Dear Mr. Wassum:

 

I am writing to urge you to abandon the proposal to provide tax subsidies to the bio-mass industry in Massachusetts under the rationale that such a policy will contribute to a "renewable energy" based economy, which ignores the fact that the industry derived proposal will accelerate particulate matter pollution, increase the incidence of respiratory distress in communities adjacent to wood burning facilities and decimate forest coverage, thus destroying the one weapon we have to effectively sequester carbon. We have no time to wait for forests to regenerate and the idea that such wood bio-mass would be harvested only from dead or storm damaged trees is a myth.

 

The science that proposed the bio-mass fuel argument was flawed in the 1980's and contains the same assumptions in today's arguments. This is a matter of public health and planetary survival that cannot be trivialized with concerns for economic gains for a particular industry. The Commonwealth is rich in its forest resources, which are currently contributing to our well being by sequestering carbon. A much more effective and less costly subsidy aimed at preserving forests and protecting old growth forests would do more to benefit the goal of combating climate change dynamics and contributing to public health via cleaner air, than the current bio-mass industry proposal.

 

A more effective strategy would be to divert the savings derived from conservation policies to more aggressively encourage solar and wind power production and the production and use of more electric vehicles.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

Nicholas Dines