Letters to the Editor

Your views in 250 words or less

Tag: biomass

Oct.
31st

GOP: Republican-led House hazardous to our health

Re: “GOP bill would let Border Patrol ignore environmental laws” (TNT, 10-24) and “Proposed biomass regulations a threat to jobs, critics say” (TNT, 10-29).

These two stories connect the dysfunction of House Republicans’ attacks upon EPA rules and regulations with the potential impacts locally: degradation of public lands in Washington state and air-quality problems in Tacoma.

Regarding the biomass regulation, on a face mask I will write the word “pass” followed by the bill number and wear the mask around town. Not only good politics, but good for my health.

Aug.
18th

BIOMASS: Critics ignore existing pollution sources

Re: Residents ignored on incinerator (letter, 8-13).

The writer and others from Shelton are worried about the biomass energy plant proposed for their city, but they don’t seem to be worried about the wood smoke presently produced from old stoves used for home heating. These are a significant source of pollution during the cold months in the Puget Sound area. Apparently, unhealthy wood smoke from a lot of small sources is OK, while emissions from a big corporate project are not.

A modern biomass energy plant incorporates preheated combustion air delivered at a controlled rate and technology to capture particulates

Read more »

June
24th

BIOMASS: Incinerator doesn’t make sense

We live in Mason County because it has clean air and water (mostly). I just can’t see allowing a biomass incinerator, spewing particulates too small to see, to take that away from us.

Why send our federal stimulus dollars to a French company (AREVA), partnered with a North Carolina company (Duke Energy of Hanford), incorporated in Maryland, that will sell the energy to California?

This project makes no business sense without federal and state subsidies. I just can’t see it.