Press Release Source: Environment and Human Health, Inc.
Monday October 25, 2010, 12:00 pm EDT
WOODBRIDGE, Conn., Oct. 25, 2010 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Environment and Human Health, Inc.'s (EHHI) newly released report, The Dangers from Outdoor Wood Furnaces, shows that current regulations for outdoor wood furnaces (OWFs) are not sufficient to protect human health.
Wood smoke contains many of the same toxic compounds that are found in cigarette smoke. Just a few of them include benzene, formaldehyde, and 1,3-butadiene, all three of which are carcinogenic.
Currently, some states have OWF "set-back" regulations of 100 feet, others have "set-backs" of 200 feet and some states have no regulations at all.
EHHI measured two particle sizes found by EPA to be contained in wood smoke and designated to be the most dangerous to human health. These particles are PM 2.5 and PM 0.5.
The study showed that a house 100 feet from an OWF had 14 times the levels of PM 2.5 as houses not near an outdoor wood furnace and 9 times the levels of the EPA air standards.
A house 120 feet from an OWF had over 8 times the levels of PM 2.5 as the houses not near an outdoor wood furnace, and 6 times the levels of the EPA air standards.
A house 240 feet from OWF had 12 times the levels of PM 2.5 as the houses not near an outdoor wood furnace and 8 times the levels of the EPA air standards.
And a house as far away as 850 feet from OWF had 6 times the levels of PM 2.5 as the houses not near an outdoor wood furnace and 4 times the levels of the EPA air standards.
High levels were present in every 24-hour period tested inside homes neighboring outdoor wood furnaces. All houses tested had particulate exposures well above the EPA ambient air quality standard. Levels of PM 2.5 that exceed the EPA standards are associated with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) attacks and hospitalizations, and are also associated with increased risk of cardiac attacks.
Particles of wood smoke are so small that windows and doors cannot keep smoke out. A study by the University of Washington, Seattle, showed that 50 to 70 percent of outdoor wood smoke entered homes that were not burning wood.
Because wood smoke particles are so small, they are not filtered out by the nose or the upper respiratory system. Instead, these small particles end up deep in the lungs where they can cause structural damage and chemical changes. Carcinogenic chemicals and wood smoke irritants adhere to the small particles and enter the deep, sensitive regions of the lungs where toxic injury is high.
Public Health Toxicologist David Brown, Sc.D., an expert in wood smoke, says, "Some of the health effects reported to EHHI include awakening at night with coughing, headaches, inability to catch breath, continual sore throats, bronchitis and colds requiring children to stay home from school. In some cases the breathing difficulty has gone into asthma attacks requiring emergency-room treatment. Even episodes of short-term exposures to extreme levels of fine particulates from wood smoke and other sources, for periods as short as two hours, can produce significant adverse health effects."
Oncologist D. Barry Boyd, MD, says, "In addition to the fine particulate matter, wood smoke contains a number of organic compounds that are potential or recognized carcinogens. Exposure over time may raise the risk not only of chronic lung disease but also of lung cancer. As well, wood smoke interferes with normal lung development in infants and children. It increases children's risk of lower respiratory infections such as bronchitis and pneumonia. Wood smoke exposure can depress the immune system and damage the layer of cells in the lungs that protect and cleanse the airways."
Outdoor wood furnaces create emissions different from either fireplaces or indoor wood stoves. The Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) found that the average fine particle emissions from one OWF are equivalent to the emissions from 22 EPA-certified indoor wood stoves, 205 oil furnaces or as many as 8,000 natural gas furnaces.
The short-term health effects of wood smoke exposures are burning eyes and throat, sinusitis, bronchitis and pneumonia.
The long-term health effects are asthma, COPD, cancer, cardiovascular problems and carbon monoxide poisoning.
Dawn Mays-Hardy of the American Lung Association, New England, says, "Because wood smoke has many of the same components as cigarette smoke, and because wood smoke emissions from outdoor wood furnaces are so thick and pervasive for all those who live near them, American Lung sees them as dangerous to health."
President of Environment and Human Health, Inc. Nancy Alderman says, "EHHI has now shown that wood smoke from outdoor wood furnaces enters neighboring houses in high enough amounts to cause serious health impacts to these families. States can no longer ignore this science and should ban outdoor wood furnaces until safer technologies are found."
