Saturday, August 18, 2012

Wood chip changes bring questions

Changes to a wood chip-burning power plant proposed for the North Springfield Industrial Park were unveiled this week.
http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120818/NEWS02/708189886

16 comments :

  1. Biomass sucks8/18/12, 11:36 AM

    " a process called cogerneration..."

    uh... putting a water pipe through a wood fire gets pretty technical...

    Glad us Dumb Vermonters have you to help.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Biomass is a LIE8/18/12, 11:41 AM

    " renewable "
    \

    uh... yeah, re plant the trees and wait 100 years... renewable.

    Mush be an educated group.


    say a prayer for all of the grubs, worms, insects, and birds that are slaughtered.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I find it a little disheartening that NOSAG is generating commentators who stretch and distort the truth, while acting primarily as NIMBYs to try a demonize and vilify one of a handful of industrialists who have tried to revive our industrial sector which had completely collapsed. Here we have a company who has agreed to meet or beat all of the applicable regulatory standards, who will directly generate employment locally and create substantially more employment indirectly, who will either stabilize or reduce the rising municipal water rates do to falling demand, will generate substantially less traffic than previous industry did, and will create a market for waste timber – and instead of being welcomed as a positive it is being attacked. Some of the arguments are borderline absurd like the argument that the waste wood that would be utilized by the plant takes 100 years to grow. Clearly somebody either was completely asleep, or hasn’t bothered to find out what kind of wood they intend to use. Others are arguing that the plant would result in the complete clear cutting of our forests, which is nonsense. Meanwhile, Chester seeking to protect its stagnant picture postcard status from being marred by any truck traffic is asserting arguments which if allowed to stand would eliminate any revival of industry in Springfield. At a meeting which introduced a new design protocol for Springfield it was mentioned that the most common positive reference to Springfield is that it is real. I believe they meant that it is a community of poor and middle-class residents who are struggling to survive in an economic environment that favors places like Wal-Mart and disfavors local production of anything. We stand a chance here to start a movement toward energy self-sufficiency not dependent upon Canadian hydro-electric or Yankee nuclear energy sources. Prominent amongst NOSAG’s leaders is a person who help block decades ago an hydro-electric project to be owned by the Town which would have provided near complete energy self-sufficiency and provided local political control over the source of that electricity. Now she wants to once again block a progressive attempt to generate jobs and energy locally, this project needs to go forward. Springfield is never going to be a quintessential picture postcard Vermont community, it may if it is able to clean up, rehabilitate and reuse the architectural legacy abandoned by the machine tool industry create an interesting and prosperous place to live again – but not if we let this form of pseudo-environmentalism block important innovative projects.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No Biomass Left Behind8/18/12, 4:14 PM

      I am not from NOSAG.

      I just know B.S. when I smell it.

      Delete
    2. I do not always agree with Alpin Jack, but this time he’s right on the money! I live in North Springfield and am tired of a few people telling the world what I want or don’t want. I welcome development of new business in our community. Matter of fact I look forward to it. Not all North Springfield residences are members of this small group who is making all the noise. Many of us are pleased that industry is coming to our community. I respect the noise maker’s beliefs, but don’t portray that all North Springfielder’s are against this project, because we are not….

      Delete
    3. @ 7:33

      This is an in your face opportunity to state your beliefs.

      Time will tell. I am just saying... of 'course.

      I always pictured heaven with trees, birds, and bunny rabbits...

      and I always pictured hell with cut down trees, fires, and pressure...

      Delete
    4. Actually I always pictured heaven with clouds and harps and such and without sex, booze, birth control (not sure why we would need it anyway up there), and people saying soothing things. Not like down here with the fisher cats, coyotes, and foxes eating all the bunnies, and the domestic cats eating all the birds. Plus what would Vermont look like without all the blighted trees and waste trees left by the loggers in the woods. Well it would just be terrible, you might actually be able to walk through the woods and think what that might do to people's waistlines. No its better to just let all that go to waste, because getting any light through the canopy by culling the blighted trees just creates underbrush and browse for the grouse, turkey and deer and they have been eating up my daughter's garden which makes it difficult for her to avoid those donuts. I hope they figure out that mule job for her soon though with the prison.

      Delete
    5. Yo Jack, nice attack the messenger plan without providing any real facts. Where is the financial plan showing who is paying for what on the biomess plant including all of the tax payer incentives, subsidies and special treatments? It certainly exists somewhere in the hands of the greedy developers. Where are the studies proving how clean and efficient this plant is when there are many studies proving the exact opposite? Why should the town have it's environment destroyed to placate and line the pockets of a few who mostly live in another state? Where are the facts, Jack? Stop your disinfo campaign and put up some real information with sources.

