 1.5 million in 1984 and said the dairy sector already pursues numerous emission-reduction actions driven by market demand. Jack Field of the Washington Cattle Feeders Association said feedlots and dairies help reuse food byproducts that otherwise would go to landfills and cautioned against unintended consequences from reporting requirements.

Researchers and technical witnesses emphasized measurement uncertainty. Brent Auverman, an agricultural engineer, and Galen Erickson, a ruminant nutrition specialist, described gaps in available data and the regional variability of emissions. Auverman cautioned that methods used in some reporting algorithms are derived from studies that may not scale to U.S. production systems; Erickson said feed, animal size and management can change emissions markedly and predicted substantial mitigation technology advances in coming years.

Joel Creswell, climate pollution reduction program manager at the Department of Ecology, provided technical detail on implementation. Creswell said Ecology’s current methods estimate methane from manure management and from feedlot surfaces but do not measure enteric fermentation (the methane produced directly in an animal’s gut). Ecology would need to adopt new methods during rulemaking to capture enteric emissions, he said, and Ecology would charge reporters an operating fee. Creswell told the committee Ecology currently identifies 10 licensed certified feedlots and 257 dairies that would be in scope and noted the program’s reporting fees: $429 per year for basic reporters and $2,269 per year for entities requiring third‑party verification.

Committee members also raised fiscal and equity concerns. Representative Dye cited a fiscal note estimate of more than $3,000,000 in fees associated with the bill and asked who would pay; Creswell said fees are assessed to entities required to report. Representatives from the Farm Bureau and individual dairy operators described highly variable on‑farm practices (feedstocks, manure handling, composting or worm‑bed systems) and warned a single statewide reporting approach could be inequitable without accounting for those differences.

The committee recessed the hearing after testimony; no floor or committee vote on HB 16-30 was recorded at this meeting. Staff and witnesses indicated multiple technical questions (which emissions categories are included, whether enteric versus manure management emissions would be reported, and how sequestration or offsets on a particular farm would be counted) will be resolved in rulemaking if the bill advances.

The hearing record includes requests from industry for state-funded measurement or pilot programs, and several members suggested stakeholder work to align any reporting approach with existing industry data and market-driven mitigation efforts.","The House Environment & Energy Committee heard testimony on House Bill 16-30, which would require dairies and feedlots to report annual methane emissions to the Department of Ecology. Proponents said improved data is needed; industry groups and researchers warned current methods and regional variability make precise reporting difficult.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill to expand Pacific Northwest biomass RECs draws support from facility operators and opposition from clean-power advocates

Environment & Energy Committee advances several bills; votes, amendments and roll calls recorded

Committee hears bill to require methane reporting from dairies and feedlots; industry and scientists urge caution