With average fuel economy at its all time low in 20 years and gas prices steadily increasing, it’s time we started taking action to increase gas efficiency and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Our automobiles need to become more efficient to save us money and to cut our oil consumption.
As the Sierra Club stated, “If new cars averaged 45 miles per gallon and new light trucks averaged 34 mpg, we would save 1,507 gallons of gas per second.’
The technology currently exists to improve our fuel efficiency, but the car companies need to be motivated to make the changes in their vehicles.
The motivation to make those changes comes from the consumers and government.
Our government needs to pass legislation that requires auto manufacturers to raise the fuel efficiency of vehicles. And by purchasing fuel-efficient cars, we can help bring about the change for a cleaner environment, lower gas expenses and less dependency on oil.
The standards that impose the regulations on vehicles date back to the early 1970s, when they were created in response to the energy crisis that was occurring.
The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards required an increase in the fuel economy of cars over a period of 10 years.
They provided the basis for the improvement in technology and efficiency in automobiles that followed in the subsequent decade.
However, no significant change to these standards has been made since. It is now time for these standards to rise again.
They effectively brought the efficiency of vehicles up in the 70s and 80s without major economic consequences, so they should be able to repeat the success again.
We are at a time when we need to conserve oil, and think economically and environmentally, especially because of the unstable situation in the Middle East, which supplies the majority of our oil.
Passenger cars have demonstrated the ability to reach 40 mpg without compromising safety standards.
We need to put pressure on automakers to invest in these changes.
Another issue that needs to be resolved is that of the categorization of SUVs in the vehicle fleets.
Throughout the past, sports utility vehicles have been categorized as light trucks used primarily for work, which relieves them of the stricter passenger vehicle standards.
However, SUVs currently make up almost half of the vehicle market and are used as passenger vehicles.
Nowadays they are far more likely to carry soccer teams around and haul lattes home from Starbucks than lumber from the yard.
It is now time to consider SUVs part of the passenger vehicle category and, therefore, require them to adhere to the stricter standards.
It is now time to invest in the changes we already know are possible.
Let’s vote with our wallets and buy fuel-efficient cars.
Save yourself money and save the environment by conserving our world’s limited fuel supply.
No, Mr. Dell’Orfano, Bio Energy has crossed the line
To the Editor:
Bio Energy has been permitted to emit 64 tons of toxins (including 2.67 tons of lead and 31 pounds of mercury) each year into our atmosphere.
The highest concentrations of those toxins will rain down on 10,000 people who live in a 5-mile radius of the Bio Energy plant. Our children are particularly susceptible to these toxins, which cause brain damage and illness.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the levels of toxins in our air already exceed federal safety benchmarks in every county in New Hampshire, and contribute to New Hampshire having the fourth highest rate of asthma in the nation.
Putting additional poisons into the air we breathe and into the water we drink are not acceptable.
No, Mr. Dell’Orfano, it is you who have crossed the line.
Your Bio Energy smoke stack is less than 250 feet from the Contoocook River – a major source of drinking water for Concord.
At a time when pregnant women are warned about eating fish from the Contoocook River, the introduction of additional toxins is unthinkable.
As Mary Jean Brown, head of the Center for Disease Control’s Lead Poisoning and Prevention Program, has stated, “There is no safe level of lead. Even a small contribution, especially in small children, is not something we want to happen.”
And you want to put 2.67 tons into our air each year.
That is precisely why the New Hampshire Medical Society, the New Hampshire Academy of Pediatrics and the New Hampshire Society of Family Practitioners have all gone on record to warn us that the amount and types of toxins your company intends to send into our air, Mr. Dell’Orfano, will create an imminent danger of harm to our communities.
That is why our entire legislative delegation supported legislation that would have imposed anti-pollution technology on your business.
That is why the Hopkinton Selectmen, the Sierra Club, the Army Corps of Engineers, the St. Anselm and Colby Sawyer college faculties, the Legislative Caucus for Young Children, U.S. Rep. Charles Bass and countless others in a bi-partisan coalition have all voiced concern over your project that now threatens the fabric of our communities.
You patronize us when you claim that this widespread outcry against Bio Energy is nothing more than mere “not in my back yard” politics.
Nine other wood-fired power plants are poised to take advantage of the economic benefit of burning construction and demolition debris as fuel if Bio Energy is successful.
This new waste incineration business model you are attempting to introduce to New Hampshire doesn’t belong in anyone’s back yard.
That is why some states have outlawed the burning of construction and demolition waste altogether.
Widespread outcry over your incineration plans stems from the fact that you, Mr. Dell’Orfano, as president of Bio Energy, have thumbed your nose at any local review of your facility, have violated the Clean Air Act, have unlawfully and without permission from the state burned construction and demolition debris containing lead, have rearranged your complex corporate structures to hide Mr. DiNapoli’s involvement in the company (a convicted felon) – and you now intend to haul toxic substances from out of state in order to emit them into our air and water, and onto our soil for profit.
No, Mr. Dell’Orfano, despite what you claim, no government agency has declared that your proposed incinerator will be safe.
Indeed, the head of the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services’ Air Resources Division has stated he believes that burning construction and demolition debris is not a good idea.
Moreover, the environmental permits you have received to date were the product of flawed processes and reviews, and are currently under scrutiny by the federal government.
Simply stating that you “look forward to working with [the community] to make Bio Energy a showcase for clean electric generation and the use of innovative environmental technology” does not make it so, Mr. Dell’Orfano.
Such upbeat and catchy statements stand in direct contrast to your plan to become the second largest, single source of mercury emissions in the state.
Your description is nothing more than a pretty label on an ugly business.