For seeing or downloading the full report go to http://ehhi.org
The Environment and Human Health, Inc. logo is available at http://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=7516
Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield, MA.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield is a grassroots organization dedicated to stopping a proposed biomass incinerator in Springfield MA.
http://www.springfieldincinerator.info/
The following groups have joined Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield to oppose this incinerator: Massachusetts Medical Society, Hampden District Medical Society, American Lung Association, Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition, Pioneer Valley Asthma Coalition, Toxics Action Center, Arise for Social Justice, Greater Springfield chapter of the Massachusetts Senior Action Council, Western Massachusetts American Friends Service Committee, Connecticut River Watershed Council, Conservation Law Foundation, Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance, The McKnight Neighborhood Youth Council, East Forest Park Civic Association, Physicians for Social Responsibility/Pioneer Valley.
October 19 2010 - Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield has just received notice that Epsilon Associates is planning to change its fuel from mostly construction and demolition debris to waste wood chips at its proposed Springfield facility! Although PRE's change is a testament to our hard work, this change requires immediate action on all of our parts at the state and local levels. Below is the link to the developer's Notice of Project Change document for your review:
http://www.springfieldincinerator.info/content_downloads/Submittal%209-30-2010%20Notice%20of%20Project%20Change.pdf
Our Position
No incineration in Springfield! Springfield does not need another polluting plant. The state and the city should abandon all incineration and support clean, safe alternatives and industry in order to protect public health. Springfield is an environmental justice community and a health-impaired community with asthma and respiratory illness rates nearly double those of the rest of the state. The switch to wood waste is still dirty and a danger to public health. Emissions from this incinerator will include the same amount of particulate matter 2.5 and 10, the same amount of VOC's, the same amount of SO2, same amount of NP3 and almost the same amount of HAPs. The plant will still emit arsenic, mercury and lead. There will be more truck trips - 140 per day - using heavier trucks to accomodate a larger amount of fuel - now 1,184 tons per day. No burning! Not this either!
We Need to Act Now
After giving Palmer unlimited time to craft their application to change fuel, the state gives the public only 20 days to comment on a more than 300 page document. We need more time to ensure that everyone’s voices are heard! Comment deadline is October 26. This project does not require a Beneficial Use Determination by the state, it does not require an Environmental Impact Report unless MEPA decides on this step, and it does not require a public hearing for an air permit from Department of Environmental Protection unless DEP decides on one. We need you and your members to comment on this proposal to ensure that an Environmental Impact Report for the region is required and to ensure that the DEP holds public hearings on this project. Without your comments by 10/26, we could lose our chance to stop this project.
Why The Rush? Can We Trust This Developer?
Epsilon openly states in its Notice of Change that is needs to start building by July 2011 to avoid new EPA clean air regulations:
3.1.2 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
PSD review is a federally mandated program for review of new major sources of criteria pollutants or major modifications to existing sources. For PSD purposes, a biomass fired boiler facility is a major source if emissions of any regulated pollutant are greater than 250 tpy. The Facility will not emit greater than 250 tpy of the criteria pollutants NOx, SO2, VOC, CO, and PM10 and therefore is not subject to PSD review. According to the PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, issued May 13, 2010, PSD would apply to new construction projects emitting more than 100,000 tpy of GHG emissions started after July 1, 2011. PRE plans to begin construction before July 1, 2011, so PSD would not apply.
What they are saying here is, although EPA is going to start regulating CO2 as a pollutant, and even biogenic CO2, they are going to evade this because they plan on starting construction before the implementation date. Obviously Epsilon Associates needs to fast-track their incineration proposal to make it happen. Palmer has already proven they are untrustworthy; last month, the state fined them $27,000 for violating provisions in their air quality permits and hazardous waste management requirements at its paving operation. Palmer was also caught dumping waste water into the ground.
In addition, their proposal claims this incinerator will be carbon-neutral because it will use nonforest wood material. This woody biomass, however, is already claimed by other users. If they take away this woody biomass from current users, more trees will have to be cut to ensure the current supply. So how can this incinerator call itself carbon-neutral if it will harm our forest resources and landscape by ultimately requiring the cutting of forest land, as the Manomet Study has already made clear. And what happens when there is no longer enough woody biomass? Biomass plants in NH are now suing each other over dwindling wood reserves, and most "wood chip" biomass plants in Maine have converted to construction and demolition incinerators because of low fuel stock. Should we expect the same to happen in Springfield with another simple permit change?
