Social Links

Run of Site Leaderboard

6 responsesSubscribe to comments

  1. The message Governor Shumlin and Secretary Chuck Ross give to organic farmers is entirely different than the message they play out for conventional farmers. Climate change surely will affect us all but apparently the governor and the secretary do not know that organic farmers are addressing climate change and water quality, which Shumlin never mentioned. Conventional farmers, which Ross wants to keep in the game, are doing neither. “Do not let these divisions divide us” suggests that there is no difference between the two modalities when in fact the distinction was the point of the NOFA conference. Organic agriculture controls production to keep prices up; it applies no petroleum-based herbicides or fertilizers residues from which flow into the lake; it supports the green Vermont brand. The state’s explicit support for conventional agriculture supports over production, which drives low milk prices, which drives farm attrition, which drives rural economic decay, lake pollution and the profligate consumption of petroleum. “Do not let these divisions divide us” but perhaps the governor and his secretary of agriculture would sit down with organic farmers to learn why they do and why Vermont must.

  2. Gov. Shumlin can lead Vermont in reducing our impact on climate change by reminding folks of Act 148, which calls for all organic materials to be diverted from landfills, starting in 2014 for large generators, but for everyone including residents by 2020.

    By keeping our food scraps, yard waste and other organics out of landfills, we eliminate the creation of methane gas, one of the most destructive greenhouse gasses, and a huge contributor to climate change. Even with systems that generate electricity from methane captured in landfill, anywhere from 20 – 50 percent of the gas still escapes into the atmosphere. This is a very concrete step that all Vermonters can take to prevent further environmental damage from the resources we toss into the trash.

  3. Also- The important potential for tree crops as carbon-negative and flood resilient strategies was discussed in separate sessions.

    Willow Crossing Farm in Johnson, VT is growing 1000s of trees along the banks of the Lamoille River not only to improve water quality and stabilize soil, but also trees which provide valuable crops themselves (fruits, nuts, timber, sugar), and of course sequester atmospheric carbon and better withstand irregular weather patterns.

    You can read about it here: http://prospectrockpermaculture.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/feb-17-branch-out-burlington-keynote-on-willow-crossing-farm/

  4. If the Governor is so concerned about climate change, why on earth would he allow 4 biomass plants in the state of Vermont.
    We have 2 now, one on the way to N. Springfield,( only 26.1 % efficient by the way ) and another in the works.According to the ANR ( agency of natural resources ) Air permit Division, the North Springfield project is considered a “major source of air pollution and a major source of acid rain”.According to the developer’s own application the facility will release 1,176 tons of greenhouse gas per day. That’s 429,000 tons per year and 21.5 million tons over the plant’s 50 year lifespan . Research by the Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences revealed in 2010 that burning woody biomass generates more carbon dioxide than coal or natural gas plants of equal size.
    I did not know these things were even allowed in the state.They come in the back doors of towns all over the country because of lingering subsidies and the businesses that choose to exploit them.They are being stopped as they did in Mass. , by citizens rising up and speaking out.
    You have the American Lung Association, The American Heart Association speaking out against biomass burning for electricity. The list is too long to print.
    Our president has mentioned more that once , we need to make decisions for the future generations when we consider energy going forward. Did you not hear him Governor !
    Not to mention the wood consumption , traffic from tractor trailers – this plant alone 100-240 tractor trailers traveling in and out of the plant and through surrounding small towns daily for 50 years. Talk about fuel consumption,health and safety? for 26.1 % efficiency?
    It’s 2013 , get these things out of what would be considered renewable energy.
    Please – do your homework. I know our town did not and we are fighting this all the way. A decision about our health and safety was made for us NOT by us and I fully intend to help in whatever little way I can to stop them from being built anywhere, not just here in my town.
    Governor, what a moment to set a precedent.We have two of the these archaic incinerators – please stop the next two and show the country you really are the ” green ” governor you say you are.

