All posts in the topic Midtown burner (Short link)
Summary
- There are 8 posts — by 6 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Dan Cooke at Apr 30 20:53 UTC
Regarding the Midtown incinerator:
South Minneapolis State Senators Linda Berglin and Patricia Torres
Ray added language to a bill that directs the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency to analyze and consider the cumulative levels of past
and current pollution from all sources before issuing a permit to
the plant. A final vote on the bill has not been scheduled.
I wrote a note of support to Linda Berglin and Patricia Torres Ray
and this is Linda's response:
Dear Nathan,
Thanks for your good work. I still feel it's an uphill battle
because Senator Chaudhary appears to be a reluctant author and
Senator Dibble will be on the Tax Conference Committee.
Linda Berglin
I encourage folks to contact Senator Chaudhary and Senator Dibble to
encourage them to support Linda Berglin and Patricia Torres Ray's
legislation:
Chaudhary, Satveer S (651) 296-4334 <email obscured>
Dibble, D. Scott (651) 296-4191 <email obscured>
Nathan Lind
I notice this announcement on another of our forums about a radio show on
Wednesday about the project.
Steven Clift
TRUTH TO TELL KFAI Radio, 90.3 Minneapolis/106.7 St. Paul/Streamed@ KFAI.org
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 11:00AM: MIDTOWN MELTDOWN?: Green or Black? KFAI Radio,
90.3 Minneapolis /106.7 St. Paul / Streamed@ KFAI.org A CivicMedia/Minnesota
production
Just when news reports seem to pronounce the embattled Midtown/Phillips
Eco-energy project dead (the project includes Minneapolis Councilmember Lisa
Goodman as an investor), another 50-60 days¹ leeway remains for the principals,
Kandiyohi Development Partners, to come up with the necessary financing,
biomass supply sources ,and buy-agreements with customers like Xcel Energy to
make city-imposed deadlines for feasibility. This in the face of serious
environmental justice disputes over the environmental impact of burning
anything more in close-quartered low-income, minority residential neighborhoods
like Phillips and other central neighborhoods where initial support for the
project has melted away. Is this an innovative biomass energy generator in the
making? Or yet another polluting industry in the already industrialized and
polluted central city? TTT¹s Andy Driscoll and Lynnell Mickelsen will query
principals on all sides of the issues and the reporters who have covered them
as the clock winds down to final decisions.
GUESTS:
STATE SEN. PATRICIA TORRES RAY, Senate District 62, adjoining the Midtown
Project.
BARBARA JOHNSON, Minneapolis City Council President
KIM HAVEY, Partner, Midtown Eco-Energy Project/Kandiyohi Development Partners
JULLONNE GLAD, Neighborhood activist opposing the project.
DAVID MORRIS, Executive VP, Institute for Local Self-Reliance
STEVE BRANDT, Star Tribune Reporter/Analyst
OTHERS invited: REP. KAREN CLARK, House District 61A, where the project lives;
GREGORY PRATT, MN Pollution Control Agency. ______________________
Thanks for forwarding this info, Steven!
This issue is not dead by a long shot. The burner folks have insisted that
this project WILL go through, so it's important to stay informed about further
developments with it AND to stay vocal about your opposition to it (if you are
opposed to it).
Remember: your neighborhood is only as good as you make it! (It takes GREAT
and SUSTAINED effort to keep Standish Ericsson as vibrant & unique as we've all
commented that it is.)
- Ann Novitske
Thank you Ann for passing on information about the KFAI radio broadcast this morning discussing the Midtown burner. I just listened to the broadcast, and called in with a comment on the moral issue of adding a million pounds of pollution to an already overburdened area. Thankfully, Jullonne Glad, a neighborhood activist from the Minneapolis Residents for Clean Air was on the panel and effectively advocated for us neighbors. After this latest heated debate, she pointed out, correctly, in the closing moments of the hour-long program, that she is the only person who was part of this radio discussion purely as a volunteer. Let's raise our voices in support of Jullonne and company, in opposition to the Midtown burner. I encourage anyone who is opposed to the Midtown burner, or just interested in getting better information from the developer, Kandiyohi Development Partners, to check out the website: http://mplsresidentsforcleanair.blogspot.com/ If you want a purple sign reading, "Midtown Burner? NO! Our Air! Our Health! " contact: <email obscured> Signs cost $5 to make, consider donating at least that much if not more, to help support Jullonne and the other leaders of Minneapolis Residents For Clean Air. Thanks! Nathan
Is there a way they can make this burner a "cleaner" facility? And if so why
aren't the developers aiming for that goal?
