Opposition to Engrossed State Bill 5575
Submitted to Shelton Blog by Terri Thompson Mason County Progressive
March 22, 2011To the Honorable Members of the House Committee on the Environment,
I am here today to speak against ESB 5575.
The financial crisis in this state, and its appetite for energy credits, should not be waged on the backs of its citizens. RCW 70.94.011 was created to preserve, protect, and enhance the air quality for future and current generations. It does not say…only in good economic times. We must maintain levels of air quality that protect human health and safety, including the most sensitive members of the population. They seem to be the people overlooked in economic, hard times. We must focus on protecting them and the air quality for current and future generations.
If we don’t have our health…we don't have anything...no matter what our economic status. I have a sensitive certification with the State of Washington; meaning that I have reactions to substances in the air such as herbicides, pesticides, etc. Others do also. How will I be notified of these compounds in the air when there is so much uncertainty of exactly what is being burned?
I have read a great deal of information on many of these topics relating to ESB 5575 but have focused mainly on the burning of human waste. Human waste, even after going through a treatment facility, contains a great amount of heavy metals, pharmaceuticals, hormones and mildly radioactive materials…again existing after treatment. Also, everything that goes down the drain, including home, hospital and industrial drains, include other heavy metals, including cadmium and mercury, oils, soaps and solvents, and some medicinal wastes. Many are carcinogenic and some change your endocrine system.
The best control systems can’t remove these horrible toxins into our air supply. Burning simply releases these chemicals back into the environment. Some of these chemicals do what is called a secondary formation; pollutants formed when other pollutants combined emitted into the air. Secondary formation seems to be even more unpredictable during the burning process. Human waste is not the same waste of 100 years go. Our current world is filled with chemicals both consumed and brought into the body, even through breathing impurities, gases, etc...
Do we want to do this to our air supply, or our health? Do we not think that harsh chemicals used during pulping won’t harm us to breathe, even when burned?
It would be naive to image a person hired to pick through demolition and construction debris…knowing what has been treated and what hasn’t. We would be burning harsh chemicals associated with treated wood, and other construction items such as metals, etc. found in the scrap pile.
Yard waste, loaded in chemicals, have a high moisture content making a less efficient fuel plus potential toxins in the air. What we do not see, can hurt us! Some of the most toxic elements in the world are invisible.
I am not sure about burning algae and its toxicity, but do know that Senator Sheldon worked on changing the noxious weed bill so that algae could be grown as a crop. It appears to be listed under this list for a reason. Will it create toxicity when burned…will we increase the spread of these algae forms into our waterways…and how is its energy efficiency, needing to be dried before burned?
Personally, I do not want to breathe these chemicals, pharmaceuticals and hormones. The hormones alone have potential to change our healthy environmental world as we know it, effecting endocrine receptors. They have already proven to change the biological makeup of fish and other wildlife. The potential is very dangerous.
I believe that the people of the state of WA voted for I-937, not realizing that hydroelectric had been removed, but a vote for renewable energy that was clean. We were mislead by legislators and legislation that is now turning this initiative into a filthy, dirty energy initiative in the name of $$$$.
You can burn almost anything…but the real question is …should we? Are we being protected by our permitting processes? How can we be when the same people are sitting on permitting boards that have an agenda to bring dirty energy to our state?
There is also the issue of monitoring. No one or no agency seems to be responsible. Cut backs have affected the process and monitoring is not happening as it should be. I have seen examples of this in Mason County. Why would we risk the health of the people for such a small amount of energy? Laws should be made to benefit the best interest of the people; not simply for the companies and lobbyists that support re-elections!
Also, why are you choosing economically distressed areas? Why would you subject these individuals to added pollutants... the economic gain is not worth the human/environmental risk. Protect their RCW 70.94.011 rights!
On March 11, 2011, the EPA released the fourth version of the National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA), an analytical tool that helps federal, state, and local governments and other users better understanding the potential health risks from breathing pollutants called air toxics. Please read these new assessments and take them into consideration before making such a huge decision to affect our air supply. I have included the fact sheet and summary but more information can be found on the internet.
Thank you for your consideration.
Terry Thompson
Union, WA
Due to the time allotted for oral comments being reduced from 2 minutes to 90 seconds, this statement was not able to be read at the hearing, and was submitted only in writing.
Well said, Terry, well said.
ReplyDeleteIt is too bad you were not allowed to read your articulate paper; even though it would have likely fallen on deaf ears. Now it is a part of the record of how citizens tried to protect all air breathers.
At some future date, when those with the means discover what their legislators have done, and when they start to feel the effects of burning everything that is not nailed down, including human waste, your letter will be part of the body of evidence that will help to restore sanity to our environmental laws in Washington.
Some people won't notice or act until the brown cloud of Simpson and the black residue left on their windshields are staring them in the face.