      Delete
    6. Yeah Jack! Burlington's environment is a complete mess after 20 years of their biomass plant. They Church Street Marketplace doesn't even exist anymore since it is only 2 miles as the crow flies from their dirty biomass plant. Every just packed up and left that city because of all the toxins and poor air quality.

      The Intervale Center literally located right underneath the biomass smoke stack is an awful place. This community farm, that is aiming to strenghten the regions community farm system is a complete waste of time. Their food hub, nursery, and garden operations are too close to this dirty biomass plant; no one every goes there for things like music events, food festivals, educational series or garden tours because it is too close to the biomass plant.

      Stay away dirty biomass plant or we may end up like Burlington, a dirty, poor city, with no tax base, which no one wants to live in, where tourism is dead, and business dont want to locate there because there is nothing to draw them in....

      Delete
    7. How could the Centers for Disease Control name that city the healthiest in the nation in 2008? I mean their biomass plant is twice the size of the one they are proposing to build here in Springfield.

      Delete
    8. Yo Jack. Just the facts, Jack! Not the spin.

      "Biomass energy produces 50 percent more carbon dioxide per megawatt hour of energy than coal. That is not a typo, and is based on numbers from the proponents' own reports. Since burning wood is so inefficient, burning living trees is actually worse than burning coal. Biomass burning releases about 3,300 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt, while coal releases 2,100 pounds. Gas-fired plants release even less, about 1,300 pounds.
      Not only is burning trees worse than coal for carbon dioxide emissions, but it produces similar levels of other pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds, sulfur dioxide and particulates. The McNeil biomass plant near Burlington, Vt., touted by biomass proponents, is the number one pollution source in the entire state, emitting 79 classified pollutants, according to planethazard.com."

      http://www.wbjournal.com/article/20100104/PRINTEDITION/301049992

      Delete
  4. IF you want the facts, research them for yourself. The ariticles and posters on this site are merely providing entertainment value with their falsehoods and distortions. If only the plentiful deadwood on the internet could be harvested for energy generation!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The progressive business community in Springfield quietly supports this project because they know the benefits vastly outweigh the negatives. Unfortunately, one of the facts regarding small businesses in a small community is that the business community remains silent for fear of being attacked by the small but vocal group of opponents. NIMBY groups such as NOSAG are making it difficult to improve employment and move towards locally based sustainable energy with their exaggerations and distortions.

      Delete
    2. Alpin Jack, when you run out of water what will you do?? 500,000 gallons a day is a lot of water to sustain, especially when we get drought conditions.

      Delete
    3. Do you want your water rates to keep rising? Because unless you start moving back towards historic water usage levels they will. Have you heard anyone from the Town saying we are having a water shortage during this years drought? No. Neither have I.

      Delete
  5. Has anyone bothered to ask the clowns promoting this boondoggle why they are choosing to build a dirty biomess plant with antiquated technology that besides being terrible for the environment, destroying the forests, polluting the air with unnecessary carbon, is 150 percent worse than coal burning plants for releasing CO2 and 400 percent worse for releasing carbon monoxide, is 400 percent worse than natural gas plants for releasing CO2 and 300 percent worse worse for releasing carbon monoxide, that the energy production is financially much more expensive than a coal or natural gas plant and cannot survive without tax payer subsidies to make up the difference in production costs? This project is purely designed to not only loot the public for the greed of a few, it is entirely irresponsible in it's lack of care for the environment when there are cleaner and cheaper alternatives readily available. Anyone got any tar and feathers?

    ReplyDelete


Please keep your comments polite and on-topic. No profanity

R E C E N T . . . C O M M E N T S

Springfield Vermont News is an ongoing zero-income volunteer hyperlocal news gathering project. No paid advertising is accepted on this site but any Springfield business willing to place a link to this news blog on their site will be considered for a free ad here. Businesses, organizations and individuals may submit write-ups and photos about any positive happenings here in Springfield that they are associated with and would be deemed newsworthy. Email the Editor at ed44vt@gmail.com.

Privacy statement: This blog does not share personal information with third parties nor do we store any information about your visit to this blog other than to analyze and optimize your content and reading experience through the use of cookies. You can turn off the use of cookies at anytime by changing your specific browser settings. We are not responsible for republished content from this blog on other blogs or websites without our permission. This privacy policy is subject to change without notice and was last updated on January 1, 2017. If you have any questions feel free to contact Springfield Vermont News directly here: ed44vt@gmail.com

Pageviews past week

---

Sign by Danasoft - For Backgrounds and Layouts