Suggested Letter Templates

You can write something as simple as (cut, paste, and edit):

Template 1

Please do not grant Beaver Wood Energy permission to break ground before December 31, 2010. More time is needed to gather information regarding the impact the proposed biomass facility will have on our area.

If people want to write more, here are some paragraphs (talking points) that may be helpful as a starting place (they should be reworked). The more personal the letter the better.

Template 2

I am writing as a resident of —- [if Williamstown or North Adams write “an abutting community’ or “who lives near the proposed Beaver Wood biomass plant”] to ask that you DENY the petition by Beaver Wood Energy requesting to break ground before December 31st 2010 for a wood burning facility on the site of the former racetrack in Pownal.

There questions that have yet to be impartially answered. It is in the monetary interests of Beaver Wood Energy to rush the permit process. However, this should not compromise due diligence on the part of the Vermont Public Service Board to ascertain the petition’s accuracy; to determine the proposed plant’s level of safety and benefit to the community; and to examine the integrity of the developers.

AIR QUALTIY AND EMISSSIONS:
I am concerned about harmful emissions. In addition to carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide, and ash, “particulate matter” (microscopic particles) is released in the biomass wood-burning process. Particle emissions can be measured as far as I know, but you need the right monitoring equipment. These particles lodge in the lungs and cause respiratory ailments. The Massachusetts Medical Society released a statement in December 2009, stating “biomass power plants pose an unacceptable risk to the public health by increasing air pollution.”

I feel it is incumbent upon Beaver Wood to PROVE low emissions for our particular location. We are in a valley with an inversion weather system that traps air. The company must have an air permit submitted to the State of Vermont, which thus far it has failed to do.

The company’s developers have had hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines levied against them for air emissions violations in the years 1996–2006 (reference data from the Freedom of Access Act Request for Information on Thomas Emero and William Bousquet (the developers) read at the Williamstown Selectmen’s meeting of November 8, 2010). This irresponsible record should give the Board pause and lead them to question the testimony of experts paid by the company to give evidence on their behalf. How will standards be enforced since the developers have disregarded regulations in the past? Is there sufficient trust to allow self regulation?

AESTHETICS, TRAFFIC AND ECONOMIC IMPACT
I am concerned about the damage—aesthetically, economically and ecologically—this facility may inflict on an area that is treasured for its scenic beauty. The pristine nature of our surroundings is a crucial draw for both residents and visitors. It is a main asset to the economy since the cultural, academic, and commercial establishments here thrive on the currency of being situated in one of the few remaining places free from blight. The landscape has maintained a small-scale human footprint with no malls, subdivisions, or large factories.

The rumbling of 70—100 lumber trailer-tractors per day—make that 140—200 since they also have to leave the factory (Beaver Wood’s estimates) on our 2-lane routes speaks not only to traffic congestion but also to harmful diesel fuel emissions (Isn’t the plant supposed to be a solution to fossil fuel emissions and our dependence on foreign oil?). Anyone who has driven knows it is not the same to be on a road with cars as with 18- wheelers. Additionally, there is the question of noise from the plant, which could also contribute to making this quiet valley most unpleasant. Disrupting scenic views, traffic, noise, and air pollution will affect property values.

WATER
I am concerned about the use of 500,000 gallons of water per day to cool the heat generated by the burning of wood. We have had water shortages in recent years and the biomass facility could make this problem significantly worse. Pumping water also uses fuel. Has that been factored into the energy equation? The process of burning great quantities of wood and using great quantities of water to cool seems a poor use of limited natural resources that to a sensible person do not qualify as “renewable.”

ECOLOGY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Is biomass wood burning on the scale Beaver Wood Energy proposes truly “green,” “clean” and “renewable?” The majority of environmental scientists I have read who have studied the process say “no.” “Contrary to industry claims, wood burning biomass does not reduce carbon dioxide emissions, it increases them. Wood burning biomass power plants emit about 50% more carbon per unit of energy than coal.” ( Massachusetts Forest Watch). Further they are only 30% efficient. This means that enormous amounts of wood are required to produce a relatively small amount of energy. 35 acres of forest need to be cut per day and burned to feed the proposed factory. Robert McCarthy, Williamstown’s tree warden has said that many trees are already dying from acid rain. (He predicts we won’t have maple syrup in New England in 10—20 years (Williamstown Selectmen’s meeting November 8, 2010)) and that it is impossible to leave enough waste wood to maintain the forests when wood is harvested on the scale Beaver Wood plans.

William Moomaw, Professor of International Environmental Policy and Director of the Center for International Environment and Resource Policy Education at Tufts University and a resident of Williamstown, claims that the woodshed region from which Beaver Wood will cut cannot sustain the scale of Beaver Wood’s enterprise. He maintains that BWE and other biomass companies do not take into account the damage to wildlife and delicately balanced ecosystems that result from harvesting wood and “forest waste” on a corporate scale. [this from a conversation I had but anyone can use.] As a citizen of the planet as well as of —– I feel we have a responsibility not to add to carbon emissions and greenhouse gasses, to not disrupt our forests’ ecosystems by cutting on a vast scale, and by not using considerable amounts of fossil fuels via transporting wood and pumping water.

ALTERNATIVES
In terms of alternative energy sources, it seems that conservation and efficiency are the best new sources of power. Permanent jobs can be generated through building and maintaining recycling plants, solar and wind power facilities, through retro-fitting homes to be energy efficient, and exploring other means of baseline energy generation.

