July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
The Andersons should have been given a chance (06/08/06)
Letters to the Editor
To the editor:
Allow me to interject right off the bat that I really do not have a dog in this fight. I do not own land near the proposed site near Portland, and even though I have a Dunkirk address I live almost equally distant from both sites.
The quote that Mr. Quadrozzi made in the meeting was to “encourage the council to do what's best for the city.” I guess I always thought his position was touted as the economic development “corporation” executive director for Jay County ... with the key word there being COUNTY.
I must admit that it does seem a little odd for someone on the outside looking in, that I must say I wonder where it makes sense to appear to court this company that is going to be a newcomer to the county. We already have a company in the county that has done business for many years here, and already has a substantial capital investment here. The Andersons have already made it quite clear that they are not going to be willing to compete with another plant in our county for the corn necessary to produce ethanol in the volumes that they are looking to produce it in. We do not produce enough corn around here to support even one plant, let alone two. It will have to be trucked in, and brought in on rail.
The fact that the high school is close to the plant proposed near Portland is indeed a serious issue, as anyone who witnesses young and inexperienced drivers who drive to and from the school every day can attest.
I have delivered bulk tank loads of another product used in the fermentation process, which is a man-made enzyme, so as this makes abundantly clear, corn trucks are not the only trucks that will be rolling in and out of these plants on a daily basis.
To assuage some fears of the local residents who do have a dog in this fight, I.E., some friends who own property very close, I can only state the following. I personally have been in, and all through, several of the plants that partners of The Broin Companies own and I can state that I have always found them to be clean and odor free.
The noise that they emit is no where near what the stone quarry that is already there emits. I am in no way stating my support of this decision, I just want you to know that I am not someone who is just saying this to support one side of this issue. These are just facts that I personally have observed as I have been to several plants in the Dakotas, Iowa, Illinois and Ontario, Canada.
It sure seems like the Andersons were not given a proper opportunity to have first dibs in this issue, and it does appear to many people that I have talked to that this decision was pretty much already made well before any meetings took place.
Again, I am not saying that this is the case, I am just saying that is what is being perceived as the way this was handled by many I have talked to.
The site in Dunkirk is better suited to many who do not share this shortsighted opinion of where it should go, but it is becoming more and more abundantly clear that this is not to be.
Sincerely,
James D. Fulks III
Dunkirk
A good idea
To the editor:
In regards to recent articles and concerns that I have read in The Commercial Review, I felt like sharing a few of my own thoughts, too.
It seems that everyone is worried about the smell of the proposed ethanol plant. I have to ask how many of these people that are complaining about the odor from such a plant remember the former Sheller Globe Co. or the Premix plant? That had a pretty awful smell as I recall but I really never heard too many complaints about that.
What about Doane Pet Care? Does everybody enjoy that smell as much as my dog does? Maybe they should go somewhere else and just lay off the people that they employ so the people of Portland will not have to smell that too.
Does or has anybody lived in the west end of town and been blessed with the sweet smell of a hog farm just north of Ind. 26? I personally would rather smell “baking bread or popcorn.”
What about the town of Geneva? Has anyone drove through there in the summer time? If you have then you know exactly what I am talking about.
In Friday's edition of The Commercial Review on page 6, Mr. Lon Racster was quoted saying that he had sent someone to an ethanol plant in Michigan and that person said, “That smell was absolutely putrid.” Don't we all have different opinions on the smell of something? Does everyone enjoy the smell of roses?
In Monday's CR there was a letter from a Dr. Clear and he expressed a concern of emissions from the plant containing formaldehyde.
Dr. Clear do you have even the slightest idea how many products in your very own home contain formaldehyde? Maybe you should check into that.
The bottom line is that an ethanol plant IS going to be built somewhere. If it isn't built here then it will be someone else's problem. As well as more jobs for their community. It will also be an estimated $300 million economic bonus to their community also.
Aaron Sanders
Portland
Unhealthy
To the editor:
Throughout elementary school my kids were taught don’t smoke, don’t use drugs, do healthy things, recycle and don’t pollute. They even brought home trees to plant. Now our state and local politicians are doing just the opposite of what my kids were taught by allowing and encouraging an ethanol plant to be built here. They are setting a bad example for our kids.
The Sierra Club sued a South Bend ethanol plant. That plant was emitting odors and pollutants nearly 10 times the permitted level. The EPA’s response was to work with the plant to resolve the problem. The EPA was not looking out for the citizens. Our elected officials are not looking out for us either.
Besides the problems of odor and pollution there are the potential problems of fire and dangerous chemical leaks. Ethanol plants use sulfuric acid, aqueous ammonia, caustic soda and phosphoric acid, just to name a few. Perhaps the Portland plant will not use all of these chemicals. Perhaps they will use something potentially more dangerous.
One Broin representative stated they will use the latest equipment to eliminate odors. I would like to know what that equipment is.
A thermal oxidizer reduces odors and pollutants by about 90 percent when it is not broke down. If the Portland plant’s anti-pollution technology breaks down will they stop production to fix it or just go ahead and pollute so they can make money?
Putting an ethanol plant where it is planned is wrong. It will affect far too many people in and around Portland.
I believe it has gone too far to stop it now. I hope someone with organizational skills will start a citizen’s group to monitor this plant to protect the citizens and the environment. I agree with Lon Racster. Decisions were made too quickly and too many questions were left unanswered.