================================
The Project: Palmer Renewable Energy proposes to build a 35-megawatt power-generating incinerator at 1000 Page Boulevard, Springfield. Each day, over 1000 tons of the wood will be burned, generating only 1/3 of 1% of Massachusetts' total power production.
Health Issues: In an unexpected and unusual move, The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) has responded to a request by members of Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield (STIS) and issued a letter of comment relating to the Springfield wood waste incinerator's Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) permit. This permit reclassifies the wood waste, declaring it suitable for fuel. The focus of the DPH letter is the lack of a health impact assessment (HIA), something the DPH feels is called for by the BUD regulations.
The Massachusetts Medical Society, an organization representing 20,000 Massachusetts physicians, has voiced their opposition to biomass incineration in general. In the first paragraph of their press release they state: "On the grounds that biomass power plants pose an unacceptable risk to the public's health by increasing air pollution, the Massachusetts Medical Society has adopted a policy opposing three currently proposed large-scale biomass power plants in Massachusetts and urging state government to adopt policies to minimize the approval and construction of new biomass plants."
The Hampden District Medical Society voted unanimously to formally oppose this plant because it presents "an unacceptable public health risk."
The Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition is also formally opposed to this plant as stated in their letter: "The Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition (MBCC) is the largest breast cancer organization in the state representing over 10,000 members. MBCC is dedicated to challenging all obstacles to the eradication of breast cancer. In particular, MBCC is concerned about the link between environmental toxins and the extremely high rate of breast cancer in the state and as a result, is in opposition to the burning of construction and demolition debris at the proposed Palmer Renewable Energy biomass plant."
The Physicians for Social Responsibility/Pioneer Valley oppose construction of incinerators in the valley. "It is the finding of the Physicians for Social Responsibility that the biomass power plants being proposed for several Pioneer Valley locations would contribute to particulate air pollution emissions in a region that already has pollution problems, and therefore we oppose the construction and operation of such plants."
Springfield air quality already receives a failing grade from the American Lung Association on many days of the year. American Lung Association of Massachusetts opposes this incinerator and explains why in a recent press release: "For years, the ALAMA has viewed biomass burning as a significant source of air pollution. We believe that the plants proposed in Massachusetts will create an unnecessary risk to both our state's health and air quality and are particularly concerned by inefficient and dirty sources of power located in communities that already suffer from poor air quality and high asthma rates."
Hampden County is already overburdened with lead pollution. According to the latest EPA figures, Hampden County sources emit 10,461 pounds of lead per year, which is 25% of the state's total.
EPA lead chart:
Effects on Our Children: The children of Hampden County are already suffering from this level of lead exposure with blood lead levels nearly double the state average. Lead can accumulate in bone and cause neurological impairment, developmental problems for children including loss of IQ, hearing impairment, delayed growth and behavior disorders. Researchers for the first time have linked air-pollution exposure before birth with lower IQ scores in childhood, bolstering evidence that smog may harm the developing brain.
The state asthma rate for children continues to climb and is now at 10%, but the Springfield rate is more than 16%! In addition to the emissions from the incinerator, there would be the added exhaust fumes from upwards of 140 truck trips a day. There are 55 schools within a five mile radius of the proposed toxic incinerator. A new study shows that children who breathe traffic-related air pollution at school are more likely to develop asthma, even after taking into account levels of air pollution at their homes.
Schools within a five mile radius of the proposed PRE incinerator
Fallout region with area schools-see website.
Environmental Issues: Burning wood releases 50% more carbon dioxide per unit of energy produced than a coal fired plant.
Carbon dioxide emissions from this incinerator are exempt from regulations.
"The science is clear: global warming is happening faster than ever and humans are responsible. Global warming is caused by releasing what are called greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The most common greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide. Many of the activities we do every day like turn the lights on, cook food, or heat or cool our homes rely on energy sources like coal and oil and that emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. This is a major problem because global warming destabilizes the delicate balance that makes life on this planet possible. Just a few degrees in temperature can completely change the world as we know it, and threaten the lives of millions of people around the world."