QUESTIONS ABOUT INTEGRITY OF BWE
Beaver Wood Energy and Bechtel Corporation (listed on BWE’s petition as “the development partner who will be the constructor of the project”) are corporations with CEOs who do not live in our area and have no vested interest in the health and well-being of our communities. Their motivation is to make money. They have a long history of negligence and irresponsibility [Report read at Selectmen’s meeting Nov. 8, 2010].

CONCLUSION
I urge the Public Service Board to put the brakes on Beaver Wood Energy’s petition and deny them authorization to break ground for the biomass plant in Pownal before January 2011. Too much is at stake and too many questions are still unanswered to rush into green-lighting a facility of this scale.

Template 3

PROPERTY VALUES
Date
Subject: Viewshed and property value losses caused from Biomass Incineration & Pellet Facility
Dear ___________________,

The historically scenic Pownal Valley of Vermont and the adjacent beautiful New England college town of Williamstown in Berkshire County, MA are at severe risk of losing one of the few assets they have, a relatively unspoiled rural character if the proposed Biomass incineration facility and related wood pellet plant were built.
The small industrial plants of the nineteenth century are things of the past. They offered jobs without polluting the soils or air. The proposed plant for Pownal would add dangerous pollutants to the air, draw huge quantities of water from the river and aquifer, add thousands of unwanted huge diesel truck trips a month to the relatively quiet roads of the area and insert a blight on the scenic beauty of this small rural town totally incongruous to its character.

It is a known fact that inserting an industrial plant in a community where there had not been anything of the size or impact of the proposed facility will have a negative effect on property values in the entire valley. Residents who chose to live in this community over past years did so assuming their views, their air and their overall quality of life would remain stable and now, with the risk all that can change, their property values are suddenly at risk. If you add this new threat to the already depressed real estate market losses to area residents could be measured in the millions. Why should an industrial giant like Bechtel which is partnering with the Beaver Wood developers be permitted to decimate our local community and its intrinsic value with its heavy, dirty and unsightly industrial facility so massively out of proportion to anything else in the community? Who will compensate the property owners for the wide scale loss of their real estate values? How will some people even be able to sell whose properties lie in close proximity to or in direct view of the future industrial site? How will the area draw its traditional buyers who have come to the region for over a hundred years to enjoy the arts, for the clean air, natural landscapes and to escape the very industrial damages done to other parts of the nation and planet?

The Beaver Wood Incineration and pellet plant would severely negatively impact one of the few “industries” the area has to offer namely its unspoiled rural character and the neighboring quintessential college town to the south which has drawn retirees as well as faculty and which provides clean safe well paid jobs for thousands of locals. Add a dirty industrial plant that is totally and completely at odds with everything the area stands for and you will put at grave risk the present local economy, you will upset the balance that has been delicately created over a few hundred years and in so doing destroy property values, livelihoods, and lives.

To build a plant the size proposed in the quiet little valley of Pownal would have a comparable impact to damming the river that runs through that valley. Everything would change. Plants and operations like Beaver Woods do not belong here and it is offensive to realize that the owners of the site would have the gall to even elect to have it built here. When Progress Partners first purchased they came to the community appearing as responsible “partners” to the community seeking input and involvement. As they realized over time their initial concept was untenable for this rural area, they ceased seeking local input. Now they rush the present proposal forward, seeking to gain urgent accelerated approvals that only benefit the developers and which put an entire community at grave risk. It is unconscionable and the PSB which has the power to grant the operating permit holds within its grasp the power to either protect or destroy a small balanced, peaceful and stable rural valley and the entire local economy.

The rush to try to push the BWE project forward is propelled by concerns over power. The urgency is apparently more pressing in light of the potential shutting down of the Yankee Atomic Plant in Vernon. The public trust has been breached there. The public trust does not exist in Pownal. We do NOT trust BWE or its giant financial partner. We do NOT trust Progress Partners since they have breached the fragile trust they first established and now have proven they care nothing for the disastrous impacts about to land on local citizens so they can extricate themselves from a bad investment. We are gravely worried about the trust placed in the hands of the PSB to protect the lives, health and welfare of the local citizens and businesses which will inevitably be negatively impacted if the plant is approved. Our trust is now in the hands of the lawyers who will have to spend untold thousands of our hard earned wages to defeat this obnoxious plant, a technology that is based on eons old principles of burning plant material to make heat and energy. We are sick and tired of old technologies cloaked in phony terms like “green” and “bio” and “jobs” to try to persuade a now very skeptical and injured public. Where are the truly responsible developers? Where is someone who has an idea that is healthy, beneficial, clean, and radically new? Where is the innovation we so desperately need and want? Where is the company that will answer the needs for clean and safe jobs that does not damage the area even more? Where is a developer that will live in our midst like the president, faculty and students of Williams College do? We want a responsible business whose leaders and officers would live and work right in the same community because they are willing to accept every benefit or any downside that might exist.

We appeal to the PSB to think carefully as to whether they would willingly choose to move next door to a plant such as the one being proposed. Would the PSB place a plant this size next to any of Vermont’s scenic treasures such as at the base of Mount Mansfield or in the midst of any of Vermont’s hallmark attractions like Mount Snow or Killington or the Trapp Family Lodge? I would imagine not and so why would the citizens of Pownal wish such a blight and blemish on itself? Pownal does NOT want BWE.

Sincerely,

(Sign above and print name and address here)