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