Lew McKibben
Portland[[In-content Ad]]
Allow me to interject right off the bat that I really do not have a dog in this fight. I do not own land near the proposed site near Portland, and even though I have a Dunkirk address I live almost equally distant from both sites.
The quote that Mr. Quadrozzi made in the meeting was to “encourage the council to do what's best for the city.” I guess I always thought his position was touted as the economic development “corporation” executive director for Jay County ... with the key word there being COUNTY.
I must admit that it does seem a little odd for someone on the outside looking in, that I must say I wonder where it makes sense to appear to court this company that is going to be a newcomer to the county. We already have a company in the county that has done business for many years here, and already has a substantial capital investment here. The Andersons have already made it quite clear that they are not going to be willing to compete with another plant in our county for the corn necessary to produce ethanol in the volumes that they are looking to produce it in. We do not produce enough corn around here to support even one plant, let alone two. It will have to be trucked in, and brought in on rail.
The fact that the high school is close to the plant proposed near Portland is indeed a serious issue, as anyone who witnesses young and inexperienced drivers who drive to and from the school every day can attest.
I have delivered bulk tank loads of another product used in the fermentation process, which is a man-made enzyme, so as this makes abundantly clear, corn trucks are not the only trucks that will be rolling in and out of these plants on a daily basis.
To assuage some fears of the local residents who do have a dog in this fight, I.E., some friends who own property very close, I can only state the following. I personally have been in, and all through, several of the plants that partners of The Broin Companies own and I can state that I have always found them to be clean and odor free.
The noise that they emit is no where near what the stone quarry that is already there emits. I am in no way stating my support of this decision, I just want you to know that I am not someone who is just saying this to support one side of this issue. These are just facts that I personally have observed as I have been to several plants in the Dakotas, Iowa, Illinois and Ontario, Canada.
It sure seems like the Andersons were not given a proper opportunity to have first dibs in this issue, and it does appear to many people that I have talked to that this decision was pretty much already made well before any meetings took place.
Again, I am not saying that this is the case, I am just saying that is what is being perceived as the way this was handled by many I have talked to.
The site in Dunkirk is better suited to many who do not share this shortsighted opinion of where it should go, but it is becoming more and more abundantly clear that this is not to be.
Sincerely,
James D. Fulks III
Dunkirk
A good idea
To the editor:
In regards to recent articles and concerns that I have read in The Commercial Review, I felt like sharing a few of my own thoughts, too.
It seems that everyone is worried about the smell of the proposed ethanol plant. I have to ask how many of these people that are complaining about the odor from such a plant remember the former Sheller Globe Co. or the Premix plant? That had a pretty awful smell as I recall but I really never heard too many complaints about that.
What about Doane Pet Care? Does everybody enjoy that smell as much as my dog does? Maybe they should go somewhere else and just lay off the people that they employ so the people of Portland will not have to smell that too.
Does or has anybody lived in the west end of town and been blessed with the sweet smell of a hog farm just north of Ind. 26? I personally would rather smell “baking bread or popcorn.”
What about the town of Geneva? Has anyone drove through there in the summer time? If you have then you know exactly what I am talking about.
In Friday's edition of The Commercial Review on page 6, Mr. Lon Racster was quoted saying that he had sent someone to an ethanol plant in Michigan and that person said, “That smell was absolutely putrid.” Don't we all have different opinions on the smell of something? Does everyone enjoy the smell of roses?
In Monday's CR there was a letter from a Dr. Clear and he expressed a concern of emissions from the plant containing formaldehyde.
Dr. Clear do you have even the slightest idea how many products in your very own home contain formaldehyde? Maybe you should check into that.
The bottom line is that an ethanol plant IS going to be built somewhere. If it isn't built here then it will be someone else's problem. As well as more jobs for their community. It will also be an estimated $300 million economic bonus to their community also.
Aaron Sanders
Portland
Unhealthy
To the editor:
Throughout elementary school my kids were taught don’t smoke, don’t use drugs, do healthy things, recycle and don’t pollute. They even brought home trees to plant. Now our state and local politicians are doing just the opposite of what my kids were taught by allowing and encouraging an ethanol plant to be built here. They are setting a bad example for our kids.
The Sierra Club sued a South Bend ethanol plant. That plant was emitting odors and pollutants nearly 10 times the permitted level. The EPA’s response was to work with the plant to resolve the problem. The EPA was not looking out for the citizens. Our elected officials are not looking out for us either.
Besides the problems of odor and pollution there are the potential problems of fire and dangerous chemical leaks. Ethanol plants use sulfuric acid, aqueous ammonia, caustic soda and phosphoric acid, just to name a few. Perhaps the Portland plant will not use all of these chemicals. Perhaps they will use something potentially more dangerous.
One Broin representative stated they will use the latest equipment to eliminate odors. I would like to know what that equipment is.
A thermal oxidizer reduces odors and pollutants by about 90 percent when it is not broke down. If the Portland plant’s anti-pollution technology breaks down will they stop production to fix it or just go ahead and pollute so they can make money?
Putting an ethanol plant where it is planned is wrong. It will affect far too many people in and around Portland.
I believe it has gone too far to stop it now. I hope someone with organizational skills will start a citizen’s group to monitor this plant to protect the citizens and the environment. I agree with Lon Racster. Decisions were made too quickly and too many questions were left unanswered.
Lew McKibben
Portland[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD