FERC: 108 MW of biomass power brought online in November

By Erin Voegele | December 27, 2013

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Office of Energy Projects has published the November edition of its Energy Infrastructure Update, reporting that eight new biomass generation units were placed into service during the month with a combined capacity of 108 megawatts (MW).

According to the report, 75 new biomass generation units were placed into service during the first 11 months of 2013. Together, these units have a combined capacity of 519 MW. In 2012, 148 biomass units with a combined capacity of 565 MW were placed into service during the first 11 months of the year.

In addition to the eight biomass units placed into service in November, the FERC also reported that one water unit with a capacity of 4 MW, four wind units with a combined 81 MW of capacity, one geothermal steam unit with a capacity of 25 MW, and 14 solar units with a combined 177 MW of capacity were placed into serve. No new coal, natural gas, nuclear, oil or waste heat units were placed into service during the month.

As of the close of November, the FERC reported that there was 15.49 gigawatts (GW) of installed operating biomass generating capacity in the U.S. This equates to approximately 1.34 percent of total capacity.

Within the November report, the FERC highlighted two biomass projects that came online during the month. EDF Renewable Energy Service’s two biomass plants in South Carolina were brought online in November. The project includes the Dorchester Biomass Plant and the Allendale Biomass Plant. The report also noted that Weyerhauser Co.’s 50 MW Rothchild, Wis., biomass phase 4 expansion project in Marathon County, Wis., is now online. The facility sells power to Wisconsin Energy Corp. under a long-term contract.  



2 Responses

  1. James Rust



    It would be nice if FERC would give prices in dollars per kilowatt for costs of these various types of power plants. Even better information would be costs in cents per kilowatt-hour for the cost of electricity from plants. If some types of plants are uneconomical, then this information would be available to the public. The renewable energy sources have big government subsidies to encourage their use. For uneconomical sources, giving price data would expose the waste of tax dollars that is so prevalent these days. It is in the billions per year. We do know solar and wind are not reliable because of their various on-off behavior.

  2. Robert Davidson



    James makes valid points. The developement and use of renewable energy sources is very desirable, but balanced reporting should include the negatives as well as the positives. The taxpayer paying the bill has a right to know the true costs of developement and research.


    Leave a Reply

    Biomass Magazine encourages encourages civil conversation and debate. However, we reserve the right to delete comments for reasons including but not limited to: any type of attack, injurious statements, profanity, business solicitations or other advertising.

    Comments are closed