Vermont Law and Graduate School’s Farmed Animal Advocacy Clinic (“FAAC”) assisted community members and public interest groups in submitting a public comment against the potential expansion of a Delaware biogas facility. The coalition highlighted the environmental and public health harms that would be caused by the facility’s expansion, and the failure to include the communities who would be directly impacted in its approval process.
The Bioenergy Innovation Center (“BIC”) in Seaford, Delaware is a biogas facility that composts waste collected from industrial poultry farms. The composting process creates biogas and digestate—both highly toxic and harmful products that cause water, air, and soil pollution. BIC seeks to expand its facility, and is requesting five permits from Delaware’s Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (“DNREC”) that will allow BIC to commercially sell the biogas and digestate.
If the permits are granted, BIC would process 250,000 tons of poultry waste annually—requiring the use of over three million birds. It may appear that BIC is simply utilizing products that would otherwise be wasted and that they are supporting the advancement of “clean energy.” However, the truth is industrial biogas development furthers our dependence upon factory-farmed animals and entrenches industrial agriculture, one of the world’s most environmentally destructive industries. The development of biogas causes environmental harms, negatively impacts nearby communities, and is unsustainable as a source of energy.
Due to the serious health and environmental risks of biogas facilities, many local community members and organizations are uniquely concerned about biogas development projects. Communities living near industrial biogas facilities are more likely to suffer from serious health complications such as respiratory diseases, tooth decay, and chronic stress. In addition, biogas facilities are usually placed near socially and economically vulnerable communities, creating significant environmental justice concerns.
Seaford, the Delaware community that would be most impacted by BIC’s expansion, has a disproportionately high rate of poverty and minority presence with approximately half the population identifying as black or Hispanic. Additionally, English is not the primary language for many residents, which creates substantial language barriers. Many members of the Hispanic and Haitian communities only speak Spanish or Haitian Creole respectively, and as a result, have had significant difficulties accessing resources. Seaford is also technologically disadvantaged—with one in four households lacking broadband internet access, and approximately one in five lacking a computer.
FAAC student clinician Bella O’Connor worked with a coalition of grassroots organizers and non-profit organizations, including the Socially Responsible Agriculture Project (“SRAP”) and Sussex Health & Environmental Network (“SHEN”), to fight against the expansion of BIC’s proposed project.
In addition to various environmental justice concerns brought to light by local organizers, they also argued DNREC violated Delaware’s public records and meetings requirements as well as its Administrative Code. According to Delaware’s Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) laws, once DNREC formed a subcommittee to approve BIC’s permits, they were required to allow the public to comment on BIC’s project at public meetings. DNREC has been holding their meetings exclusively online, in a manner that excludes participation, and therefore in violation of Delaware's FOIA laws.
Public meetings cannot be truly democratic when a significant number of interested citizens cannot attend. Because such a significant portion of the Seaford community is technologically disadvantaged, holding exclusively virtual meetings prevents a large segment of the affected population from commenting on the project. As a result, many residents have been denied any ability to meaningfully participate in the process—violating fundamental principles of inclusion, equal consideration, and critical public debate.
FAAC clinicians were particularly invested in this project because not only do industrial biogas facilities harm vulnerable communities, but they further entrench industrialized animal production methods that are cruel and unsustainable. Preventing the expansion of this project would protect the Seaford residents, expose the greenwashing campaigns of major meat and energy producers that deceptively claim massive biogas production as sustainable, and stymie the proliferation of industrial farming and manure lagoons. For the FAAC student clinicians, this was an amazing chance to collaborate with clients fighting against human, animal, and environmental exploitation.