ELLSWORTH – The Ellsworth Village Hall was packed Monday, March 18 for a special board meeting on the proposed anaerobic digester, along with roughly 60 attendees tuned in online. Many people were convinced the board would vote on the digester that night; however, Village President Becky Beissel assured them that was not the case.

Beissel made clear the meeting was for the board to hear from Department of Natural Resources representatives about the permitting process for anaerobic digesters. It was also an opportunity for trustees Andrew Borner and Tony Hines and Village Administrator/Clerk-Treasurer Brad Roy to talk about their trip to view Bigadan anaerobic digesters in Denmark.

“I would like to remind everyone that this is not a public hearing,” Beissel said. “The point of this meeting is to hear from the DNR about their permitting and hear about the village travel to Denmark. There have been two public hearings on the proposed digester which allowed for over six hours of public comment.”

During the public hearings, the board heard comments on method or processing, the size of the facility, workers, emissions, pollutants, meeting processes, property values, truck traffic, odor, noise pollution, loss of tax base, conflicts of interest, biofilters, future health concerns, why Ellsworth was chosen, leak concerns, chemicals, prevalence of digesters, neighboring uses, PILOT payments, water usage and pressure, county oversight, sand in water and potential benefits.

“We are not here to listen to the same comments again,” Beissel said. “The meeting tonight is for listening and learning. I understand there are many opinions surrounding this topic. We have been working hard to gain as much insight and knowledge as possible to help us in our decision and that's what we will continue to do here tonight. Please be respectful and orderly so we can learn together.”

Beissel said comments would be limited to one minute and had to be about the information presented that night. She also told people they had to make their comments from the podium.

“We need to have another public hearing about this. I feel very strongly about this,” said Trustee Ryan Bench. “Just because something is done right, doesn’t always make it right.”

Lisa Olson, a resident of Woodworth Street, asked the village board to remember a quote from the Design Ellsworth summit in January 2019. She quoted from the final report.

“The people from Ellsworth are its most valuable resource. Vital communities work together to tackle issues for the benefit of the entire community, not just a small part of the community,” she said.

Lance Austin, who is running for trustee in the April 2 election, asked if the meeting should be postponed since Village Attorney Bob Loberg wasn’t in attendance. Trustee Tom Schutz agreed and made a motion to table the discussion, which Trustee Tony Hines seconded. Schutz said he also felt a larger meeting space is needed.

“I don’t think that tabling this meeting is the right thing to do,” said Bench. “I think we need to hear from the people that went on the trip. The way the agenda was put up was maybe not the best.”

The motion failed.

DNR information

Roy said village staff isn’t qualified to answer questions on emissions, possible spills, etc., so that’s where DNR permitting comes in.

“They can’t get into specifics until they see a design, then they could respond specifically to it.” Roy said. “Their answers will be kind of vague on some things.”

Nate Willis, a DNR wastewater engineer, and Jill Schoen, director of the DNR’s Watershed Management Program, were on hand to provide information.

Schoen, who also handles CAFO permitting, said the DNR is working with 8-10 other digesters around the state to navigate the permitting process.

In general, the DNR regulates discharges of pollutants to the environment, air emissions, air permitting issues, evaluating the sources of materials coming in (CAFOs or unpermitted smaller farms), and oversight of the management of the output/waste streams, whether that’s a nutrient source put back on the land in a Nutrient Management Plan.

Schoen said stormwater and erosion control permits will be needed for the operation and design of the facility, if the village moves forward with it, and possibly an air permit.  

“Farms that are contributing manure to the facility may need to modify their existing permit or work with their local NRCS specialist to modify their Nutrient Management Plans or manage any nutrients coming back to their farms,” Schoen said.

Willis, who drafts permits for industrial facilities (pulp and paper mills, cheese plants), said it depends on the types of waste the facility is accepting.

“Some accept strictly CAFO manure, largely tracked based on flow rate back to fields,” Willis said. “Any types of waste that go out to fields, any type the digester accepts, it might look closer to an industrial land spreading permit.”

In terms of conditions for Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) permits, all have standard conditions, Schoen said, such as spill permitting, operation, maintenance, and records retention requirements.

“We have digesters that accept all three types of waste, so the devil is really in the details when it comes to these types of permits,” Schoen said. “We will need to know the proportion of waste. If they do accept industrial liquid waste, say from a creamery, it will be a different permit.”

