Archive: Opinions

I am responding to Dan's opinions on the gas fired power plant closing, Lansing's tax base needs, as well as his opinion that there is not enough gas.  Is he insinuating that Dryden residents are denying development in Lansing through denying a new fracked gas line be run through Dryden properties and impacting our taxes and property values is not good reason to oppose it? He insinuates landowners who are well educated as to the many impacts and who do not want any of the known risks, damages to our properties, liabilities and decrease in property value are somehow unreasonable.

The methane pipelines present health risks and loss of life potential not to mention potential for loss of life as well as potential for poising through radon leaks and methane poisoning our water. I first ask the writer, why did you mention realities like the impact zone? This is the measurement that the pipeline companies use to determine risks to loss of life.  They do not disclose these when they ask people to take on the risk of loss of life.

The other issue is that the proposed pipeline is actually not necessary and is why it was not established as a need, but a choice. The need is not being denied since power can come from solar, wind and geo thermal power at the site of any new development. Developers can choose electric power rather than expensive fracked gas.  Solar is actually cheaper to the inhabitant and safer as well and removes the known health risks like exposure to radon upon burning gas to heat or cool a dwelling, this does not dissipate according to Dr. Resnickoff's studies on shale gas.There are no health impacts to inhabitants using solar power.

If one is an employer that is also a consideration since employers are liable for exposures in their buildings and workers compensation must pay for those exposures. Do people forcing gas on landowners understand we will not be getting any of the gas even if we wanted to use gas? Most of us do not use gas and some who did already switched to solar. The new gas line is not for Dryden and cannot be 'tapped into' for each homeowner along the route as NYSEG seemed to present yet is actually impossible without thousands of dollars invested by each homeowner to decrease pressure once they spend thousands to change their oil to another fossil fuel that is already harder to get delivered so is not cost effective for neither homeowners or NYSEG to offer gas.

The new gas is at the request of the mayor of Ithaca who in collaboration with IDA and TCAD are encouraging rapid un sustainable, gas powered development that are inferior considering climate change and becuase choosing fracked gas supports accelerations of methane and seems to violate and contradict comprehensive plans that call for rapid decrease of CO2 emissions like methane.  They seem to lack a critical understanding that we can have all the electricity we need with solar, wind and hydro power and these are far cheaper when the entire costs to our health and planet are considered.

Since I switched from gas to solar two years ago I saved two thousand dollars not buying gas, my health and family are not subjected and NYSEG has not charged me for electricity since 2014 since my solar provides all my electricity needs.

Last, if a town board chooses to rely on an obsolete energy providers who are owned by less than stellar private for profit entities as a tax base should be considered a safe investment to continue that seems unreasonable considering it has proven to be disastrous.  Any investment in fossil fuels see is a losing investment as is why divestment in them is rapidly catching on.  If Lansing wants revenues that exceed those of the old coal plant they could invest in solar and wind farms and give the landowners of Lansing options to provide land for farms, the town and residents can have a community owned power resource and offer power to Ithaca and Lansing residents.

A win win is very possible if leadership is educated on the best sources of power and revenue to enhance our communities and meet development and climate change needs. Imposing eminent domain on American citizens by way of a private for profits multi national corporation forcing eminent domain to sell their product is not a method that is supported by most Americans and is not restricted any political party in my experiences and many Lansing residents do not want their neighbors forced to give up their land when many other solutions are viable options.

Joanne Cipolla-Dennis
Dryden, NY

v12i11