LISBON - An environmental activist organization criticized for warning federal regulators about the possible ramifications of the Baard Energy project say it is within it rights to do so and will continue to act in this manner.

"We want the law to be followed and told the (U.S.) Department of Energy that. We believe that's within our rights," said Shannon Fisk, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The NRDC, along with the Sierra Club, have appealed the state and federal decisions to award the permits needed for Baard to build a $6 billion coal-to-liquid fuel conversion plant on property in the Wellsville area the Columbiana County Port Authority intends to purchase.

A story published in Tuesday's Salem News referred to comments by port authority officials who said Baard is concerned environmental groups are spreading misinformation about the project to the energy department, which may be asked to loan money for the project. Baard applied to seek a $2.5 billion federal loan from the energy department but withdrew the application while the appeals are pending.

Fisk said the NRDC is concerned because the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has a poor track record when it comes to ensuring companies live up to the environmental regulatory permits it issues. He said this could have a significant effect on the environment given the scope of this project, which involves processing 7 million tons of coal and 2 million tons of biomass per year as part of the conversion process.

Secondly, the NRDC believes Baard is overselling the project by claiming it will be more environmentally friendly than the permits require.

"We remain very concerned that the permits don't match their public statements," said NRDC spokesman Josh Mogerman.

For example, Baard claims 85 percent of the plant's carbon dioxide emissions will be captured and recycled, and up to 30 percent of the 1.6 million tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the air will be generated by renewable biomass materials. But Fisk said the permit doesn't address either.

When the permits were issued in 2007 and 2008, carbon dioxide was still unregulated and not considered a pollutant, but last month the Obama administration formally declared it a dangerous pollutant and subject to federal regulation. Fisk said they believe the permit now should be made to address carbon dioxide emissions.

tgiambroni@mojonews.com