http://rutlandherald.com/article/20131109/NEWS02/711099926
Published November 9, 2013 in the Rutland Herald N. Springfield biomass project dealt heavy blow By SUSAN SMALLHEER Staff Writer NORTH SPRINGFIELD — In a major blow to the proposed North Springfield biomass electric generating plant, a hearing officer for the Vermont Public Service Board has recommended that the project be denied a state certificate of public good. In a 124-page ruling released late Friday afternoon, PSB hearing officer John Cotter said that impacts from truck traffic was the reason he was recommending the project be denied. The project will “unduly interfere with the orderly development of the region based on its trucking-related impacts to the local community,” he wrote. “I am cognizant of the fact that the project would provide measurable benefits to the surrounding community and the state as a whole if it were constructed and operated,” Cotter wrote, citing increased jobs, wages and tax revenues. “I cannot conclude that there are reasonable conditions that could be imposed to alleviate the undue impacts of the significant increase in truck traffic on two local streets leading to the entrance of the North Springfield Industrial Park,” he added. If the three-person PSB doesn’t adopt his recommendation, Cotter wrote, it should impose many conditions on the permit. Earlier this year, the town of Springfield entered into an agreement with the developers of the wood-fired plant over the construction of a new access road to the project. The North Springfield Sustainable Energy Project, a joint project of Winstanley Enterprises and Weston Solutions, wants to build a 37-megawatt wood-fired power plant in the North Springfield Industrial Park. Wood chips would be trucked to the project, which would be built next to the former Fellows Corp. building, now owned and operated by Winstanley. The project would also produce low-cost steam heat for the businesses in the industrial park, as well as a thermal loop for residences in an area of North Springfield. But nearby residents formed the North Springfield Action Group to fight the project, saying it would be a blight on the landscape, as well as pumping tons of toxic pollutants and particulate into the atmosphere, harming the region’s air quality. They also raised questions about truck traffic and impact on the area’s groundwater. Cotter’s recommendation explicitly said that his finding on the North Springfield project was not an indictment of all wood-based biomass projects in Vermont. “Nothing in this proposal for decision should be construed to mean I have concluded that no commercial-scale, woody-biomass electric generation facility could be approved for construction and operation in Vermont,” he wrote. “To the contrary, I recognize that, as a general proposition, a woody-biomass electric generation facility could occupy an appropriate place in Vermont’s energy portfolio.” Robert Kischko, president of the North Springfield Action Group, said he was pleased with Cotter’s recommendation, and declined further comment. “The North Springfield Action Group will not have any additional comments at this time other than we are extremely pleased with the hearing officer’s recommendation to deny the project,” he said. He said the group will provide additional commentary to the PSB, as requested by Cotter. Dan Ingold, senior technical director for Weston Solutions and spokesman for the project, couldn’t be reached for comment Friday evening. Last week Ingold told the annual meeting of Springfield Regional Development Corp. that he expected a favorable ruling from the PSB board “in a week or two” and that construction on the project would begin next spring. Ingold said the construction work would bring 600 jobs to the region, with a full-time staff of 25 people at the facility, and dozens more in the wood industry. The 124-page decision came after a series of lengthy hearings that were held before Cotter and other PSB employees, but not the three-member board itself.
Congratulations to our NIMBYs.
ReplyDeleteNever mind that they did not consider the fact that the Burlington project has been highly successful, has had emissions of about 1/10th of those permitted, and that neighbors have not noted any dire consequences.
Springfield is doomed to continue on its path of having an economy based on welfare, yard sales, and drug deals.
The NIMBYs must be terribly proud of themselves.
You have been a shill for this tax payer boondoggle since the beginning of your posts here with nothing but baloney arguments against the facts. How much money to you expect to reap from this bogus project while the citizens choke?
DeleteMr/Ms Anonymous 11:27:
DeleteWhat exactly do you mean by "How much money do you expect to reap...?"
Anoymous 11:27 -- I couldn't agree more. I have asked that question of this poster several time. How 'exactly' will this plant ultimately benefit Springfield? Taxes will not be lowered (have they ever been?), and few jobs will ultimately be made from this project. The negative clearly outweighs the positive in this case.
DeleteI've replied several times. And all the NIMBYs do is stick their fingers in their ears and scream "lalalalalalala I can't hear you."
DeleteThey remind me of that saying "My mind is madeup, don't confuse me with facts."
So after all the wailing over greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on global warming, it ultimately comes down to a lone PSB ranger hanging his objection on...........trucks. The NIMBYs will probably hold a parade upon hearing this. Unfortunately for them, this won't be enough.
ReplyDeletethey will get there permit its just a pot hole in the road for them
DeleteYour all so desperate to drag Springfield out of the sewer, lets face it you have a State Office Complex with all the free money, HCRS that brings every derelict from 50 square miles and a lack of any real business in town. This town is what it is an old mill town with it's best years in the rear view mirror. Your little wood plant won't change a thing other then giving us more tractor trailer traffic on roads that no one maintains. Come up with something else , let these clowns build it in their back yard in Mass.
ReplyDeletewell said....most intelligent thing I have heard so far.
DeleteTrucking is the least of the worries over this pollution plant.
ReplyDeleteDoes any small town really want a spewing smokestack and heavy truck traffic (24 hours a day) in their area? I believe this would greatly harm any interest in Springfield as either a potential business location or a place to live and would ultimately "fuel" the further decline of our struggling town.
ReplyDeleteDon't some of you idiots understand what an "industrial park" means? Where was all the complaining when Fellows was open or Ben & Jerry's had there plant out there? And what tax boondonggle are you talking about? The one that will actually lower property taxes in town cause we might actually add to the tax roles? Or is it better to keep the town a welfare and drug dealer magnet?
ReplyDeleteTo the big shots involved with trying to bring this plant to North Springfield:
ReplyDeleteBuilding this power plant in a residential area is not the best idea. It should be located off of 91 with the nearest resident at least 2 miles away, if there is such a spot. Trucks would exit off 91 directly to the plant. The wood for fueling it could be take from the median area between the north and south bound lanes of 91. Feds would pay for the road up keep. Prisoners from Springfield prison would do the majority of the cutting. Take a look at all the fuel I am talking about. It goes many miles up 91 and 89.
To the big shots involved especially the CEO...What a heck of an idea you have here. Pat yer self on the back.
its being built in a industrial park, most of those houses were built after the park was put in...springfield prisoners don't go outside the fence..
DeleteSorry for wasting yer time on such a stupid idea....
DeleteAnonymous 4:49PM -- you are wrong that "most of the houses were built after the park was put in." Clearly, you don't know much about North Springfield.
DeleteI believe I saw a crew of prisoners taking care of the front of the old J & L building last summer. Cutting down vines and and such. Good job prisoners !!!
DeleteThe industrial park calls for light Industry--not Mega Electrical production---two very very differnt things. Read the town plan!
ReplyDelete