All digesters will have some form of land spreading: the specific requirements are based on the type of material the digester accepts, plus other factors such as farms’ waste storage requirements, soil quality, crop needs, etc. Schoen said. Some digesters also need a license to sell the product as commercial fertilizer.

Schoen said there is no such thing as an “odor permit.” The emission limits will be based on what type of materials are being managed.

“The permit for the air … would also look at operations, maintenance, making sure they are taking steps to mitigating the enforcement,” she said.

When Hines accused the DNR of not enforcing anything with the creamery, Schoen said she’d look into compliance.

Borner asked Schoen how the DNR measures air emissions and how they’re enforced. Schoen said DNR regulates air and odor differently.

“If the plant is managed appropriately, odor hasn’t been a problem in the digesters we have seen,” Schoen said. “There aren’t specific limitations on odor, but the department will be looking at specific constituents and making sure they’re following limits. The DNR looks at the materials coming in, how they’re being processed. Sometimes there is actual monitoring required, but in other situations it’s more of the operating, maintenance and records.”

Schoen said the DNR regulates types of chemicals that cause odor, but odor itself is not regulated.

“We lean on preventative measures, but there’s not a specific standard for odor,” she said.

The village would need to come up with its own regulations on odor, Roy surmised.

Willis said he’s not sure how often the facility would be inspected, but it would depend on its size. Smaller facilities are usually inspected every other year.

At this point, some audience members began shouting questions from the crowd. One man asked why another site hasn’t been considered.

“They came to us about that site,” Beissel said. “We make the decision based on what they ask.”

Town of Gilman farmer John Shafer, who spoke online, said the DNR does a thankless task, while being underfunded and understaffed.

“I think this could be beneficial for the community but there are a lot of questions that should be asked, such as could PFAS be mixed in with the digestate? We need to have somebody that can enforce such a facility. I think it would be beneficial for the village and county to have a moratorium on such a facility for at least a year until things are in place. I’m worried about groundwater contamination. The DNR very rarely denies a permit and to me that’s a problem,” Shafer said.

Schoen said the DNR is tasked with looking at the proposal, the specifics and comparing that to the regulations at hand and making a decision.

“If a facility comes to the department that may not meet the standards, we’ll work with them so they can come up with something that meets the standards,” Schoen said. “We go back to the drawing board. Our goal is that they meet regulatory standards.”

Larry Langer, who spoke at the podium as asked, said taxpayers deserve better.

“There’s a lot of people who are upset and asking questions. I’ve been in the village for almost 40 years. I called the DNR before and I don’t get much of a response. I just don’t trust it. Use a lot of caution. I never would have bought the property (on Halls Hill) if I had known there was going to be a ‘refinery’ next door.”

Resident Melinda Thunstrom asked if an environmental impact study had been done.

“Many of the permits we’re talking about are considered an integrated analysis,” Schoen said. “As part of the process, we evaluate the environmental impact the process would have. A formal environmental impact statement, most of the permits we’re talking about, don’t require that.

“Air management, wastewater, stormwater permits, would have an evaluation as part of the permit process but not a separate environmental impact analysis. Usually they’re reserved for things like the Line 5 pipeline project.”

Denmark tour

The village board authorized Borner, Hines and Roy to travel to Denmark to tour three anaerobic digester facilities owned by Bigadan. The trip cost $7,151.43 and came from the village’s economic development fund.

The proposed digester is based on the Kliplev facility in Denmark, Roy said. The men met with plant staff and a local municipal official. The plant, which began operations in 2022, uses co-digestion of dairy and pig manure, chicken litter, industrial and organic food waste. No organic food waste is proposed in Ellsworth, Roy said. Kliplev sees 100 trucks per day (200 total trips). Bigadan is proposing 150 trucks per day (300 total trips) in Ellsworth.

The plant is 1,000 feet from a residence and 2,500 from a McDonald’s, Roy said.

“The municipality did not express any concerns with the facility and they reported they had not had any environmental issues,” Roy said.

Borner added the communities had the exact same concerns as Ellsworth. The facility keeps a complaint log and communicates with neighbors via Facebook.

“When we got there all the doors were open,” Hines said. “We talked to a few of the neighbors. And there was one complaint.”

Hines agreed the trucks that drove into the plant were not covered in manure and didn’t need to line up outside.