  5. Gayle Morabito, here are some others from Montpelier that you can add to your list of government officials who act before doing their homework.

    Co-Chairs of the House Climate Caucas, Rep. Chris Pearson and Margaret Cheney recently co-sponsored H. 271, a bill proposing that Vermont divest its $3.5 billion public employee & teacher retirement funds of all portfolio holdings related to fossil fuel production, refining and marketing. The apparent purposes of this legislation is to financially cripple fossil fuel companies while sending a message to the world that Vermont is for clean air.

    From what was reported in the press, it appeared that the Governor’s Office, the State Treasurer and the Vermont public employees union were not that enthusiastic about H. 271. If I were a state employee or teacher, I certainty wouldn’t be happy if politicians were risking my retirement funds on such a boondoggle.

    I wrote to Rep. Pearson and Cheney asking: If they are really interested in improving Vermont’s air quality, what do they propose to do about the environmental threat posed by the proposed Springfield bio-mass plant. A plant that will require an endless number of CO2 absorbing trees to be cut to operate and then belch out tons of CO2 and other noxious gases into our air.

    Rep. Pearson wrote back to me saying that he hadn’t dug into the Springfield bio-mass issue, but hoped to do so. Rep. Cheney did not respond to my e-mail. Nice, we should all be comforted by the completeness of their work before putting state employee retirement funds into potential jeopardy.

    When will our leaders in Montpelier break free of the corrupting influences of lobbyists, wind turbine and bio-mass developers and do what’s really right for improving clean air?

    Thanks to Vtdigger, those in Montpelier may be beginning to hear the footsteps of common sense.

  6. Thank you Peter Yankowski !
    We all need to do our homework to keep up with what is going on. I never thought such decisions that negatively affect our health and safety could be made in this way. No vote , no discussion with the community – one public forum where we could pose concerns , but not get any answers. No one was permitted to speak to us , just listen.

    A few little overlooked details did get addressed following that meeting- a citizen brought up the fact that Springfield’s water supply would be compromised ( that hadn’t occurred to anyone ) oh , and by the way there is an airport up the street. What about the height of the smokestack on the plant? Oh , well hadn’t thought about that either? We’ll just lower it . Now the smoke and all it’s poisons can float directly into the windows of surrounding homes before continuing to float over and layer pollutants on our farms, streams ,and into our kids lungs. Absolutely no comments on the truck routes the freight train of tractor trailers are supposed to take to get to and from this plant as of yet. The surrounding towns might like to know that bit of information. Anyone do any studies before this decision was made?

    What century is this?

    We all need to attend the next town meeting in Springfield, all of us from all over Vermont.Monday , March 4th,7:30 PM, Springfield High School.
    We are all invited aren’t we?

Leave a Reply

Comment policy

VTD requires that all commenters identify themselves by first and last name. You may wonder why we don't accept anonymous comments. The short answer is: We want to keep the discourse civil.

You might rightly ask, since most online newspapers accept anonymous posts from readers, what makes VTD so special?

The long answer is: Anonymous comments don't support our mission. We are a nonprofit news organization dedicated to enhancing democracy through in-depth journalism. Our role is to foster a civil online discourse, and one very simple and effective way to do that is to require commenters to identify themselves. This isn't a new idea, of course. This is the way newspapers have treated letters to the editor since time immemorial.

As a result of our comment policy, VTD has created a safe zone for readers who want to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy

VTDigger.org does not share specific information about our readers with other entities. Email addresses we collect through our subscription list and comment submissions are kept private.

We use Google analytics to generate aggregated data regarding the size and geographic distribution of our readership. This information helps us gauge how many readers come to the website and what towns they live in. It does not include addresses or other identifying characteristics about our readers.

Donate Today

We're an independent nonprofit organization, your donation helps fund the digging, and, it's tax deductible.

Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "At NOFA conference, challenges of climate change addressed"