Greed is the root of both of these quests. The alchemists failed. With subsidies from taxpayers and the credulity of local leaders, Fibrowatt continues.
In the first media stories, our community was promised a windfall of $15 million a year, then $10 million, and then $7 million. Fibrowatt has operated here for two years.
Just before his recent death, Paul Harvey featured our town on his newscast as being a town who applied for and received a grant which they were turning back because no matching funds being available.
Our streets are overused and in poor repair. Our school's story in this week's paper is that they are facing a possible $200,000 cut to maintain their budget. Our taxes and utility costs continue to increase. Our new business in town is an outlet for dented can goods.
Our windfall seems to be odor, smoke, and grit. You do not want this in your area. Information now available from the MPCA on Benson’s project and the independent thinkers in your community may save you from this corporate greed.
Darlene Martinson Ross
Benson, Minn.
The deck was stacked
I am writing in regard to several topics mentioned in the closing paragraphs of your editorial of March 30, 2009.
The Surry County Board of Commissioners meeting held March 26 to discuss the proposed Fibrowatt plant was the most egregious example of the arrogance of power that I have witnessed. There was an obvious intent by the Board to deny opponents of Fibrowatt a public forum to express their concerns, while proponents were given free rein and ample time to promote the project.
C.R.E.D. (The Committee for Responsible Economic Development) had asked for and been reassured of a 20-minute time slot to present their viewpoint, but the agenda mysteriously changed and their opportunity disappeared.
Many individual citizens who signed up to speak and later asked questions of the scientific experts or Fibrowatt spokesman Terence P. Walmsley were later denied permission to present their 3-minute statements, being told by Commissioner Paul Johnson that they had already spoken and therefore had been removed from the list.
Of particular note among those not allowed to speak for this reason was Dr. Bill Blackley, who represents a number of area physicians concerned about the detrimental health consequences of air pollution from the Fibrowatt plant. The doctors especially wanted to make it known that there will be an increase in respiratory and circulatory disease from pollutants, along with an increased risk of certain cancers and other disorders from the dioxins that will be released from the 300-foot tall stack. They cite children suffering from asthma and the elderly with weak respiratory systems as groups eliciting special concern.
Fibrowatt claims to be a very clean operation in terms of air pollution, but its Minnesota plant has been cited by the EPA for exceeding its emissions limits. All three plants it built in the United Kingdom (where the company originated) rate in the top 100 dirtiest of 2,000 power plants nationally as of November 2007. It would be the largest single source of airborne emissions in Surry County by a wide margin.
Local doctors are also concerned about the increased likelihood of serious vehicular accidents on the notoriously narrow and curvy Highway 268 that will have between 100 and 200 additinal tractor-trailer rigs traveling it every day six days a week. Furthermore, as the road undergoes a constant pounding, its surface will deteriorate further, making it even more dangerous. Neither the state of North Carolina nor Surry County has the funds to straighten and improve Highway 268. Fibrowatt will no doubt be asking for hefty tax concessions and other financial perks to locate here. Shouldn't they be offering to pay for improvements to the highway that will be necessary for their operation?
Because questioners were generally not allowed to ask follow-up questions, a number of incorrect statements were made by pro-Fibrowatt speakers and supposedly neutral experts. For example, soil scientist Deanna L. Osmond, Ph.D, implied that making palletized fertilizer from poultry litter is financially unfeasible and has not been successful when tried on the Delmarva peninsula. In fact, the Perdue AgriRecycle plant there profitably produces a poultry litter organic fertilizer under the brand name "microStart60," which is used commercially on golf courses and helps regenerate clear-cut forest lands, as well as a consumer product sold under several brand names at garden centers and big box stores, including Lowes and Home Depot. Additionally, since it doesn't incinerate poultry litter, there is no air pollution problem.
The purpose of government is to ascertain and execute the will of the people within the confines of the law; to attempt to manipulate an open meeting to deprive citizens of a fair say is diametrically opposed to this. Excluding the valid questions and concerns of Surry residents will not make them go away but only invalidate the positions held by Fibrowatt and the Board of Commissioners.
The Fibrowatt decision will have a major impact on our community, both economically and environmentally, for years to come. From what I have heard and read, the Fibrowatt project seems an extremely risky proposition, one likely to bring long-term harm to Surry County in return for a modest tax benefit and the creation of a handful of new jobs. I think we can surely do better.
Robert Snow
Elkin
Editor’s note: The above letter was edited for reason of space limitation. The full letter is on the website.
Post a Comment
