Wednesday, March 23, 2011

SB 5575 Hearing 3/22/11 Citizen Testimony

SB 5575.E - DIGEST
(AS OF SENATE 2ND READING 3/03/11)
Promotes the generation of renewable energy from pulping liquors and biomass in economically distressed communities.

Prohibits the utilities and transportation commission,
from January 1, 2011, until December 21, 2013, from considering the act in any proceeding concerning a company's decision to acquire or construct an eligible renewable resource.
Opposition to Engrossed Senate Bill 5575

Submitted to Shelton Blog by Tom Davis Mason County Progressive

To whom it may concern:

The siting of biomass fueled energy plants in depressed communities tends to undermine precisely the economic stimulus they purport to create, and legislation designed to accommodate such ventures serve only to deter other, more viable recovery efforts, and here’s why:

  1. Biomass fueled plants increase local economic dependency on the wood products industry. Historically, even large economies based on a single industry have proven to be innately unhealthy, as they tie themselves to market demands of closely interrelated products. Consider the cities of Detroit and Flint, Michigan, or any of the other 20 cities recently voted as places you want to avoid; in some of them you can now buy a home for as little as $200, simply to get back on the tax rolls.

  2. Additionally, less desirable industry tends to site their facilities in depressed communities, promising jobs and by extension, economic recovery. But such ventures typically bring only a small number of low paying jobs with little opportunity for advancement. Moreover, they tend to discourage more suitable business opportunities, such as tourism, organic farming, retirement destinations, residential development and other small business enterprise. In the long term, the net result of siting environmentally and esthetically intrusive facilities in depressed communities is to hold them in cycles of poverty.

  3. As is the case with Engrossed Senate Bill 5575, the very fact that this body deems it necessary to consider legislation aimed at broadening the scope of acceptable fuels is proof, in and of itself, that the biomass to energy model lacks a level of economic viability that allows it to stand on its own merits, and patching up a poor business plan with accommodating legislation only deters a better plan from being implemented.

In conclusion, it is far more reasonable to support methods of economic diversity in depressed communities than to pass legislation that encourages dependency on the fortunes of a single industry, especially one that has failed to measure up to a workable standard.

And it is for these and other reasons I am opposed to Engrossed Senate Bill 5575.

Thank you,


Tom Davis

Real Estate Investor
Mason County, WA

3 comments:

  1. Excellent. I would add, citing such facilities in "economically depressed" areas subjects the economically disadvantaged, those least able to relocate, to the ill effects of pollution and associated health problems, in violation of Federal Law. It further subjects them to economic dependence on those equally dependent on government largess.
    Tax offset and subsidy dependent ideas do not pull communities out of poverty, it makes them ever more dependent, a sorry state of affairs. These communities are victimized many times over. First by lack of diversified business plans, next by local politicians who only serve industry while raising the taxes of the already disadvantaged to accommodate dependent industries, third by the Federal Government that also subsidizes these polluters with tax funds, and lastly by state and federal environmental administrations that illegally allow these polluters to be permitted.

    This sadly drives these communities further into a downward spiral.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Lovely, Tom. We are so lucky to have you in our community!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. We have great people doing what needs to be done for all the right reasons. It doesn't get better than that. It should be noted that the time alloted for comments at the hearing of ESB-5575 was two minutes but after a few people spoke, it was cut to 90 seconds. Given that we should all have the ability to get to the point of our lives in 30 seconds or less, I think they did us a favor. I say this because Simpson will be an even tougher go than Adage; they have the home town advantage. The good news is that we need not waste our time appealing to the powers that be (this time) but go right for the beast's throat; no matter how powerful a corporation might seem, they all wither under bad publicity.

    ReplyDelete