Main Menu

News, Letters to the Editor, Russell First Publications

PDF | Print | E-mail

 

Russell First publications and letters to the editor:

 

Russell Biomass Will Revive Our Town 

To the Editor: 

Concerned Citizens of Russell held an anti-biomass information meeting on 9/17. Although I support the Russell Biomass project, I was enlightened to learn that CCR is not against just the Russell Biomass plant, but against all biomass projects nationwide. 

The speakers stated or demonstrated they were speaking relatively, how the issue of Russell Biomass “fits in statewide and nationwide”.  During the evening, the audience was encouraged to sign two different petitions to limit or eliminate biomass projects. 

Peter Shilling, Chairman of the Massachusetts Counsel of Trout Unlimited - Boston, spoke of a political agenda for green energy pushed by Governor Patrick.  The “governor is building his” green agenda to improve his record for future political ventures.  “The legislature doesn’t care”.  “If someone has an agenda he will drive it through.”  “Those who are regulating are the same as those pushing the energy bill.”  Nationally Congress pushed through a bill favorable to biomass and the Senate is still questioning if they will follow suit.  

Mr. Shilling bemoaned the state and federal authorities acceptance of the Russell Biomass water permits. He then gave his own rationale about how damage to the fish population was miscalculated. There will be “massive destruction” of the fish, though he stated that the withdrawal permit requires Russell Biomass to stop operating if the “low flow” level is reached. 

Regarding zoning of the Russell Biomass plant, Mr. Shilling stated the “lower section of the Westfield River is zoned industrial below” a certain point.  These are “state regulatory schemes”. An audience member asked, “Is it true that Massachusetts has some of the most stringent regulations? Mr. Shilling responded, “Massachusetts can be hardnosed, but it is all political.” In a final statement he said that the fight against all biomass has been “taken to the national level….” 

Dr. Mary Booth of the Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance addressed wood supply and sustainability, air impact, and trucking. A PowerPoint displayed her assessments and calculations regarding each issue. References to the Palmer, Greenfield, Middlebury College and Pine Tree plants were made as well. Her distaste for the larger Palmer plant seemed to be greater than that of the Russell plant. Dr. Booth’s presentation of information supported her points. 

I am not a scientist, and at the speed of the presentation, grasping all of the calculations was difficult. I came away with a general idea of each of her points, all of which were negative to biomass projects in general.   In closing remarks Jana Chicoine, CCR Spokesperson, stated, “people don’t know whom to believe”.  It brought me back to Dr. Booth’s scientific presentation, wondering just that!   The point was perfectly clear to me: All biomass burning projects are bad, the fault of the regulating bodies. 

To all concerned: if you dislike the biomass projects, take your fight to those who set the regulations, not to the individuals who are meeting or exceeding those regulations. Russell Biomass will revive our town, with needed tax relief and other amenities. 

Gloria Farrell, Russell 

 

Bring Common Sense Back to Russell

September 27, 2009 Country Journal 

To the citizens of Russell:  It is disturbing that we have thrown aside our basic civility, our common and decent manners toward each other. People are insulting and threatening one another in public over honest disagreements and opinions. Are we pretending to be in some third world war zone here? These misguided, malicious, venomous and theatrical assaults will leave burn scars on our public discourse and keep a generation of good citizens from coming forward to serve our town.

Let’s all step back, take a deep breath and collect our senses.  It also concerns me that some of us actually believe that we are now supposed to exist in a “Post-Industrial” world. How many of us blithely assume we can and should be buying most of our goods from overseas, outsourcing our industry and services, borrowing to pay for our self-indulgent lifestyles, hunting far and wide for those scarce jobs?

Connect the dots: Our schools and other essential town services are on the chopping block, along with our jobs, our overdue mortgages and our unsecured debt, while our real-estate taxes are going sky-high.   We need to kiss those Post-Industrial fantasies good-bye and face reality.  We can’t afford those fantasies. Local industry and our community can -- and must -- learn to live in harmony.  We can co-exist peacefully and benefit mutually in many ways.

Countless other towns and cities manage to balance the needs and issues of industry and traffic and jobs and the environment and sustainability and raising healthy kids. Think about it. We can use our heads, do it just as well, and have solid economic development here.  