Click here to view the source on 350.org and to learn more about how adding more corbon dioxide to the atmosphere could be disastrous!-see website
http://www.springfieldincinerator.info/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Webmaster: Please go to the Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield website for more details, charts, and graphs. Please support the effort by this organization.
http://www.springfieldincinerator.info/
The following groups have joined Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield to oppose this incinerator: Massachusetts Medical Society, Hampden District Medical Society, American Lung Association, Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition, Pioneer Valley Asthma Coalition, Toxics Action Center, Arise for Social Justice, Greater Springfield chapter of the Massachusetts Senior Action Council, Western Massachusetts American Friends Service Committee, Connecticut River Watershed Council, Conservation Law Foundation, Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance, The McKnight Neighborhood Youth Council, East Forest Park Civic Association, Physicians for Social Responsibility/Pioneer Valley.
October 19 2010 - Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield has just received notice that Epsilon Associates is planning to change its fuel from mostly construction and demolition debris to waste wood chips at its proposed Springfield facility! Although PRE's change is a testament to our hard work, this change requires immediate action on all of our parts at the state and local levels. Below is the link to the developer's Notice of Project Change document for your review:
http://www.springfieldincinerator.info/content_downloads/Submittal%209-30-2010%20Notice%20of%20Project%20Change.pdf
Our Position
No incineration in Springfield! Springfield does not need another polluting plant. The state and the city should abandon all incineration and support clean, safe alternatives and industry in order to protect public health. Springfield is an environmental justice community and a health-impaired community with asthma and respiratory illness rates nearly double those of the rest of the state. The switch to wood waste is still dirty and a danger to public health. Emissions from this incinerator will include the same amount of particulate matter 2.5 and 10, the same amount of VOC's, the same amount of SO2, same amount of NP3 and almost the same amount of HAPs. The plant will still emit arsenic, mercury and lead. There will be more truck trips - 140 per day - using heavier trucks to accomodate a larger amount of fuel - now 1,184 tons per day. No burning! Not this either!
We Need to Act Now
After giving Palmer unlimited time to craft their application to change fuel, the state gives the public only 20 days to comment on a more than 300 page document. We need more time to ensure that everyone’s voices are heard! Comment deadline is October 26. This project does not require a Beneficial Use Determination by the state, it does not require an Environmental Impact Report unless MEPA decides on this step, and it does not require a public hearing for an air permit from Department of Environmental Protection unless DEP decides on one. We need you and your members to comment on this proposal to ensure that an Environmental Impact Report for the region is required and to ensure that the DEP holds public hearings on this project. Without your comments by 10/26, we could lose our chance to stop this project.
Why The Rush? Can We Trust This Developer?
Epsilon openly states in its Notice of Change that is needs to start building by July 2011 to avoid new EPA clean air regulations:
3.1.2 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
PSD review is a federally mandated program for review of new major sources of criteria pollutants or major modifications to existing sources. For PSD purposes, a biomass fired boiler facility is a major source if emissions of any regulated pollutant are greater than 250 tpy. The Facility will not emit greater than 250 tpy of the criteria pollutants NOx, SO2, VOC, CO, and PM10 and therefore is not subject to PSD review. According to the PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, issued May 13, 2010, PSD would apply to new construction projects emitting more than 100,000 tpy of GHG emissions started after July 1, 2011. PRE plans to begin construction before July 1, 2011, so PSD would not apply.
What they are saying here is, although EPA is going to start regulating CO2 as a pollutant, and even biogenic CO2, they are going to evade this because they plan on starting construction before the implementation date. Obviously Epsilon Associates needs to fast-track their incineration proposal to make it happen. Palmer has already proven they are untrustworthy; last month, the state fined them $27,000 for violating provisions in their air quality permits and hazardous waste management requirements at its paving operation. Palmer was also caught dumping waste water into the ground.
In addition, their proposal claims this incinerator will be carbon-neutral because it will use nonforest wood material. This woody biomass, however, is already claimed by other users. If they take away this woody biomass from current users, more trees will have to be cut to ensure the current supply. So how can this incinerator call itself carbon-neutral if it will harm our forest resources and landscape by ultimately requiring the cutting of forest land, as the Manomet Study has already made clear. And what happens when there is no longer enough woody biomass? Biomass plants in NH are now suing each other over dwindling wood reserves, and most "wood chip" biomass plants in Maine have converted to construction and demolition incinerators because of low fuel stock. Should we expect the same to happen in Springfield with another simple permit change?
