Gant Daily.com published a Letter to the Editor from John Wright of Curwensville recently wherein he referred to our views at CleanCurwensville.com incorrectly and deemed us "environmenalist extremists".
Please read his letter and offer your comments on this post by clicking the "comment" button.
Here's a link to his letter:
http://www.gantdaily.com/news/38/ARTICLE/16968/2008-04-08.html
Comment below, please and have your voice heard.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
THIS LETTER WAS SENT INTO GANT DAILY.com AS A RESPONSE FROM ONE OF OUR SITE VISITORS. IT WAS SENT TO ETTARO VIA EMAIL AND POSTED HERE:
Dear Mr. Evans,
In a recent article, Mr. Wright suggested that Dioxins and Heavy Metals were acceptable compounds for humans and the environment so long as the permitted levels were "low". I would strongly suggest to this gentleman that he research the impacts of Dioxins and Heavy Metals and then do some research about the contamination that results when industries have "events" and "releases" that far exceed their air and water pollution permit levels.
What guarantees have been negotiated with this proposed plant to assure that NO accidental releases/events will occur? By the way, that would be impossible to guarantee. Who will pay the healthcare costs for this extra pollution burden to your city? How can you place a "price" on the illness and premature deaths that will occur because this company is there rather than another company that is not emitting dioxins and heavy metals? Will this company provide extra assistance to the families with high-risk pregnancies and children born with learning disabilities due to the presence of these heavy metals in the environment?
When considering the TOTAL impact of any industry, these are the very real issues that must be addressed. In Midland, Michigan we have been dealing with massive contamination issues from the industry located here. The fact that a company can be fined for exceeding their limits in their Air and Water Pollution Permits does absolutely nothing to make the problems in our environment and our bodies go away. Whose child will suffer and die prematurely because this company will locate in your city? Will it be yours or your best friend's wife that dies prematurely?
Sincerely,
Suzette Zelenak RN, BSN
Midland, MI
COMMENT EMAILED INTO ETTARO FROM A WEB VISITOR:
Hi Samuel,
There are more questions re your Coal-fired Ethanol plant than I have answers to at this point.
Where is the coal mined?
What is the chemical assay?
How will it be transported, and how much used?
Where will the flyash and ash be disposed?
Was there an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) performed and issued?
Was the a Department of Natural Resources (DNR) construction/air permit issued?
Were public hearings and a comment period for these permits held.
Keep in mind that all coal contains the pollutants mentioned in these documents, especially carbon dioxide, CO2. Unless the project has controls to effectively eliminate these pollutants from the air emissions, its quite probable that they are in violation of the Clean Air Act. If the plant does have such controls,(There are no such controls for CO2.), then the pollutants become a wastewater and/or solid waste problem. Is this addressed in any permit?
Gerhardt List
THIS COMMENT WAS SENT IN VIA EMAIL:
Sam, good afternoon.
I wish my schedule would permit to be more active in research but unfortunately the best I can do is offer some valid questions and possibly point out some reason to pause for reflection. While I am not completely opposed to an ethanol plant and I do feel that it could offer some advantages both in local economy and fuel, I am speculative on several accounts.
1. Air quality ; technology exists to permit facility’s to produce a product without a negative effect on the air quality and the EPA as of 2007 has lessened the restrictions on the output of pollutants from corn ethanol plants. The public should be aware of that, and a responsible company will not abide by those standards.
2. Location; why Clearfield county? There are many areas that would be suitable for their facility . since my research has shown that some of the higher-ups in the company are from Pittsburgh area, why not closer to that area? Is it possibly because our area has a lower income which often correlates to a lower standard of education, which could be construed as less organized resistance or standards?
3. Corn; of what sound reason are they going to ship in the corn from elsewhere? From my limited understanding they are not using local corn right away. We have many farmers here that have fields that could be used to provide corn and money locally to further stimulate our economy.
4. Food; while it is little known or publicized by our entertainment focused media, the world is having a food shortage and the U’S’ for the first time is having wheat shipped in rather than exporting it. It would seem to me that there is a problem with a system that takes food and uses it for fuel. Selfishness comes to mind about our society when it appears that fueling our ATVs, SUVs and other non-essential vehicles is more important than feeding the hungry.
5. Open dialogue for discussion; our elected officials should have a responsibility to inform the public about the downfalls of such a plant as well as they present the positives. As a community it should be up to us not just those elected to decide if it is worth it. As I stated previously, I work five days a week and spend a considerable time commuting, not to mention my home life is busy with work as well, time for myself let alone to research and double check every move and decisions our elected officials makes is few and far between. (thus why responsible leadership is important)
6. Cost effectiveness; the corn is going to be planted and harvested by machines that use fuel, it will then be transported to the facility by using fuel to make fuel. Then it well use about how much fuel to make the fuel. Then since ethanol cannot be piped easily they uses tankers to carry the fuel. Point to ponder, and how well ethanol not drive up the price of gas? And at what price per gallon does it need to be sold at to profitable? I am guessing somewhere above 2 dollars per gallon.
I believe the plant could be a good idea, if done correctly. But let’s not fool ourselves, we're not talking about a perpetual motion machine that will solve our problems. This is what I think every citizen needs to be made aware and research for themselves. Attached is a link I found that may be able to help spread the word.
http://www.cleanairwatch.org/
I look forward to being active in the discussion forum and attempting to do my part.
Gary Mcclure
State College
Drafter/Designer
Even though we get drafts and chemicals brought in from other areas, the closer you are to a coal fired plant, the worse off you and your children will be. I am writing about the lastest scientific discovery in autism research that shows as many as 1 in 50 kids are at risk for a mitochondrial disorder that can be "set off" from any number of factors --high level of pollutants being one...
The more we pile up the toxin load in these kids, the more likely all 1 in 50 are becoming ill. Some of these 1 in 50 will do ok, but the more we stress their bodies, the more likely they will tip over into the neurological effects.
Here is an abstract and link from a study out of texas. By the way, clfd county already has mercury and lead in the air --mostly from the shawville plant. One more plant, means more kids with problems. And the cost of raising such a child will far outweight the benefits of such a plant.
Higher levels of environmental mercury has been shown to produce higher rates of autism. http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/seed.pdf
Environmental mercury release, special education rates, and autism disorder: an ecological study of Texas.
Health & Place, 2006
Raymond F. Palmer, University of Texas Health Science Center
This study demonstrated the correlation between environmental mercury and autism rates in Texas. Excerpt:
"On average, for each 1,000 lb of environmentally released mercury, there was a 43% increase in the rate of special education services and a 61% increase in the rate of autism. The association between environmentally released mercury and special education rates were fully mediated by increased autism rates.
Post a Comment