There are residents in the Hilltowns around Russell who would give their right arm for an opportunity like the one sitting in our lap, for the tax base, for the jobs. These are intelligent and well-informed people who are not paranoid, who know that The Sky Is NOT Falling, as some fear-mongers are shouting. These are people who are not impressed by wild theatrics, emotional bullying, name-calling, mis-information. People who know our government is not out to “Get” us, nor is our government conspiring with local industry in some vast web of lies and deception. That the environment and our health can be well–protected, by the best and strictest laws, standards and regulations, backed up by our own local commitments and vigilance. 

How will we explain our role in this process to our kids and grandkids, assuming we can afford to keep our homes and families here in Russell? We need to consider our current economic situation, our future and our options calmly and rationally, and decide individually and as a community what is best for Russell. No one can afford to sit idly on the sidelines or on the fence. We need to make this happen. The alternative is pretty horrendous.  

Sincerely,  

Derrick Mason 281 Upper Moss Hill Rd.Russell, MA 01071   

 

 

 A Letter to Westfield Residents    

I have lived in Russell since 1955. I have served on the Board of the Westfield Watershed Association and the regional Resource Conservation and Development Council. I have worked for the Hilltown Community Development Corporation. I have also served on the Board of the Valley CDC. I co-chaired a Downtown Improvement Program in Westfield in the late 1980’s. My wife and I have residences in Westfield and Russell, in order to accommodate her disability. I currently serve on four committees in Easthampton, where I have a business. 

The Russell Biomass project is of great importance to Russell – to its economic viability, to its jobs base, to its tax base, to the sustainability of its forests, to its schools and all its community services. I could talk about each of these in detail, but I won’t lecture you.    Russell does not have the many economic blessings that Westfield has. We lost about 90% of our industry in the past 25 years. We are “Post Industrial” by force, not by choice. Almost everyone in Russell must find work in other towns including Westfield. We have one small factory, one gas station, a tiny bakery, a modest package store and one bar-restaurant. That’s it. 

Russell needs to bring in industry and jobs. We do not have the luxury of slamming the door on good economic opportunities, or demonizing legitimate business developers.  Russell Biomass has worked hard over the past four years to create a sound, viable and constructive model for a very modest 50 KW renewable resource-based generating plant. 

Russell Biomass has worked hard to cultivate a responsive, cooperative relationship with the town government and residents. Russell Biomass has developed and refined their plant design, access route, engineering and protocols to meet every conceivable concern of the town, the citizens, the neighbors, the regulatory agencies – regarding air, water, noise, dust, traffic, health and welfare, jobs, tax benefits, community programs for youth, seniors, students, sports and recreation, etc. 

In a region where the environment is often a big concern, Russell Biomass will meet or exceed the most stringent public standards in the nation, and possibly in the world. The developers themselves are a blended team of technicians, businessmen and dedicated environmentalists. Their operating contracts with the town guarantee that the town will always have the power to monitor and intervene if the regulations, standards and agreements are violated. 

How would the proposed Russell Biomass plant actually impact life in Westfield?   The truck traffic might add 4% to the truck trips passing through Westfield. Hardly noticeable. (Thank you for finally getting a new bridge and raising the RR overpass to help the traffic along.) 

The water removal from the Westfield river will be 1.3 cubic feet per second, only 1.5% of the 84 CFS already allowed to be withdrawn from the river for other public and private uses.   The warm water returned to the river would raise the water temperature less than 1 degree at the precise discharge point, and a negligible amount within a few yards downstream.  

The air quality impact will be unnoticeable, even at the plant in Russell. Less than 5 percent of the permitted limits for any hazardous emissions will even come out of the stack. These emissions would be equivalent to a few old-fashioned household wood stoves, and would be entirely compensated by a stove replacement program in downtown Russell. Plus, the ash will be valuable as fertilizer.

A number of other wood-fired plants throughout Massachusetts have operated for many years, with no adverse air impacts, including one right on the campus of Cooley Dickinson hospital in Northampton. 

A few gullible Westfield residents, reporters and grand-standing politicians have been sadly misled by CCR (Concerned Citizens of Russell) into making some false and outrageous public claims, and raving that the Sky Is Falling, just like the children’s fable. 

Westfield has a commercial and industrial base which is hundreds of times larger than Russell, which has only one small operating factory. Westfield’s quality of life is determined by its own activity, its own development and environmental issues, which dwarf those of its tiny Hilltown neighbor.  It is absolutely ludicrous to argue that one new state-of-the-art, small-scale, strictly-regulated generator will have a noticeable adverse impact in Westfield. 

