Posted by Ed
on December 9, 2007, 7:35 pm
24.34.144.49
Lowell Sun 12/09/2007, Page B03
Questions remain on power plant
By William G. Greene, Jr. and Marc Lombardo
After reading Joseph Fitzpatrick's letter " Energy plant deserves
support" in The Sun on Nov. 13, we felt it necessary to reply. Given
that Mr. Fitzpatrick, CEO of the company developing the plant, has
publicly asked for support for this project, we hope the proponents
would be willing to publicly answer some of the questions we share
with our constituents.
The letter from Mr. Fitzpatrick states that the proposed plant
will, " provide a reliable source of back- up power for the region
during periods of high electrical demand."
Perhaps the proponents of this plant could further explain exactly
what " region" will be served by this plant. Could they offer more
information to the citizens of Billerica on the relationship between
the plant and ISO- NE, an independent, not- for- profit corporation
which acts as a transmission organization serving the states of
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and
Vermont? This plant is a stand- by plant that can be called on by ISO-
NE, to run any time day or night to meet energy demands, not just
during summer heat waves, in places as far away as Southern
Connecticut.
Mr. Fitzpatrick's letter also says, " The Billerica Energy Center
is designed to have minimal impact on the environment and the
community." However plans for the plant include six 80- feet high and
16- feet wide stacks, and the proponents' own research states that
they will emit 428,777 tons of CO2, 41 tons of particulates ( the
most harmful type of emission for those suffering from asthma,
cardiovascular and respiratory disease, and lung disease) and 44 tons
of NOx per year. Have independent, comprehensive studies, using data
collected in Billerica, been conducted to determine what effect these
pollutants will have on our air quality?
Mr. Fitzpatrick wrote, " The Billerica Energy Center will be a
clean- burning natural- gas facility that will operate in the daytime
hours." If that is the case, why does the Environmental Impact Report
( EIR) filed by the plant's proponents with the Massachusetts
Environmental Policy Act office ( MEPA) contain this clause on page 2-
2, " The site will have a 500,000 gallon tank to store ultra low
sulfur diesel fuel for back- up use in the case of lack of economic
supply or an interruption of the natural gas supply."? Does this mean
the only criteria to determine fuel use will be financial impact to
the company? Would the proponents please define what " lack of
sufficient economic supply" means? Also if the plan is to only run
during the day, why are the proponents asking to be permitted for
2,300 ( out of a possible 8,760 total hours in a year) hours of
operation? Why does a plant that is supposed to serve as a " backup"
or " insurance policy" need so many hours? What is the incentive for
the plant to be permitted for all those seemingly unnecessary hours?
Would the proponents be willing to agree to hours of operation and
consecutive hours restrictions?
Mr. Fitzpatrick's letter informs us that this plant will be
supervised by personnel at a facility in Lowell and not on site 24/ 7.
In the post 9/ 11 world we live in, is this the best possible
practice for keeping our residents safe? Be advised that the plans
for this plant call for 50,000 gallons of ammonia and 500,000 gallons
of diesel fuel to be stored less than 750 feet from the Concord
River. Should the residents of Billerica feel safe knowing the purity
of the Concord River is being guarded by computer screens from miles
away? Have any specific safety/ risk management plans been filed with
the state or town?
Mr. Fitzpatrick writes that, " We will use water for air quality
control, which will come from the Billerica wastewater treatment
facility supplemented by Billerica municipal water supply." The
proposed plant has requested the use of 60 million gallons of water
per year. Have any formal agreements been reached with the
appropriate town officials authorizing this usage? How can town
drinking water be used, even as a back- up, while we are operating
under the terms of a stage II water ban? How can permit decisions on
air quality be made on the plant without knowing if they have secured
the water source they need for pollution control?
Finally, Mr. Fitzgerald gives the impression that $ 30 million to
the town over the next 20 years is a generous benefit to the town.
While we appreciate the need to look for ways to expand the town's
tax base, we dismiss the notion that the money is worth the risk
posed to the town and its residents. Whether it is $ 30 million or $
30 billion in revenue, the health and well- being of the residents of
Billerica ( and the surrounding comm unities who will receive no tax
revenue should the project be built) do not have a price tag.
We hope that by writing this response letter we have shown that
opposition to this plant is not grounded in NIMBY- ism or overly
idealistic environmentalism, but rather that it is grounded in our
fact- based concern for the health and safety of our residents and
our environment.
Frankly, too many questions remain unaddressed by the proponents
and the answers they do choose to provide are troubling, to say the
least. The time is now to protect the character and integrity of our
communities.
We strongly encourage residents to contact town officials to ask
questions, demand answers, and express your opposition to this
project.
Rep. William G. Greene, Jr. is a state representative serving
Billerica and Marc Lombardo is vice chairman of the Billerica Board
of Selectmen.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread