Burning resources is unsustainable

John Lajoie
Charlestown
To the Editor:

The Valley News front page article “Energy at Issue in NH Race” (August 1) shows once again that politics makes strange bedfellows. While erstwhile progressives Molly Kelly and Steve Marchand seek to overturn Gov. Sununu’s veto of Senate Bill (SB) 365, environmentalists are joining with “no subsidies for anyone” conservatives to urge legislators to sustain the veto when it comes back for a vote on Sept. 13.

Biomass is dirty and unsustainable. See the film “Burned: Are Trees the New Coal?” to get a fuller picture of how burning large quantities of trees pollutes. In a sympathetic but damning Aug. 5 article about the Springfield, New Hampshire biomass facility, the Valley News points out that even with subsidies “the economics of operating the biomass plant are grim.”

Trash incineration is even dirtier and also unsustainable. SB 365 contains subsidies to Wheelabrator’s so-called “waste to energy” incinerator, a known source of dioxin and other poisons. Even though Wheelabrator is paid to take the refuse it burns, trash incinerators fail economically when deprived of energy credits.

Industries based on burning resources are not sustainable. Taking money out of our pockets to subsidize dirty technologies that would fail in a free market goes against both common sense and self interest. If you care about the environment and your pocketbook, urge your legislators and gubernatorial candidates to sustain the veto of SB 365.

 

John Lajoie

Charlestown