Please consider that the power transmission line that Russell Biomass proposes is not a new intrusion on the landscape. For decades it was used to bring power in to Russell for our paper mills. The transmission line will now send green electricity out of Russell to benefit the region. It will have minimal if any environmental impact in Westfield. It will have no economic downside, and it will bring you $200,000 every year in city tax revenue.  

Please consider that the residents of Russell are your neighbors, your commuters, your shoppers, your employees. We need the same kinds of economic and industrial development opportunities in Russell that you are creating for yourselves.  We need your cooperation, and your careful, rational consideration in this matter.  Thank you. 

Derrick Mason  

 

Russell Biomass Would Help Forest Landowners Keep Their Land in Forest

 

As a local landowner, tree farmer and forestry worker since I was big enough to carry an axe, I would like to offer my thoughts on the Biomass plant’s potential impact on our regional forests. Responsible forest owners who look for any reasonable return on their investment in the land plus taxes, insurance, maintenance, all need to harvest and sell forest products.  If not, the owners are inevitably compelled to sell or develop the land, so they can get their money out of the forest and into more productive investments.

My family loves our forests, and has maintained several hundred beautiful and productive acres of forestland in Russell for over 50 years. Our labor of love means we are constantly considering the multitude of investment alternatives, costs and benefits, maintenance chores, supply and demand forces, govt. regulations and programs, rights and responsibilities affecting forestry.  All of these influences, along with forestry practices, harvesting technologies and public perceptions have changed a heck of a lot over the past half century, and mostly for the better. One of the newest developments that intelligent and active forest owners (and our professional foresters) welcome is the opportunity to harvest low-grade wood, i.e. biomass, at a break-even or positive ROI (Return on Investment). 

For centuries, our collective forests have been raided for the most valuable trees (e.g. mature/healthy/straight oak, pine, hard maple, cherry), while there has been no reliable market for the junk, low-grade wood (e.g. soft maple, hemlock, beech and crooked/damaged/diseased trees).   You might think that pulpwood and firewood would offer adequate outlets for our low-grade wood, but in fact the chronic low demand and pricing for them has produced minimal benefit to the forest or the landowner. Even modern “selective cutting” forestry (which by the way has effectively eliminated clear-cutting of the mixed hardwood forests of our southern New England region within the past 50 years), has not been able to solve this major problem. The junk trees continually build up in the forests, crowding out natural regeneration of better quality, higher-value trees. It’s identical to weeds in your vegetable or flower garden. Take a walk in any local forest or tree farm with a forester, and you will be treated to unmistakable proof of this fact. 

At last, in our lifetime, biomass offers a cost-effective system and incentive for loggers and landowners to remove the tree tops and “weed out” the junk trees that otherwise clog up the forest and the log landings.  Biomass creates new demand on a scale that will encourage loggers to invest in the equipment and add it to their list of services, encourage landowners to get the junk wood out of their forests, and encourage the forests to re-generate with higher-quality, faster-growing, higher value trees. It’s a win-win-win situation all around.

Now, the forestry question of the day is, “Will biomass encourage “clear-cutting” or mass destruction of our forests?”   The answer is: No, and the reason is pure dollars and sense. Why would any one in their right mind take a tree worth a thousand dollars as a sawlog,  and instead chip it up into twenty-five dollars worth of biomass? That would be like you driving your nice new Lexus or Volvo to the scrap yard and collecting $50 for the metal.

Here’s the take-away lesson: biomass harvesting will never be a danger to our forests. Biomass will never create a profitable “primary” market for wood, but it will be a nice way to get paid for your trash, while cleaning up the forest environment, generating electricity we all need from renewable sources, and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. 

So I guess the final question is: How silly do you think foresters, landowners, tree farmers, loggers are, that they would sell their most valuable commodities for pennies on the dollar? Even if you have no interest at all in the history, science or general facts of the matter, please at least digest this last paragraph carefully.  

Derrick Mason

Moss Hill Tree Farm, PO Box 321, Russell MA 01071 

 

Last Updated (Saturday, 09 January 2010 18:49)

 

Copyright © 2009 ---.
All Rights Reserved.

Designed by Karin Schloss.