================================
The Project: Palmer Renewable Energy proposes to build a 35-megawatt power-generating incinerator at 1000 Page Boulevard, Springfield. Each day, over 1000 tons of the wood will be burned, generating only 1/3 of 1% of Massachusetts' total power production.
Health Issues: In an unexpected and unusual move, The Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) has responded to a request by members of Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield (STIS) and issued a letter of comment relating to the Springfield wood waste incinerator's Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) permit. This permit reclassifies the wood waste, declaring it suitable for fuel. The focus of the DPH letter is the lack of a health impact assessment (HIA), something the DPH feels is called for by the BUD regulations.
The Massachusetts Medical Society, an organization representing 20,000 Massachusetts physicians, has voiced their opposition to biomass incineration in general. In the first paragraph of their press release they state: "On the grounds that biomass power plants pose an unacceptable risk to the public's health by increasing air pollution, the Massachusetts Medical Society has adopted a policy opposing three currently proposed large-scale biomass power plants in Massachusetts and urging state government to adopt policies to minimize the approval and construction of new biomass plants."
The Hampden District Medical Society voted unanimously to formally oppose this plant because it presents "an unacceptable public health risk."
The Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition is also formally opposed to this plant as stated in their letter: "The Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition (MBCC) is the largest breast cancer organization in the state representing over 10,000 members. MBCC is dedicated to challenging all obstacles to the eradication of breast cancer. In particular, MBCC is concerned about the link between environmental toxins and the extremely high rate of breast cancer in the state and as a result, is in opposition to the burning of construction and demolition debris at the proposed Palmer Renewable Energy biomass plant."
The Physicians for Social Responsibility/Pioneer Valley oppose construction of incinerators in the valley. "It is the finding of the Physicians for Social Responsibility that the biomass power plants being proposed for several Pioneer Valley locations would contribute to particulate air pollution emissions in a region that already has pollution problems, and therefore we oppose the construction and operation of such plants."
Springfield air quality already receives a failing grade from the American Lung Association on many days of the year. American Lung Association of Massachusetts opposes this incinerator and explains why in a recent press release: "For years, the ALAMA has viewed biomass burning as a significant source of air pollution. We believe that the plants proposed in Massachusetts will create an unnecessary risk to both our state's health and air quality and are particularly concerned by inefficient and dirty sources of power located in communities that already suffer from poor air quality and high asthma rates."
Hampden County is already overburdened with lead pollution. According to the latest EPA figures, Hampden County sources emit 10,461 pounds of lead per year, which is 25% of the state's total.
EPA lead chart:
Effects on Our Children: The children of Hampden County are already suffering from this level of lead exposure with blood lead levels nearly double the state average. Lead can accumulate in bone and cause neurological impairment, developmental problems for children including loss of IQ, hearing impairment, delayed growth and behavior disorders. Researchers for the first time have linked air-pollution exposure before birth with lower IQ scores in childhood, bolstering evidence that smog may harm the developing brain.
The state asthma rate for children continues to climb and is now at 10%, but the Springfield rate is more than 16%! In addition to the emissions from the incinerator, there would be the added exhaust fumes from upwards of 140 truck trips a day. There are 55 schools within a five mile radius of the proposed toxic incinerator. A new study shows that children who breathe traffic-related air pollution at school are more likely to develop asthma, even after taking into account levels of air pollution at their homes.
Schools within a five mile radius of the proposed PRE incinerator
Fallout region with area schools-see website.
Environmental Issues: Burning wood releases 50% more carbon dioxide per unit of energy produced than a coal fired plant.
Carbon dioxide emissions from this incinerator are exempt from regulations.
"The science is clear: global warming is happening faster than ever and humans are responsible. Global warming is caused by releasing what are called greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The most common greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide. Many of the activities we do every day like turn the lights on, cook food, or heat or cool our homes rely on energy sources like coal and oil and that emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. This is a major problem because global warming destabilizes the delicate balance that makes life on this planet possible. Just a few degrees in temperature can completely change the world as we know it, and threaten the lives of millions of people around the world."
Click here to view the source on 350.org and to learn more about how adding more corbon dioxide to the atmosphere could be disastrous!-see website
http://www.springfieldincinerator.info/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Webmaster: Please go to the Stop Toxic Incineration in Springfield website for more details, charts, and graphs. Please support the effort by this organization.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)