Columnist Marty Nathan: Positives and a negative concerning the climate emergency AP PHOTO In this July 19, 2007 file photo, an iceberg melts off the coast of Ammasalik, Greenland. AP
Published: 1/6/2021 2:16:09 PM
Modified: 1/6/2021 2:15:59 PM
I admit it: this column on the climate emergency is usually pretty depressing.
Today, though, I want to offer a bit of respite and hope. Though 2020 is on course to be either the hottest or second-hottest year on record; though the polar regions are still warming at three times the rate of the rest of the world, spelling disaster for low-lying coastal regions threatened by rising seas; though the 2020 Gulf hurricane season was the most active in recorded history; and though drought-induced Western wild fires in the last year burned over 8 million acres, there are glimmers of optimism as we enter 2021.
Proposed Springfield biomass plant poses regional harm (Letters)
Updated Jan 02, 2021;
Springfield, which has been designated as “the asthma capital of the country,” is possibly going to become even more unhealthy! Palmer Renewable Energy has been pushing for 12 years to construct an electric-generating wood-burning biomass incinerator in a low-income area of East Springfield.
This facility will disproportionately affect the health of black and brown residents of Springfield, many of whom struggle to breathe freely. Children and elderly folks who already need inhalers will be even further compromised and more threatened by COVID-19.
In her recent article posted on MassLive (Dec. 23, “Biomass plant will create a ‘sacrifice zone’ in Springfield”), Dr. Marty Nathan noted that the smoke generated by this plant “will include tiny particles that burrow deep into the lungs.” Springfield will be the “sacrifice zone” for the profit from this project. But the air quali
A Massachusetts bill classifying biomass as renewable reignites a decade-old fight
Photo courtesy of René Théberge
When Tanisha Arena thinks of the proposed biomass facility in Springfield, Massachusetts, she remembers a recent fire in a nearby trash incinerator that blanketed her neighborhood in smoke. That smoke was the last thing her city needed, she said. It was October, in the middle of allergy season and a respiratory pandemic, in the asthma capital of the United States.
When Arena remembers hiding from that smoke, she imagines a biomass incinerator burning wood in her backyard. Her community cannot handle any more pollution, she said.
Scrutiny persists over biomass plant in Springfield
AP PHOTO AP PHOTO
Modified: 12/31/2020 10:47:44 AM
SPRINGFIELD As the year comes to an end, environmental and racial justice advocates are sounding the alarm about legislation and regulations that are set to benefit a proposed wood-burning power plant in Springfield.
The energy plant, which developer Palmer Renewable Energy secured a permit for a decade ago, has long been the subject of controversy. Opponents have pointed to research that shows burning “biomass” wood chips or pellets made from trees and cleared brush results in significant greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants harmful to human health. The project is located in Springfield, which the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America has named the asthma capital of the country.
Massachusetts’ two U.S. senators have asked the state to put a stop to a biomass plant in Springfield, at least until the incoming Biden Administration