Opposition to your plan to pollute also has nothing to do with the origin of your last name. Back in 1985 when you first began operating Bio Energy, you shamelessly raised that same alleged bias in response to community concerns.
You and Mr. DiNapoli claimed that those raising concerns about your operation “created clouds on us because we were from Massachusetts. Then, the fact that our last names are not Haines or Horn or Harris or whatever ... I’m not saying there is discrimination, but that plays a role.”
You might take some solace, Mr. Dell’Orfano, in learning that REACH’s point professionals on health and science share your ethnic heritage.
No, Mr. Dell’Orfano, once again you give the people of this community, and indeed this state, too little credit.
REACH and all those who oppose your plans who you so callously dismiss as misguided, bigoted simpletons are not just a “pitiful minority” as you suggest, Mr. Dell’Orfano.
We are many. We are thousands.
REACH alone has over 1,600 members from many towns. Our members are growing each day as the reality of this ugly situation becomes known to more and more people.
We are not going away.
Please do us all a favor. Be a good neighbor and end your plan to emit toxins into the air we breathe and the water we drink.
Ron Lajoie
President of REACH
(Residents Environmental Action Committee for Health)
I take exception to comments made by Pitts in newspapers
To the Editor:
I would like to clarify certain statements made by Bow Town Manager James Pitts concerning the recent Superior Court ruling in Town of Bow v. Bryan Milazzo.
Mr. Pitt’s comments in the Concord Monitor inferring that my calls to report crime were harassment is a continuing attempt by Mr. Pitts to keep the focus on me rather that focus on the ineptitude of his office and the Bow police to rationally address the speeding problem in Bow.
Mr. Pitts has continued to promote the town of Bow’s argument that the town of Bow, through his office and the police department, attempted to get me to agree to limit my contacts as outlined in the town’s Verified Petition for Temporary and Permanent Injunction item 7, “The Police Department has asked Mr. Milazzo to limit his contacts, to no avail.” of the original lawsuit. No law-biding citizen would believe that the police in any department, anywhere, would ask a citizen to agree not to report crime.
This never happened, it is false and misleading. In fact, I have been criticized on several occasions by Bow officers for not reporting speeders and other law breakers in a timely manner.
In comments to The Bow Times, Mr. Pitts has gone on to poorly define what neither the original lawsuit nor the Superior Court did – what is an emergency situation.
Mr. Pitts, I expect that you will be at my house 24/7 defining these emergency situations for me. I suppose you can ride the ATVs purchased by the town of Bow with money earmarked for terrorism since there are no public ATV trails in Bow and, therefore, the police would be patrolling private property, placing them at much greater risk.
Tell me, does terrorism constitute an emergency situation?
In my continuing effort to ascertain how much money has been spent by the town of Bow as the town moves to remove my Constitutional rights, Mr. Pitts has also offered that such information is protected by attorney-client privilege – the client being the town of Bow, the town of Bow being the tax-payers and citizens, including me.
What is he trying to hide? It appears from what little he has sent me, that the town of Bow has spent in excess of $12,000 in trying to remove my rights.
If this incorrect, I trust he will tell all of us in a response published in this paper.
Or we can wait until the next town of Bow budget is determined and see if “Suing Bryan Milazzo” is now a line item.
As always, look for updates on this situation at https://home.comcast.net/~townofbowissues/townofbowissues.html.
Bryan Milazzo
Bow
Bring on the snow and ice
To the Editor:
Once again, the Bow PTO ski and skate sale was a huge success.
We have many people to thank for this, from our veteran volunteers to many new volunteers to the recreation staff and the Comets softball team.
We also would like to thank the two very generous ski shops: Rogers Ski Shop in Lincoln and S & W Sports in Concord.
The community, of course, was the biggest supporter.
Thank you for all of your gear and we hope that you found everything you need for a wonderful snow-filled winter.
Carol Niegisch
Lois Davis
Co-organizers
PTO Ski and Skate Sale
Thanks for keeping spirit alive
To the Editor:
On behalf of the New Hampshire Highland Games, I wish to express our appreciation for the enthusiasm, co-operation and assistance that we received from the people, community services and businesses of Hopkinton, Contoocook, Manchester and the Greater Concord area.
To all of the above and, of course, to our attendees, volunteers and corporate sponsors, thank you for helping us to celebrate the spirit, fun and traditions of Scotland via the 2004 New Hampshire Highland Games.
Donald J. Munro
Managing Director
New Hampshire Highland Games
Make a difference for a child
To the Editor:
Court Appointed Special Advocates of New Hampshire (CASA), a not-for-profit organization that recruits, trains, supervises and supports citizen guardians ad litem, is currently seeking volunteers.
CASAs work directly with children, family members, foster-care providers, social workers and the court. They advocate for what is in the best interest of children who have been abused or neglected by their caregivers.
CASAs help ensure that the child ends up in a safe, permanent home.
Applicants must be 21 and older. Volunteers give approximately 10 to 15 hours per month working on their cases, which include visits with the child(ren) and court appearances.
Volunteers are asked to commit to the life of their case, which averages 22 months.
Volunteers need the flexibility to attend court hearings during the workday (on average, five court hearings per year).
The 40-hour initial training is taught over two weeks, with both a day time and evening/weekend format available.
Upcoming training sessions will be held in Manchester, Lancaster, Keene and Portsmouth.
For further information, or to receive a volunteer application packet, please contact Diane Peragine at (800) 626-0622.
You may also visit our Web site at www.casanh.org.
Help make a difference in a child’s life.
Diane V. Peragine
Training & Recruitment Coordinator
CASA of New Hampshire
