The effects of climate change are reported by the media almost every day — the melting polar ice caps, rising oceans, floods, droughts, wildfires and hurricanes of increasing severity. And Dartmouth College’s response, amazingly, is to try to reverse global warming by suggesting we burn our forests.
Trees sequester carbon and a variety of toxic pollutants, including lead and mercury. When a tree is burned, those pollutants are released back into the atmosphere. Should we really build a biomass incinerator in our valley? Our children are especially vulnerable to the adverse health effects of air pollution due to their rapid lung development between the ages of 10 and 18. We don’t allow our children to smoke — why are we willing to subject them to pollution from biomass?
The biomass industry has successfully created a green image based on the idea of managed forests. But the reality is that in order to feed biomass, it will demand heavily mechanized logging capable of clearing acres a day. Biomass advocates, many of whom have a vested economic interest, say Dartmouth will buy its wood locally and control its pedigree. But instead, it appears that the entire project will be subcontracted out to a third party, giving Dartmouth plausible deniability and no control over the carbon and pollutants that will be released into the atmosphere.
These same vested advocates have stated that it is impossible for Dartmouth to generate 48 megawatts with a non-combustion heating system. The truth is that geoexchange systems can meet most of the required output in conjunction with solar and wind energy acquired through power purchase agreements.
As an investment, biomass has not been proven economically viable. A report in The Wall Street Journal stated, “An industry considered sustainable today can seem nefarious tomorrow — just look at biomass.”
Dartmouth must join with other forward-thinking colleges, like Saint Michael’s in Colchester, Vt. By following this path, Dartmouth would be protecting the health of its students and faculty, the residents of the Upper Valley, and the planet.
LUCIA MARTIN
Hanover
The argument presented in recent letters to the editor that growing new trees to replace the ones harvested for Dartmouth College’s proposed biomass heating plant will reabsorb the carbon dioxide released by the plant is too limited a perspective. This argument only considers the pollutants emitted by the Dartmouth facility and ignores the numerous other human activities, such as driving cars, heating and cooling non-Dartmouth buildings, etc., that release carbon dioxide. If Dartmouth’s new facility releases less carbon dioxide, the existing forests can absorb more of the carbon dioxide from these other activities.
Following the argument that trees will absorb the pollutants, Dartmouth could simply construct a more efficient facility to use fossil fuel, such as oil or gas, which can be less polluting than wood. The existing forests would then remain in place to absorb the carbon dioxide released from this facility, just as they would the carbon dioxide from a wood-burning facility.
However, a preferable solution would be to invest in sources such as solar, geothermal and wind, the operation of which would release little to no pollutants. The existing forests could then be left to absorb the carbon dioxide from numerous other human activities.
Dartmouth is one of the leading academic institutions in the country, with vast resources including a school of engineering. These resources should be utilized to design and construct a forward-thinking facility using current technology rather than one using an ancient and outdated fuel source.
Regarding the argument that the harvesting of wood for a wood-burning facility would provide jobs in the area, this ignores the fact that, rather than lacking jobs, Vermont and New Hampshire are lacking the workers to fill current employment needs.
PHILIP ROBERTSON
Woodstock
Today’s high school students and others would perhaps gain valuable insight into the mind of President Donald Trump by reading Shakespeare’s play Macbeth. It seems that the play was written with someone like our current troubled president in mind. It focuses on a powerful man who aspires to become king of Scotland and sets out on a twisted and immoral path to do so. He makes “deals” with three witches who he thinks can help him become king and then maintain his power. But the witches only see him for the ambitious, crooked idiot that he is. They toy and play with his twisted mind as he struggles to maintain his failing kingship built on evil doings. His eventual downfall turns his world into total ruin.
Senate Republicans might benefit from a review of Macbeth so as not to blindly follow a president who desires to become America’s first king. Evil and unchecked corrupt power lurks in Trump’s White House and it is becoming more and more clear to all Americans with the impeachment hearings. The truth of Trump’s corruption is being told by dedicated, humble and honest public servants in spite of Republicans who try to cast doubt on their testimonies. But truth is easily recognized, and the truth will bring this corrupt president down.
JACKIE SMITH
Sunapee