http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20120322/OPINION03/703229975
http://www.eagletimes.com//news/2012-03-12/Opinion/N_Springfield_not_compromised.html
---
Published March 22, 2012 in the Rutland Herald
Is biomass plant worth the gamble?
Economic texts explain a phenomenon called the multiplier effect. This is an effect where an increase in spending produces an increase in commerce and consumption greater than the initial amount invested — like ripples spreading in a pond.
As the theory goes, if a corporation builds a factory, it will employ construction workers and their suppliers, as well as those who eventually will work the new factory. Indirectly, the factory will stimulate employment in local stores, restaurants, and service industries in the vicinity of the factory. An initial construction pulse in hiring, followed by factory jobs that lead to even more jobs from the multiplier effect (for example, jobs in the forestry industry), is one of two arguments that developers have proposed as a justification for locating a wood-burning “biomass” power plant in Springfield.
But whether the power plant produces jobs that will make an impact on the Springfield economy is only speculation at this time. The projected jobs “dividend” from this biomass plant that seems to have captivated our local politicians is said to begin with approximately 300 construction jobs that will last for up to two years. Fair enough. But in the long-term the power plant payroll will include only around 30 workers. What is unknown is where these permanent employees will come from or where they will reside, shop, or obtain other services for themselves and their families. No one knows. And as for logging and forestry jobs or trucking jobs, no one knows that either.
While the job questions are unanswered at this point, we may have a hint of what is in our jobs future from a biomass plant. First of all, we know that wood will be harvested from three or more different states, including New Hampshire and Vermont. Will wood from New Hampshire be harvested and transported by foresters from Springfield? From Chester? Or from Weathersfield? What we do know is that when a wood lot in North Springfield was chipped recently, the logger was not from our area and the chips traveled 120 miles to Burlington. The logger, in fact, was from Reading, and he carted the chipped wood up to the McNeil plant in Burlington. So, what does that have to do with an economic multiplier or any economic benefit for our town? The fact is that in the wood biomass business no one knows where the jobs will lie and we only have a vague idea where the wood chips will come from or where woods chips will end up.
An economic multiplier effect from a biomass plant in Springfield is pure speculation. There does, however, appear to be evidence of a different kind of multiplier effect. But this multiplier is not an economic one. It is an environmental multiplier that will not impact jobs but instead will impact air quality from CO, CO2, particulate matter resulting in ozone, from the stack and from truck traffic. This multiplier effect is not a good one for Springfield.
Despite public assurances, all biomass power plants emit greenhouse gases and other emissions. Traffic also produces greenhouse gasses no less important than the stack emissions as they negatively impact the state’s greenhouse emissions policy, which seeks to reduce environmentally harmful greenhouse gases.
Burning wood produces emissions that generate pollutants with health implications. Greenhouse gases get most of the press these days. But carbon, nitrogen compounds and particulates in the air also produce ozone (03). Ozone high in the upper atmosphere is a good thing because the ozone layer in the atmosphere protects us against harmful rays from the sun. However, ground layer ozone is a bad thing. Ground layer ozone is a serious eye and lung irritant the effects of which are especially acute in warm, humid weather.
Studies around the country have calculated the health care costs from ozone pollution or “smog.” One study of asthma patients in Atlanta revealed that over a three-week period when ozone pollution decreased, there was a corresponding 42 percent decrease in asthma-related hospitalizations and 55 percent decrease in asthma related ER visits. Industry and government studies show that biomass power plants, including wood-fired plants, emit CO, CO2 and nitrogen compounds (elements of ozone) similar to those of coal-fired plants.
The second factor in our environmental multiplier is pollution from heavy truck traffic that will supply some 300,000 or so tons of green wood chips to the plant each year. This effect is highlighted by the petitioner’s own estimates of 40-50 18 wheelers traveling through the greater community and through North Springfield. Studies in California show that prolonged exposure to heavy truck traffic results in anywhere from a 40 percent to as much as a 350 percent increase in the risk of cancer and respiratory disease. The to and fro of large trucks through North Springfield not only will produce green house gases, but it will also expose residents to fugitive dust and other particulates.
An economic multiplier, a jobs dividend, from the proposed biomass plant in North Springfield is anyone’s guess. On the other hand, there is solid evidence of a negative environmental multiplier effect on Springfield. Is a biomass plant that will affect the quality of life not only in Springfield, but also in Chester, Ludlow, Weathersfield and elsewhere in our community worth the gamble?