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
I listened to the show and heard Nathan! It was a bit exciting! :) I was happy to hear that this was supposed to be one of the cleaner burners out there. Apparently it meets or exceeds several different clean air standards, including Kyoto. I am still very concerned though that it is adding such a huge amount of pollution/carbon to our air. The discussion seemed to go round and round. It sounds to me like it would be the safest alternative as far as burners go, but no one in the neighborhood wants it there. The Phillips area apparently has a higher incident of asthma and elevated lead levels as it is along with heavily polluted ground. And this is where they are adding more pollution? As you can see, I'm still undecided... But, the KFAI website has the shows archived in podcasts so if you missed it you can go back and listen to it. And next week, everyone is invited back to continue the discussion. Jullone sounded like she may not be able to make it back so the neighborhood may go unrepresented which would be very sad. Here is the website for KFAI: http://www.kfai.org/node/682
In a word, $$$$. From what I understand, the burner is planned to be
of a certain size, just below an important threshold, so that they
don't have to abide by more stringent pollution regulations. The
website I mentioned has better detailed information.
The developers like to say how clean and green their incinerator would be but you have to pay close attention to what they say. First, the Kyoto protocol targets only CO2 emissions, not the one million pounds per year of dioxin, arsenic, lead, formaldehyde, sulfur dioxide that this project's pollution permit would allow. A nuclear plant built at 28th and Hiawatha would probably comply with Kyoto standards too -- that doesn't mean we should build one there. You have to consider the other impacts of the burner when deciding whether it would be a good idea. Second, I believe this plant will amount to a net increase in worldwide greenhouse gas emissions for a number of reasons: (a) the there will be a dramatic increase in the fossil fuels burned by vehicles using the facility after it is built (which will be large semi trucks that have to travel long distances to haul in the waste/biomass and haul out the ash, (b) any burner itself emits CO2s; when the developers say it complies with Kyoto what they are really saying is that it will emit fewer CO2s than a coal plant. But the construction of this burner will NOT take any existing coal plants offline -- it will only add more energy to the grid thereby increasing overall consumption of energy (which is what we should be trying to avoid if you are concerned about human greenhouse gas emissions), (c) all incinerators discourage conservation and recycling efforts for their lifespan because the waste that they rely on for fuel can no longer be conserved or recycled. If you burn a piece of paper (or some other biomass) instead of recycling it you take that paper out of the recycling or conservation chain. This creates unnecessary waste and detracts from conservation efforts, which should be the #1 goal if you are concerned about the impact of humans on the global environment. See http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13890 for a more thorough explanation about this. When you consider the known health impacts of the release of one million pounds of regulated toxins into an already polluted area this project makes very little sense. Other developers and City initiatives have gone a long way towards trying to revitalize that area with expenditures on things like housing construction and the Midtown Greenway and the new Midtown Greenway bridge. Putting a new 140-foot smokestack into service for the next 40 years will discourage further development and further harm the area's economy and health. If you take a close look at the pollution permit application for this project you will realize that it is potentially devastating. Why, for instance, does it allow for the emission of significant amounts of dioxin, a super-chemical that does not exist in nature and is only formed by the burning of plastics? Why does it allow for future pollution variance applications? And why does the MPCA not consider the cumulative impact of this as a pollution source when deciding whether or not to grant the permit? The State of Delaware, in recognition of the problems with incineration has a law that prohibits the construction of ANY incinerators (biomass or otherwise) within 3 miles of any residence, school, church or hospital. The Twin Cities already has one of the highest rates of per-capita incineration (as measured by megawatts) in the U.S. Building another incinerator here is just a very bad idea. - Dan http://burnerinfo.blogspot.com