Elochoman Grange on the move again?

To The Eagle:

In last week's paper, Richard Erickson was reported as stating that people who buy waterfront property across from the Wauna paper mill do not mind the mill's noise, lights and smell. This is false.

Q.U.I.E.T. (Quell Unlawful Illegal Emissions Today) sent an anti-noise petition with 18 property owner's signatures to the mill in 2008. Prior to that, other property owners complained about the bright lights. Most of the sentiment is apathetic; you know, its worthless to fight it. What I hear, when I have conversations with most local folks, is the mill is objectionable. Erickson's statement concludes that since people buy property across from the mill, existing property owners who would be close to Bradwood LNG should not mind living across from a new national-security time-bomb. Does anyone want a potential terrorist target in the community? On the contrary, we should not be complacent and welcome the armed escorts, restricted river traffic and various negative environmental impacts Bradwood will bring.

Bradwood is another Trojan that will be too short-lived. According to Sun & Wind Energy magazine, December 2009, estimates on available natural gas reserves are highly questionable and probably much overestimated with worldwide extraction peaking by 2025. Over half of these natural gas reserves lie in Russia, Iran, and Qatar. Additionally, with rising demand, etc. "...then Europe and other regions of the world can expect to see shortages even within the next few years." If so, then why build a short-term LNG facility? I suggest a solar direction. The earth has an abundance of the element silicon used to manufacture photovoltaic cells. Wind is an inexhaustible energy source. Why build a facility, with such negative consequences, to import a dwindling resource?

Dale Costich

Cathlamet