Randall Sussman is a resident of North Springfield and a member of the North Springfield Action Group (www.NoSagvt.org).
Randall Susman lives in North Springfield.
---
Published March 22, 2012 in the Rutland Herald
Is biomass plant worth the gamble?
Economic texts explain a phenomenon called the multiplier effect. This is an effect where an increase in spending produces an increase in commerce and consumption greater than the initial amount invested — like ripples spreading in a pond.
As the theory goes, if a corporation builds a factory, it will employ construction workers and their suppliers, as well as those who eventually will work the new factory. Indirectly, the factory will stimulate employment in local stores, restaurants, and service industries in the vicinity of the factory. An initial construction pulse in hiring, followed by factory jobs that lead to even more jobs from the multiplier effect (for example, jobs in the forestry industry), is one of two arguments that developers have proposed as a justification for locating a wood-burning “biomass” power plant in Springfield.
But whether the power plant produces jobs that will make an impact on the Springfield economy is only speculation at this time. The projected jobs “dividend” from this biomass plant that seems to have captivated our local politicians is said to begin with approximately 300 construction jobs that will last for up to two years. Fair enough. But in the long-term the power plant payroll will include only around 30 workers. What is unknown is where these permanent employees will come from or where they will reside, shop, or obtain other services for themselves and their families. No one knows. And as for logging and forestry jobs or trucking jobs, no one knows that either.
While the job questions are unanswered at this point, we may have a hint of what is in our jobs future from a biomass plant. First of all, we know that wood will be harvested from three or more different states, including New Hampshire and Vermont. Will wood from New Hampshire be harvested and transported by foresters from Springfield? From Chester? Or from Weathersfield? What we do know is that when a wood lot in North Springfield was chipped recently, the logger was not from our area and the chips traveled 120 miles to Burlington. The logger, in fact, was from Reading, and he carted the chipped wood up to the McNeil plant in Burlington. So, what does that have to do with an economic multiplier or any economic benefit for our town? The fact is that in the wood biomass business no one knows where the jobs will lie and we only have a vague idea where the wood chips will come from or where woods chips will end up.
An economic multiplier effect from a biomass plant in Springfield is pure speculation. There does, however, appear to be evidence of a different kind of multiplier effect. But this multiplier is not an economic one. It is an environmental multiplier that will not impact jobs but instead will impact air quality from CO, CO2, particulate matter resulting in ozone, from the stack and from truck traffic. This multiplier effect is not a good one for Springfield.
Despite public assurances, all biomass power plants emit greenhouse gases and other emissions. Traffic also produces greenhouse gasses no less important than the stack emissions as they negatively impact the state’s greenhouse emissions policy, which seeks to reduce environmentally harmful greenhouse gases.
Burning wood produces emissions that generate pollutants with health implications. Greenhouse gases get most of the press these days. But carbon, nitrogen compounds and particulates in the air also produce ozone (03). Ozone high in the upper atmosphere is a good thing because the ozone layer in the atmosphere protects us against harmful rays from the sun. However, ground layer ozone is a bad thing. Ground layer ozone is a serious eye and lung irritant the effects of which are especially acute in warm, humid weather.
Studies around the country have calculated the health care costs from ozone pollution or “smog.” One study of asthma patients in Atlanta revealed that over a three-week period when ozone pollution decreased, there was a corresponding 42 percent decrease in asthma-related hospitalizations and 55 percent decrease in asthma related ER visits. Industry and government studies show that biomass power plants, including wood-fired plants, emit CO, CO2 and nitrogen compounds (elements of ozone) similar to those of coal-fired plants.
The second factor in our environmental multiplier is pollution from heavy truck traffic that will supply some 300,000 or so tons of green wood chips to the plant each year. This effect is highlighted by the petitioner’s own estimates of 40-50 18 wheelers traveling through the greater community and through North Springfield. Studies in California show that prolonged exposure to heavy truck traffic results in anywhere from a 40 percent to as much as a 350 percent increase in the risk of cancer and respiratory disease. The to and fro of large trucks through North Springfield not only will produce green house gases, but it will also expose residents to fugitive dust and other particulates.
An economic multiplier, a jobs dividend, from the proposed biomass plant in North Springfield is anyone’s guess. On the other hand, there is solid evidence of a negative environmental multiplier effect on Springfield. Is a biomass plant that will affect the quality of life not only in Springfield, but also in Chester, Ludlow, Weathersfield and elsewhere in our community worth the gamble?