At this point, people began shouting from the audience. One man was angry because the agenda made him believe the board was going to vote. Another resident complained of meeting minutes not being online and meetings not recorded.

The trio continued with their presentation. They said the manure trucks delivered the manure in sealed containers, which did not have an odor. All trucks were washed before exiting the building. The admitted the odor inside the receiving building is strong and unpleasant, but negative pressure keeps the odor inside when the doors open. Outside a faint odor was present, but all three men agreed the odor would not be present at the property lines in Ellsworth.

The men also visited the Horsens and Kalundborg facilities. A neighborhood is located 2,200 feet from the Kalundborg plant. The men spoke to a couple of neighbors, who said they weren’t informed when the facility was being built in 2018. One said there hadn’t been any problems with odors in the four years he’d lived there. Another said there hadn’t been any in 10-12 months.

General information listed in the report included:

• Bigadan began prioritizing building, owning and operating facilities around 2010. All facilities are built to Danish standards (high environmental standards).
• They have found that the reception and pretreatment are the biggest difference between digesters and reception has the biggest impact on odor.
• There will be odors with the commissioning (starting phase). The odor is not constant but will likely be present daily one to two hours. Communication with neighbors is vital.
• All new facilities will be managed by Bigadan Denmark staff for a minimum of five years before turning operations over to local staff. If approved, the initial Ellsworth facility manager will have 30 years of experience.
• The biofilter is very important in managing odors. Carbon-based biofilters are superior. Bigadan has established an equipment replacement schedule instead of waiting for the equipment to fail.
• The tours provided were thorough. Even though we witnessed problems at some of the facilities (door issues), all facilities we toured were operated very efficiently and professionally.
• The facilities are very large with an “industrial” appearance.
• The odors within the buildings are very strong. Outdoors, at the site, odors are minimal and not likely to leave the site.
• Bigadan was adamant that instances of odor will occur from time to time. The commissioning phase (startup) will have the greatest likelihood of odors.
• With Kliplev being the model for the proposed Ellsworth facility, all the village representatives agreed that odor from the proposed Ellsworth facility is not an issue and should not be a main concern regarding its permitting in Ellsworth.
• Truck traffic at the sites were efficient; we did not witness any trucks waiting to enter the site or a building.
• We would have liked to talk to more of the neighbors of the Kalundborg plant, but the number who were at their residence and language barriers limited it to two interviews. However, those two interviews verified what we were told by Bigadan.
• Bigadan has taken what they have learned from their various facilities and integrated that into its other sites.

During and after the presentation, people hurled insults and questions in a chaotic fashion. One person yelled that Roy lives in River Falls; another shouted that the digester would only benefit the Creamery, not the residents.

To applause, Langer said. “Why isn’t it out in the country somewhere where the farmers can have it and have at it? All of this controversy is unnecessary and it shouldn’t happen. I’m at retirement age and I’m appalled. I can’t sleep at night.”

Resident Serina Hendrickson, who called The Journal “The Urinal,” claimed “everyone is talking about leaving” thanks to the lack of information, possible Ellsworth schools referendum, the new judicial facility and this digester. She said no one wants to ask questions because their kids might be mistreated or they might lose their jobs.

“People don’t want to come talk here. We can’t see the due diligence. No one wants to read the paper or minutes,” she said.  

Other questions filtered in about the website, infrastructure, holding a referendum, and fire department training.

Schutz blurted out that Ellsworth Fire is not in favor of the facility; Beissel chided him that that information was part of closed session talks.

“Well, you didn’t tell me I couldn’t! Nobody answers anything around here,” he said.

The meeting ended with a resident accusing Beissel of being in cahoots with the creamery and resident Sean Hall saying he wants to file an ethics complaint against Beissel for conflict of interest. Beissel said Loberg and the League of Municipalities has ensured her there isn’t.

A Payment in Lieu of Taxes schedule published on the village website shows the village could gain almost $14 million in revenue over a 30-year period if this is approved.

The village board will hold a special meeting March 28 to go into closed session to discuss the Memorandum of Understanding, Beissel said.

“If the board decides negotiations are complete, we’ll probably schedule another meeting in early April,” she added.

For more information, visit Proposed Ellsworth Bioenergy Digester Project | Ellsworth, WI (villageofellsworth.org)