http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120402/NEWS02/704029951
Published April 2, 2012 in the Rutland Herald
PSB grants intervenor status to woodchip plant opponents
By SUSAN SMALLHEER
Staff Writer
MONTPELIER — The Public Service Board has granted party status to a North Springfield citizens group opposed to the proposed wood-fired power plant over objections of the developers, Winstanley Enterprises and Weston Solutions.
The order, signed by hearing officer Ed McNamara and issued last week granted party status to the North Springfield Action Group (NoSAG), the Vermont Natural Resources Council and its affiliate the National Wildlife Federation, the Springfield Regional Development Corp., and the Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets.
Collectively, the groups and organizations said they had concerns about transportation, industrial by-products, need, environmental and air quality, water capacity, aesthetics and economic benefit and invasive species, among others.
McNamara ruled that because Winstanley and Weston, which have formed the North Springfield Sustainable Energy Project, didn’t have a power contract for the 25 to 35 megawatts it plans on generating, certain restrictions in state law on reviewing renewable energy projects do not apply.
If the project had a power contract, the issue of need would not be open for discussion, McNamara ruled.
Winstanley and Weston had not objected to the natural resources council and its national affiliate, but the PSB ruled that the citizens group and the statewide environmental group had raised the same issues, and Winstanley hadn’t objected to the Vermont Natural Resources Council. The Department of Public Service had objected to the statewide organization, but not the local group.
McNamara, who conducted a site visit and public hearing on the proposed 35 megawatt woodchip plant in late February, did limit the groups’ participation to issues they raised in their motion for party status.
NoSAG, as it is called, said in its petition it had 37 members “in the immediate area” and its concerns were “orderly development, need, economic benefits, aesthetics and the environmental, air quality, water conservation, transportation, scenic and natural beauty, wildlife habitat and public investment.”
It said it wasn’t representing individual owners of property in the North Springfield area.
Winstanley had objected and asked that the group submit a list of all 37 members and identify their property in relation to the proposed woodchip plant, but the hearing officer ruled that wasn’t necessary.
“NoSAG is seeking to intervene as a non-profit environmental organization... and there is no difference between the Vermont Natural Resources Council, which North Springfield Sustainable Energy Project did not object to,” he wrote.
The Vermont Agency of Agriculture had asked for party status, and was granted intervenor status. It said its concerns were invasive species and the spread of invasive species, and its potential impact on the state’s agriculture economy and the health of the state’s forests.
The town of Springfield and the Southern Windsor Regional Planning Commission are parties by law.
No date has been set for technical hearings on the project, which would be built on a 20-acre field next to Winstanley Enterprises’ building on Precision Drive, the former headquarters of Fellows Corp.
Awesome! How do I join the party?
ReplyDeleteYou mean the party to stifle economic activity in Springfield?
ReplyDeleteThis power plant will not bring economic development if it pollutes our air, monopolizes large amounts of water,decreases property values, large amt of truck traffic on our already deteriorating roads, ultimately changing green VT to a brown VT with forest use and the list goes on. Do not be fooled by the words Sustainable/Green Energy it will become one of the largest polluters in the state..and laugh all the way to the bank on all the government monies they will receive. Please get informed!!! www.nosagvt.org and watch the newpapers for upcoming informational meetings.
ReplyDeleteWho is going to pay for the future repairs of your already deteriorating roads? Or your aging water systems?
ReplyDeleteWill you also please protest my three neighbors that are using outdoor wood furnaces?
Stay informed: http://www.biomasscenter.org/resources/fact-sheets/fse-biomass-emissions.html
The question of stack (chimney) emissions is further complicated by the incorrect assumption that what we know about residential wood stoves holds true for modern wood systems currently used in institutional, commercial, and utility settings.
These wood systems are significantly cleaner than wood stoves for the following reasons:
The mess associated with cordwood storage and use in a home’s living space and with ash removal from a stove, is absent. Woodchips are confined to a storage bin and boiler room, with no dirt or dust entering the rest of the building.
Unlike home woodstoves, there are virtually no visible emissions and odors associated with modern woodchip and pellet systems.
Modern woodchip systems emit far less particulate matter (PM10), an exhaust product of wood combustion known for its adverse effects on human respiratory health compared to wood stoves.
These systems should also not be compared with outdoor wood boilers, which, as a class, burn very inefficiently with high particulate emissions, even compared to modern residential wood stoves.
Pollution-control technologies are available to reduce emissions for applications where warranted.
It sounds like this group is trying to take advantage of a former machine tool town that is still down on its luck. Add this to the mix with the prison and all the state hand out offices and Springfield will never recover. We have a great river that can produce power without the pollution and consumption of so much of our forests. Please say no thanks to this company. We do not need another black eye.
ReplyDeletePlease get informed: Don't let these NIMBYs ruin another renewable energy project and a potentially huge economic driver for the town of Springfield.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.biomasscenter.org/resources/case-studies/communityde.html
http://www.biomasscenter.org/resources/fact-sheets/economic-development.html
http://www.biomasscenter.org/resources/fact-sheets/fse-biomass-emissions.html
read the Winstanley Air and water quality applications--it tells everyone what they need to know: "THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT source of AIR POlLUTION" what don't you get about that? It is their report--they wrote it. They are telling the public it is going to dirty your air and tax your water system.......
DeleteThis is not another NIMBY Issue. It is about intentionally polluting a town who has no coal plant (biomass might be a small step better than coal). The lessor of two evils???? but Springfield is now clean--LET'S keep it that way and let's have water reserved for truly green industries and new families who will move here seeking clean air, water and quality of life.
I'm in favor of any efforts to curtail dependency upon foreign oil and reduce energy costs.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the Schumlin administration is directly responsible for this proposal. Vermont has mandated 20% of it's energy from "renewable" recourses by 2017. A move heralded by our worthless, technically ignorant representatives. So folks, what we have now is the backlash of your idealistic goals. Blame yourselves, you voted for these stooges.
Not like we don't already have an ample source for safe, clean, reliable, inexpensive power. And burning 100s of cords of wood/hr, 24/7 is an improvement? What say you Alice and Cynthia?
Yes!!! what say you Alice and Cynthia.
ReplyDeleteAs of April 4, 2012 5:17 AM Alice and Cynthia no long read this blog. Sorry.
Delete