Randall Sussman is a resident of North Springfield and a member of the North Springfield Action Group (www.NoSagvt.org).
Randall Susman lives in North Springfield.
Very well said, Mr. Susman. Indeed, I do not consider my home, my gardens, my brook, my apple trees at all "compromised." North Springfield is a lovely neighborhood. We love the wildlife in our yard: the birds, the bats and even an adolescent moose once! I guess the animals don't think we live in a "compromised" area either.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good fight! As will I! and together I pray we can stop this!
There seems to be really little doubt that the biomass plant will not only bring additional jobs to the area, it will have a massive positive economic impact in a Town that is in severe need of a positive stimulas in that regard. The positive spin-offs are real and are being supported by the industries located within the park already and those who plan to move there. The restrictions on particulate matter are severe and the environmental impact negligible. This plant is a win/win for Springfield.
ReplyDeleteGod I wish the nimby's would just leave town. I'd even help them.pack. let's give Springfield the chance to move forward instead of remaining in the same stagnant state it has been in for 40 years.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. We have an abundance of wet blankets in this town.
DeleteI'd be perfectly happy if they would consider building a biomass plant on your road 1/4 mile from your house... that will increase traffic, increase gas fumes, have a 150 ft smoke stack (not to mention the height of the plume), lower your house value, lower your ability to sell your house and that will only employ 25 people. Why don't you bring that up at the next public hearing? Offer your backyard.
DeleteVermont requires perk tests and an engineer to design and site a household septic system; requires specially trained professionals to clean up accidental oil spills as small as five gallons; and Vermont will also not allow fishermen to wear felt soled waders in streams. Yet it routinely shuts down rest areas and forces tourists to use the side of the highway as a rest area; sprays oil on paving equipment to keep it free of clinging asphalt, only to have the oils contaminate water; and also issues felt soled waders to Dept. of Transportation bridge inspectors, who routinely inspect many bridges on different streams and rivers, thus contaminating many with rock snot. Therefore, I expect Vermont will approve the construction of the biomass electrical generating station in Springfield. Typical of bureaucrats who don't know water runs down stream, or that prevailing winds are from the west, the bureaucrats aren't concerned the proposed site is upwind of most of the town! I wonder which side of a boat these fellows pee from? Probably the upwind side.
ReplyDeleteOne thing is certain: Springfield will be left holding the bag when real estate values plummet; when the Town's water resources are insufficient to supply both the Town and the biomass facility; and when taxes gained are insufficient to balance costs incurred. Water Dept. customers should expect a huge increase in their rates, and huge expenses will be incurred providing appropriate roads and bridges through North Springfield. What will happen when voters fail to approve proposed Town budgets in the future, because of staggering increased costs due to the biomass facility? What state funds will be available to bail out Springfield? Does anyone honestly think a person who chooses to buy property in Vermont will be unconcerned about living close to a biomass facility?
Wonderful Christopher Coughlin--well said indeed!
DeleteAnother manifesto from the unarenter. Yawn. And here's a former "union official" seeking to lecture us about bureaucrats. Pleeeeeeeease!
DeleteThe biomass plant is unlikely to have much effect on real estate values except possibly homes immediately adjacent to the industrial park, any decrease in residential values of this immediately adjacent properties will be more than offset by the increased values within the industrial park itself as it fills with spin off and symbiotic industries.
DeleteAnd I am sure that you have conducted many property-value studies before this one. That you have full researched the property-value effects of building biomass plants in neighborhoods. Let's remember... your opinion is not a fact. Don't believe everything you think.
DeleteFalse to all that on and on crap. This town has a chance to move in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteBut because of all the negative people here spreading just nonsense. they should pack up and leave. Just so you know more than 80% of the people want this plant. Only about a 100 upset people in this town showed up to the public hearing out of the whole town population. I have lived here all my life. My family has been here since the 1800s. If we build it they will come. The water, not a problem. They will recycle non compressed water from the loop also. The water has no contaminates either. It all will go through a heat exchanger. Nothing but facts.
NDP
"Nothing but the facts": If we build it, they will come? Who will come? All 25 people that will be employed? I don't really care if your family has been here since the 1800s. How is that even pertinent to the conversation. I have been here since 1995. Whoopee. I still don't want to build a plant that is going to harm Springfield's residents for generations to come.
