LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
- September 05, 2006
Dear Editor;
I wish to address a recent announcement by the provincial government. They will pay someone $90,000.00 to determine why British Columbians have quit buying freshwater sports fishing licenses. What a waste! All they had to do was ask me. I would not only freely tell them the truth but hopefully the truth would set them free.
I passed by a Forestry campsite on the August long weekend and counted five campers. There was also a caretaker living onsite to collect the rent and sell firewood. Throughout most of the 90s I frequently passed by that same recreational lake. There was no fee for camping in Forestry campsites and most campsites were occupied all summer. The Ministry of Forests provided firewood at no cost to the camper. Timber royalties collected for the benefit of all British Columbians paid for park maintenance.
Tourists, snowbirds and the bourgeoisie occupied all the shoreline campsites. The remaining camping spaces were sure to be filled on weekends, because on Fridays working people would send a family member to secure one of the less desirable ones. These sites would usually be away from the shoreline and close to the road noise.
Snowbirds ensconced in their land yachts on their summer vacations, taking a break from the heat of Arizona, (armed with their subsidized five-dollar fishing licenses) in their humble beneficence, would leave the ramps clear so the peasants (who had paid more than thirty dollars for their licenses) could launch their car-toppers and zodiacs.
The above scenario, as unpalatable as it was in a democracy, became obscene with the advent of a Liberal government in 2000 when the lower income people of this province lost their last chance for a reasonably priced vacation. Presently, the proletariat pines for the past, unwilling and/or unable to pay for the firewood locked behind a high fence and guarded zealously by entrepreneurs who bid for this privilege (no, you're not allowed to use the firewood you brought with you, but I'll sell you some!).
The working people of this previously more democratic province have been relegated to casting their bait from the shoreline or finding campsites accessible only to the four- wheelers that they also can't afford.
Our government is now paying someone a large sum to tell them what we already know---the reason people no longer buy fishing licenses. Where's the mystery?
- HPToews, Princeton
Keremeos Village Council recently sent this letter to Victoria regarding the Compliance Energy Project in Princeton.
The Honourable Barry Penner,
Minister of Environment,
Room 112,
Parliament Buildings,
Victoria, B.C.
V8V 1X4
Dear Sir,
Princeton Power Project
As the Minister responsible for reviewing recommendations resulting from the environmental assessment process, the Council for the Village of Keremeos wishes to advise you of its objection to a project that is currently being proposed in the vicinity of our beautiful Village.
The project is at the stage where public comment on the environmental assessment Terms of Reference has recently closed. It is not a comment in that regard that we wish to make; we wish to state, for the record, our position. Therefore, at our Council meeting held August 14th, we resolved: "that the Council for the Village of Keremeos does not support a wood residue and coal power generating plant 14 km south of Princeton, as proposed by Compliance Energy and as supported by B.C. Hydro."
When considering your decision, we trust you will give affected local governments' positions the serious and due consideration they deserve.
Yours truly,
T. Zeller,
Acting Mayor
To The Editor;
I would like to respond to Mr. Tapics, C.E.O. of Compliance Coal, where he states that I simply have my facts wrong.
1. Mr. Tapics states contrary to my information, that they are not building a pulverized coal plant. In the Compliance Coal website it states, "the coal is milled to a fine powder in a pulverizer to increase the surface." You will have to forgive me if I interpret that to mean you end up with pulverized coal.
2. Mr. Tapics states that I am incorrect about a coal gasification project with zero emissions near Chaplin, Saskatchewan and gives the website where you can find this out for yourself. The trouble is, the website is for a proposed near zero emissions coal fired plant in Melville, Saskatchewan whose technology is also far ahead of Compliance Coal. The coal fired project in Chaplin, Saskatchewan scheduled to begin immediately while not a gasification process is a zero emission plant and will result in no emission of sulphur dioxide and mercury.
3. Mr. Tapics states that at a time gasification is very inefficient and costly. In the U.S. alone Industrial Info Resources research states on August 17, 2006 that there are 50 proposed gasification plants totaling in excess of 44 billion in total investments. It seems as if there is either a lot of foolish money being invested or technology has passed Compliance coal by.
I take exception to the word costly as well, costly for who, if we as residents of this valley take exception to government standards which according to Mr. Tapics were set by the Canadian Council of Environment Ministers and had public health at the forefront of their thinking yet allow his company to emit 15 to 25 percent of the mercury contained in the coal into the atmosphere, who is paying that cost? He states that his process will live up to these standards yet will not harm our air, land or water.
I must need to go back to my studying, 15 to 25 percent released into our atmosphere has got to go somewhere. And that is where its gets interesting, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency originally believed that only 8% of mercury emissions settled locally, however EPA researcher Matt Landis and the University of Michigan conducted a survey in the town of Steubenville, Ohio and found that instead of the 8%, nearly 70% of the mercury from the nearby coal fired plant settled in their community.
The bottom line of this debate is whether you feel emissions are harmful to your community or not and it depends on who you are willing to believe, the industrialists or medical science. In a submission to Medical News Dr. John Palmer from the University of Texas who together with a Harvard Research team found that the mercury in the air is having direct effect on our children, playing its part in the devastating epidemic of neurological disorders including autism. He states, "States that are reporting the highest levels of mercury also have the highest rates of developmental disorders including autism." So if you give these scientists any credit do you still believe that the Canadian Council of Environment Ministers had public health at the forefront when they did not even dictate the amount of mercury that could be released, only as a percent of emissions? In other words if my coal has ten times as much mercury as the next guy than my 15 to 25% allowed mercury emission is ten times greater than his. As it has been stated, the minister's decision means only that Canadians will be poisoned slower, but poisoned all the same. Again pardon my lack of knowledge, I missed public health at the forefront of the environment minister's decision on emission guidelines.
The bottom line is when we are developing new industries we must demand that they be as environmentally efficient as possible. B.C. is in an enviable position, we have no coal fired generating plants here, isn't now the time to require these companies keep our health and welfare in mind?
Who will speak for those who can't speak for themselves, the youngsters who can look forward to 40 years of protection under the government standards that allow the contamination of our home? Who will speak for our neighbors who will receive the other 30% of the emissions while we reap the supposed economic windfall?
This battle will not be won by a few of us speaking out but by an outcry of all those willing to take the time to investigate and stand up. We are not asking for no coal fired generation plant, we are only asking for a zero or near zero emission process that is safe to live with. And when it comes to cost if Compliance Coal cannot afford to give us an appropriate process then I cannot afford to jeopardize the health and future of the people of Princeton by being silent.
- Mayor Randy McLean, Princeton
PS: This is my source for information concerning the Chaplin plant: www.ccnmatthews.com and go to Saskatchewan Minerals Coal-fired power guidelines>www.bc.gov.ca >then min of environment>environprotection division>waste>industrial waste>mining smelting and energy>2005 guidelines>coal fired power boiler emission guidelines.
Letter to The Editor;
We live in a time when heroes are in short supply. Even more when the rationale to reach out and help is skewed by the creed of business "we can't afford favors."
I would like to tell you about a man and his business who has put most to shame.
Stan Thompson at Model Transfer right here in Princeton. We run a small pre-school in Keremeos and were looking for some bark mulch for our playground.
After being told by every trucking company the hauling cost would be over 300 dollars, we found Stan at MODEL TRANSFER.
This kind gentleman refused to charge us for his service.
Out of the goodness of his heart, he brought two semi loads to our play school here in Keremeos all the way from Princeton.
This wonderful man, Stan, shows us that there still are heroes and that Model Transfer is truly a model for other businesses to follow. It is nice to know in that there are heroes in business who selflessly place good deeds before profit.
Jean Philpott, Duckie Lucky Preschool, Keremeos
To The Editor;
President Bush's emotional rhetoric about winning the war in Iraq or on terror does not ever touch on the root cause which is the Israeli - Palestinian issue and the mass of hundreds of thousands of unemployed young in the muslim world. The incubator of terrorists.
Never is there a speech or focus on the decades of insufferable conditions of the million and a quarter Palestinians squeezed into Gaza of which eight hundred thousand are the young.
The young do not sit still as President Bush will soon learn once the impending recession hits home in the U.S.A. This is far more dangerous than Iran's nuclear bombs or even the U.S.A'.s cluster bombs.
Any great leader would acknowledge this. As far as Canada is concerned, if Prime Minister Harper is seen cozying up to President Bush and not giving Canadians a clear picture of what's going on in Afghanistan and why we're there he could be in for very early retirement.
Regards,
Joe Schwarz, Princeton
To The Editor;
What are the facts???
John Tapics of Compliance Energy says that our Mayor has his facts wrong. Mayor Randy McLean has spent a great deal of time doing research, and his job, looking after the welfare of the citizens of Princeton. If he is concerned about the power plant, we all should be concerned.
When the plant was first proposed, it was going to be a 49 megawatt plant, now Mr. Tapics is saying 56 megawatts. There were going to be 70 full-time jobs created, then it was 35, now its 20-30.
Mr. Tapics says there will be no harmful effects from the power plant on the environment. Isn't that what an impartial environment assessment is supposed to determine?
YES, MR. TAPICS THE PEOPLE OF PRINCETON WANT THE FACTS.
- Dan Pippin, Princeton
The Editor:
Welcome to Princeton
We're pure as can be!
Our air is pristine,
Our rivers run clean,
No nicer scenery will ever be seen!
Our world is just perfect
And so it shall stay!
We're poor but were pure
And we like it that way!
This is not my point of view, but it does seem to represent a significant slice of Princeton sentiment heard so far. Community opinion is obviously valued by Compliance Coal or they would not be spending time and money on rounds of meetings and an information centre in the heart of town.
Some of us have made our views clear, but let us not remain the only speakers. Please, write to the editors, voice your opinions, but let them be reasoned opinions based on a bit of knowledge. A little time spent on the internet with your favorite search engine will tell you all a lay person can possibly understand about coal gasification and the whole gamut of alternative energy, not just in North America, but around the world.
You should also try biomass coal gasification because that is what is actually being proposed by Compliance Coal. You will be faced with an amazing array of information, some simply factual, some quite one-sided. The point of personal research is to look at all sides, not just those items that speak to your personal expectations.
Coal dominates the global production of electricity and will probably do so decades to come until other alternatives become technologically and economically feasible. Since it generates about 45 percent of the world's electricity it is doubtful that anyone can economically abandon, or ban, coal but strict emission controls can be, and are being, initiated.
For now, and for some time to come, the Compliance Coal Project is state of the art technology. That, however, does not mean we are somehow compelled to support the project against our better judgment. I don't feel that project is likely to harm us and, in fact, could enhance the economic wellbeing of the community. Personally, I see no glory in being either pure or poor.
- Karin Green, Princeton
