Ethanol in the Finger Lakes?

Is it good for the environment? Is it good for the economy? Is it good for the residents of Seneca County? Give us an Environmental Impact Statement, and we'll give you our answer!!

Sunday, November 25, 2007

Ethanol's Bottom Line

Wall Street Journal
By ROBERT HAHN
November 24, 2007


The results of a recent Environmental Protection Agency report on the economics of mandating the production of alternative fuels strongly suggest that that the case for ethanol is lacking.

Congress might never have bet so much of the taxpayers' money on corn-based ethanol if an unbiased accounting of the consequences had been available early on. We could use a separate agency, shielded in part from political considerations, whose sole mission would be to analyze the costs and benefits of regulations and government programs. Without such an agency, interest-group logrolling will continue to trump science and economics in major policy choices.

To read the whole article, click here.

Posted by Finger Lakes Future Alliance

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Sign our Petition for an EIS

October 22, 2007

Our position from the beginning has been that the ethanol plant project in Seneca County needs an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The more we learn about this project, the more we realize just how essential this is.

The Seneca County Industrial Development Agency (SCIDA) sees its main role as promoting industrial development---especially industrial development that benefits members of the SCIDA themselves, their family members, and their friends and business associates. However, when the SCIDA saw to it they they were named "lead agency" under SEQRA, New York's environmental review law, they took on a legal obligation to defend the public by making sure any negative environmental impacts were identified and studied.

They have shown little interest in doing that. Despite overwhelming evidence that there would be huge environmental impacts, they issued a "negative declaration", and refused to require an EIS. In effect, they gave a free pass to a huge project with enormous giveaways of public lands and taxpayer funds. It would destroy a sensitive ecosystem and degrade air and water quality. There is little evidence that this project would benefit the public in any way. But there is overwhelming evidence that there would be serious negative consequences to the public.

But it's not too late.

Under the SEQRA law, the lead agency is not just permitted, but OBLIGATED, to rescind a negative declaration when it becomes clear that the scope of the project has changed, or new information has come to light. Both of those conditions clearly apply. The project as it is now discussed is different in many respects from the preliminary documents presented by the developers, which were used as a basis for the negative declaration. These documents were full of omissions and misrepresentations.

Will the IDA do its duty and rescind the negative declaration, and now require an EIS?

Maybe---but only if we hold their feet to the fire, and hold our public officials accountable.

That's where the petitions come in. Let it be known that we demand that the IDA do its duty and RESCIND THE NEGDEC!! We need an EIS for this project!

SIGN OUR PETITION:

There are two ways to express your support for Finger Lakes Future, and demand that the IDA do the right thing and REQUIRE AN EIS :

1) Click here to sign our petition on the Care2 website.

or

2) Email us at fingerlakesfuture@gmail.com and we'll add your name to our petition. Or, if you prefer, we'll send you a pdf of our petition, suitable for gathering written signatures.