DeleteSpringfield needs to focus on Information Technology jobs. Springfield is a nice location and could attract workers to the area if the right industries are encouraged to setup there. Springfield is on I91 and in a beautiful recreation and nature area. I would classify a wood plant as mutually exclusive of the aforementioned vision.
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing inconsistent between the biomass plant and the development of Information Technology. Its impact on the viewshed will be limited primarily to the area immediately adjacent to the industrial park. People who buy homes adjacent or within the viewshed of an industrial park should anticipate that industrial uses will occur within the park.
DeleteWe still can attract tech jobs. But this would be a great reason to set up shop here if Springfield can offer low cost heating to new incoming businesses.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how many of those who support the biomass plant smoke cigarettes? It is a wonderful addiction. There are many positive reasons why people smoke. Besides providing personal pleasure, tobacco use provides employment for millions who grow, sell, and tax tobacco. The tax revenue collected is enormous. It is good for the economy. It even shortens the time the government must pay Social Security benefits to millions of people by seven years! Tobacco smoke smells like money, and though even second hand smoke is deadly, it usually takes years to kill a vbictim! Biomass plants are similar to tobacco use. They are short term economic drivers, and long term death machines.
ReplyDeleteIf you support the biomass plant in Springfield, be consistent and also support eliminating smoking restrictions in Springfield. Smoking should be allowed in public buildings, restaurants, schools, hospitals, and everyone's homes. Restricting its use lowers sales, reduces tax receipts, and drives the economy even lower!
Will the owners of biomass plant raise their children down wind of the facility? If people want to live with a biomass plant and enjoy its many benefits, why don't they move to Burlington, instead of plotting to ruin the health of their neighbors?
Who lives downwind from Chris Coughlin's wood furnace? According to the map, there's a convalescent facility not far away. Apparently he's unconcerned about subjecting them to his very own smoke/emissions. And you can bet if someone complained or tried to prohibit his own use of a wood furnace, he'd be the first to object quite testily. No room for hypocrisy on these pages. Take a hike buddy - preferably downwind from Springfield's new biomass plant so you can get a taste of your own medicine!
ReplyDeleteYou raise a valid point. I burn wood for heat, and it stinks, is dangerous, and is a health hazard.
DeleteI would much rather burn oil, or even be able have firewood delivered stove ready, neither of which I can afford to do. I cut five cords of wood a year; split it with an axe, wedge and maul; and move wood into my storage area with a wheel barrow. At age 68, believe me, there are more convenient and easier ways to heat a house. I thank God I am physically fit enough to do the work, and am not complaining!
In Jan. 2011, I was put out of the apartemnt rental business by a failed municipal water main, which had just been constructed and supposedly met all state and federal standards. When a million gallons of water escaped under Park St., the Brown Holt building was flooded to the floor joists, and my personal retirement plan vanished. No one expected such an event to happen. No one. The best plans of mice and men often fail, don't they?
Did the Town's insurer honor its contract with Springfield? No. Did my insurer honor its contract with me? No. So without income from what was to be my retirement, during the heating season I burn wood, for my personal use.
I do not operate a facility that burns 50 tractor trailer loads of chips a day, 12 months a year. I do not drive 18,250 tractor trailers through Springfield and over its roads and bridges each year. I draw no water from the limited source that supplies Springfield Water Dept.'s customers. And despite what some might think, I do give a damn about polluting my neighbors' air, and hope to install a stove with a catalytic converter ASAP, or maybe even solar equipment.
18,250 loaded tractor trailers per year traveling to the biomass plant. 18,250 trucks leaving the plant as well. 36,500 tractor trailer transits per year! That is one every fifteen minutes, every day of the year. There are other trucks servicing the industrial park's present businesses, and will be more as "cheap" heat becomes available.
DeleteHow are so many trucks going to deal with school busses holding them up, or are they going to stay out of town at certain hours, when students are waiting for busses?
Ask winstanley. They've already agreed to halt truck traffic on weekends.
DeleteNo trucks on weekends would mean 20 extra trucks per day (70 each day) on weekdays! The numbers show there will be two tractor trailers of chips per resident of Springfield each year! 18,000 trucks divided by 9,000 persons. How many cords of wood in each tractor trailer?
DeleteSounds like Springfield will really be on the move! Now how is all the truck traffic going to help fill store fronts downtown? With pedestrian fatalities on the rise, and an aging population hobbling across Springfield's streets, maybe the town fathers should plan to route trucks coming from I91 on an alternate route than through downtown. Have them go up South St. hill to Union St., then on Park St. to Route 11, then over French Meadow Rd. and through North Springfield. It would be sort of like school busses going to and from Elm Hill School. While it is a bit confusing, the school buss drivers soon learned the route and get the job done. The town could run the truck traffic past Coughlin's apartment house on Park St. and near his house on Linhale, just to show him who runs this town: not him!
ReplyDeleteA better alternative route would be over Mineral St., past the State Office Building; up Park St. past the old high school to Route 11, then onto Fairgrounds Rd. and past the Town Garage. The trucks would then pass state facilities, central offices of the Springfield School District, my apartment house, Selectman David Yesman's house, and town road maintenance facilities. At the same time, downtown Springfield would be spared and crosswalks would be safer.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Delete18,000 loads a year. That means about 50 an average day.
ReplyDeleteWhen Idlenot Dairy was in full swing, they had 60 or so loads a day coming and going. Were we concerned that, THAT MANY TRUCKS, were on the roads. Oh, heck no.
So get real folks, this is an industrial park. Truck should come and go.
Lets open our arms and welcome a biomass plant for the new future of Springfield.
And what happened to Idlenot Dairy, and how many folks lost money financing that operation?
DeleteWasn't due to truck traffic.
DeleteThere are biomass plants like the proposed one all over New England. We still have forests, we still have rural living, we still have clean air. I really wish people would stop trying to keep this town from progressing. I came back after many years away, but sometimes I wonder why I bothered....my taxes are 3 times higher for a property of equal value, and I have to drive 15 times farther for most shopping...Let this town have a future!
ReplyDeleteI agree. The biomass plant is a good idea. The traffic is going to be there with any industrial development. By the time they comply with all of the restrictions on particulate matter, it is highly unlikely that anyone who doesn't live right by the plant is even going to know it is there. And for those who live right by it, sorry, industry does have this unfortunate habit of locating within industrial parks. This is a win/win for Springfield.
DeleteThere isn't anyone in this town that doesn't want jobs and lower taxes. We can't let our desperation overshadow the facts. This is why we have the prison. They told us that it would lower our taxes and bring jobs. They sold that to Springfield the same way they are trying to sell us the biomass plant. It's arguable that we still have clean air. The rates of asthma and other respiratory related ailments should make you wonder. How many of you wishful thinkers live close to the site at about the same height as the stack is going to be, and directly in the path of the prevailing winds? If you did and if you availed yourself of the facts you'd be as scared as I am about the negative impact of this. Winstanley is spending a huge amount on marketing this thing because first and foremost they're interested in making a profit. They know folks are desperate here and they figure it's an easy sell. They are fine with compromising some people's health, quality of life, and property values. The site is bad. It's a hollow near residences with many more residents downwind. Look at the facts, including what Winstanley's own experts have admitted. You wishful thinkers are willing to let your fellow community members suffer the consequences and fallout of this for a few jobs. I burn wood for heat using a fairly efficient boiler. They're right that wood stoves etc. are not clean burning, and may be less efficient and release a bunch of particulate matter. However we don't burn wood to heat our homes all year. This plant, by all objective and reasonable estimation, is not good for anyone.
DeleteYou are completely delusional if you think this biomass plant is going to lower your taxes.
DeleteHow much will oil prices go up for home heating oil when a cord of wood cost double then it does now?
ReplyDeleteSkidder destruction in our forest will cause erosion beyond everyone's imagination.
All the wildlife feed trees will be cut leaving nothing for winter feed for our wildlife. we will be back in the 1850s when wildlife like deer was hard to find. All for a very few jobs that will be gone when the forest can't produce enough wood anymore.
The wood they will be using is not marketable timber, but defective timber that currently goes to waste. It will provide a badly needed market for substandard timber which needs to be culled so that the timber trees can grow. You don't see any foresters complaining about this project. Currently the area around Springfield has extensive stands of blighted and bull pine that need to be culled to bring the timber lots back into full production. At present these trees if they are being managed at all, are simply girdled and allowed to fall within the forest. I am not sure what is being referred to as "wildlife trees", but the statement above is clearly wrong. The principal forest management now for wildlife is preservation of deeryards which has little or nothing to do with food. Under the management principles that are imposed, the deeryards will remain unaffected. The cord wood prices should not be affected since they are not the type of wood which would be used in the biomass plant, the only wood users who would see their prices possibly jump are the maple producers. The maple producers, however, for the most part have switched to reverse osmosis so their wood fuel consumption is tremendously reduced. We need to have people listen to the facts instead of spouting all this nonsense.
DeleteVermont was not known for its deer population in the 17 and 1800's. They were imported.
ReplyDeleteSince the deeryards would not be affected, this plant would probably stimulate the deer population since the culling of substandard trees would actually increase deer browse, same would be true of many other wildlife species.
DeleteWe got biomass heat at S.H.S (Dean tech center) let's shut that down to.
ReplyDeleteThis I assume to be sarcasm, I don't think many of these people realize that the Tech Center has biomass heat and no one notices...
DeleteSo does Elm Hill.
DeleteSeems to me some of you need an education about forest management and wildlife existence.
ReplyDeleteFor you who don't know what a feed tree is it's, Apple, Oak, Beach, and scrub pines provide a place for bedding during the winter storms. The young growth, what you call not marketable timber is browsing and cover for all forms of wildlife.
To the person who says there were no deer in the 17 & 1800s and they had to be imported, this is true! it's well known almost every forest was cut into fields for winter feed for livestock plus grain, corn, and other feed for people. And to Alpin Jack who says deeryards would not be affected. Nothing says private land owners have to save deer yards. Only time they are protected is when act 250 permits are issued.
And yes I believe in logging in order to keep new growth coming along, but we know the American greed has over come logic and for a few dollars now days people will sell out anything, even all their trees!
And to think only scrub trees are going to be cut for chips is like believing in the tooth fairy. The limbs as well as the hole tree are harvested, the market logs are cut to length and sold as such. So not to think the price of wood for your woodstove is not going to be affected you better think twice.
They would not be culling young growth, the type of scrub growth that you are referring is actually stimulated by culling. The logger agreements with respect to plants like this have strick requirements regarding restrictions on logging from which they can accept shipments. Have had to deal with this in the past, this is unlikely to have an adverse impact on wildlife and is more likely to create browse for wildlife.
DeleteAs discussion of the Winstanley biomass plant continues, both sides of the issue should remember that while some might think the state gives a hoot about their opinions, it doesn't. That is why no Public Service Board memnbers attended the hearings; only stand-ins were there. Public meetings were held to allow people to let off steam, not to direct policy. Springfield residents have no official voice, no vote, and will have to live (or die) with whatever the state decides. No matter what one thinks about the wood chip plant, state mandates that deprive local citizens of an official voice in decisions that affect their communities are very dangerous.
ReplyDeleteEven if we have no voice regarding whether a plant will be constructed in Springfield, perhaps finding a better site for the plant within the town will make sense to the state. Siting the plant on Winstanley's property in the industrial park is very short sited, similar to the siting of the sewage treatment plant on Fairgrounds Rd. in the 1970's. At that time, officials didn't consider that water runs down stream, the same as they now apparently don't know that prevailing winds are from the west. The multi-million dollar sewage treatment facility on Fairgrounds Rd. was never used, was eventually demolished, and the salt storage shed was constructed on the site.
If Springfield must have a biomass plant, perhaps the state and Winstanley will be smart enough to execute a land swap. The state could trade state property under the correctional center for land in the industrial park. Since corrections is the major industry in Springfield, moving the correctional facility to the industrial park would be appropriate, and provide additional construction jobs. Constructing the biomass plant downwind of the town and over unlimited water from the aquifer under the CT River makes sense. Traffic related to the correctional center would not threaten downtown Springfield.
Winstanley is getting a 25 million dollar federal grant as soon as the plant is approved, and that should be applied to moving the correctional center as well as constructing the biomass plant.
What about the water? If the next big crisis in the world is going to be over food and water should we not be concerned about conserving H2O? We need food and water, if the trucks were importing and exporting this stuff we could have a happier community, Winstanley! I'm thirsty...
ReplyDeleteIF the biomass plant were where the correctional facility is now, then trucks would just come off I91 and go right to the plant without having to cross Springfield. No traffic problems, less transportation, easier on the drivers, less cost to the plant...
ReplyDeleteI’m really impressed with your writing skills as well as with the layout on your Wood Chip Suppliers blog.
ReplyDelete