Propaganda wrong term for REACH's Biomass facts

To the Editor:
I am writing regarding two different pieces in you paper’s August 22, 2008 issue.
First to correct Keith Testa’s story regarding the Biomass plant in Henniker and to correct the Editorial entitled Zoning Fairness.
Both stories refer to the mailer from the REACH organization. Both stories portray the “FACTS” in the REACH mailer as propaganda.
For your information, those pollution numbers were presented by Laidlaw to the Town of Ellicottville, NY as actual smoke stack emissions from their proposed Biomass power plant in that New York town. Those figures were part of a Findings of Fact report Ellicottville prepared after a three year study of Laidlaw’s proposal for a biomass power plant in their town.
Kudos to the town of Ellicottville, New York for demanding an in depth study before it swallowed any of Laidlaw’s erroneous claims. If you would like to read that report I will provide you with a copy.
I believe that you will be surprised to learn that Laidlaw’s calculations for the numerous pollutants that would have been emitted from that power plant are quite accurate.
Also, you most definitely will be surprised to learn that the pollution control measures that Laidlaw has discussed in previous meetings and those Representative French and Melissa Hawthorne, of the Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), either talked about or alluded to at the last meeting, are either, implausible, non effective, to costly or in fact are non existent for use with wood chip burning boilers.
Miss Hawthorne’s discussion of carbon neutrality was totally inaccurate. In the absence of a completed plan of the operation Biomass generator, a complete review of the current carbon foot print of the property in question and a detailed outline on how the operation intends to receive the wood chips, a carbon neutral study cannot be performed. Simply put, there is insufficient information to be able to identify and quantify the entire carbon foot print of this project. Therefore, any claims of carbon neutrality would be false!
For Representative French and Ms. Hawthorne to speak about this project as being carbon neutral or as a renewable clean energy source, shows their total lack of understanding and reckless disregard of the scientific facts of how renewable and clean energy is defined. If you care, I would gladly sit down with you to discuss the scientific data and definitions of “CLEAN RENEWABLE ENERGY.”
I do believe that you will be quite surprised to learn that the plant Laidlaw could be proposing is anything but CLEAN. Furthermore, Laidlaw has not demonstrated that it is in fact being supplied with wood chips from a renewable source. The current logging practices in Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine are coming under close scrutiny as to whether or not renewable and sustainable forestry practices are in fact occurring. I say could be proposing only because no such specifics have been supplied by Laidlaw nor has the Zoning Board in Henniker actively questioned Laidlaw on these issues. I find that no questions regarding these issues to be extremely odd.
In Ellicottville, the town attempted to ascertain information about such issues. They even attempted to get Laidlaw to agree in their application, to purchase the wood chips from a reputable tree farm, practicing proper sustainable management. Laidlaw refused. As stated in Ellicottville’s report:
In reality, the issue of carbon neutrality is far more complicated, and while biomass plants can be carbon neutral, the Laidlaw proposal is neither carbon neutral when viewed locally or regionally, because the Laidlaw proposal is not coupled with a sustainable agricultural management program. Laidlaw specifically rejected the Planning Board’s efforts to link the project to such a program, a proposed hybrid willow farm, stating “the growing of willow trees as a biomass fuel source is not and never has been” part of this project. [15]
One example that has not even been mentioned is the number of gallons of diesel fuel that could be needed in the production of this “Clean” electricity. Quite frankly, I don’t see how the use of this fossil fuel relieves us of our dependence on foreign oil, in light of the fact that these types of projects are being touted all over the country. A claim the proponents of Clean Renewable Power Plants use in their “PROPAGANDA” campaigns to gain the public’s acceptance for these very specious projects.
I find this mendacious attitude to be quite disturbing.
If their project is so high tech and good for the people of Henniker, I would think that they would be proud of it. Show it off! Why hide it? Why keep dragging out the process? Come forth with a completed plan that reveals your magnificent project so all of us can be dazzled!
Oddly, I don’t find REACH’s flier that reveals Laidlaw’s truths as being propaganda. I find it quite disturbing that Laidlaw refuses to fess up to the truths Laidlaw themselves reported to the town of Ellicottville, NY.
Try listening to the message before you slay the messenger!
If you care to know more please feel free to contact me.
Dr. Bruce J. Trivellini
Henniker