It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Biomass incinerators planned for Shelton.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Biomass incinerators planned for Shelton.


www.olywip.org

"Currently, there are two wood waste incinerator power generation projects being planned for Shelton. These projects are generating a lot of heat and discussion in the local environmental community. Works in Progress' Mike Coday reached out to speak with Pat Rasmussen, a local environmental activist with the World Temperate Rainforest Network and Duff Badgley of No Biomass Burn of Seattle about the Shelton biomass incinerators."
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.incineratorfreemasoncounty.org
www.co.mason.wa.us
www.facebook.com
sheltonwashington.blogspot.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread134491/pg1




posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
The proposed biomass incinerators are not safe. Among at least 35 airborne pollutants emitted by each of the two burners, these toxins include:

- Lethal particulate matter;
- Dioxins (carcinogenic);
- Mercury;
- Lead;
- Carbon monoxide;
- Chloroform;
- Formaldehyde; and
- Sulfurous acid.
Source:
www.olywip.org...


This effects our health don't you think? Apparently the company has to break ground by December 31, 2010. ADAGE is fast-tracking the permitting process to meet this deadline and get $75 million in taxpayer funds.
That is unbelievable, they prefer the money over the environment and our children, isn't there something wrong with this picture?
On top of the airborne pollutants emitted there are health risk's involved:

According to the American Lung Association State of the Air, 2008 Report, particle pollution diminishes lung function, causes greater use of asthma medications and increased rates of school absenteeism, emergency room visits and hospital admissions. Other adverse effects can be coughing, wheezing, cardiac arrhythmias and heart attacks. According to the findings from some of the latest studies, short-term increases in particle pollution have been linked to:

- Death from respiratory and cardiovascular causes, including strokes;
- Increased mortality in infants and young children;
- Increased number of heart attacks, especially among the elderly and in people with heart conditions;
- Inflammation of lung tissue in young, healthy adults;
- Increased hospitalization for cardiovascular disease, including strokes and congestive heart failure;
- Increased emergency room visits for patients suffering from acute respiratory ailments;
- Increased hospitalization for asthma among children; and
- Increased severity of asthma attacks in children.
Source:
www.lungusa2.org...

www.olywip.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

Please write letters to the editor's of news coverage this needs to be made publicly. I've written letters and have had no response.
P.S. I will be posting actual images that I will be taking from the places and images of the signs being posted throughout Shelton County.

[edit on 13-8-2010 by millicake]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by millicake
 


Biomass incinerators are 21st century new technology that has many other social uses and features besides just producing bio fuels from waste products. It is that hidden aspect that I have been following for some time now and whenever one of these plants gets opened, I usually post the same or similar remarks about them that no one is considering.

In the days of Nazi Germany, the Death Camps were designed from a point of killing and disposal of the many bodies that were burned in gas ovens on a 24/7 basis. The cost of gas, the cost of building the death camps and the labor needed to operate them are all facets of death camps that have been improved upon by those that seek to do the same but with more efficiency and with less or zero disposal requirements.

It is these new Biomass plants that in my opinion will one day be converted to disposing of human bodies. That process will instead of costing money to achieve, will actually create profits from the bio-fuels that can be produced by processing human corpses into some bio-fuel with almost no waste issues.

It is these new biomass plants that I keep up with because whenever the feds start throwing money at such plants, I question as others should, why the feds take such an interest in biomass plants so much that they throw fed money at plant operators to ensure the design and the operational capacity is where it would need to be to one day convert to human disposal in a moments notice.

Such plants will be near Death Camps and that is why I firmly believe that they will try to locate the FEMA victims nearby or will perhaps they will just neutron a city and then it is a matter of body recovery and disposal. Add in bio weapons and or chemical attacks or death in large numbers from pandemics and these bio mass plants will serve to dispose of what the government chooses while producing a bio fuel in the process. Of course there will be no funerals for anyone during such process.

While I realize this is probably more than most need to consider, it is still a matter that needs to be known about. It must be understood that FEMA is now ordering portable and mobile bio-mass processing assets and for me that begs the question of why would they want to biomass all dead victims?

Well, it saves the government a lot of money in disposal process and it generates a beneficial end product. In such a way the new New death camps will operate and it is that understanding that we better grasp and share with others. Death camps with ovens is an outdated and unfeasible approach to mass genocide.

It is a new age and anyone who thinks that FEMA or the federal government is going to force us into FEMA camps is deluded. However; if a staged disaster occurred and it was such a disaster that had all the elements of death and spreading destruction, all the survivors would freely and willingly run to and trust FEMA to save them, feed them and care for them. This is exactly what the new NWO thought anticipates and in such a way we the people will willingly go to our deaths to eventually become a few gallons of bio-fuel.

Something tells me that if they can make bio-fuel from humans that pretty soon the motivation for the end game could be driven by greed associated with the process of getting rid of so many useless eaters so that they can profit from the free fuel being produced. To the NWO it resolves the useless eaters and it derives a benefit in the process of eliminating the masses by using bio-mass plants to process the victims.

There is plenty of other background regarding this concern that is all over the internet and as I stated earlier, when FEMA begins spending money on mobile bio-mass processing centers where the bodies can be processed in whatever area FEMA chooses to do so. It is this ability to now take the bio-mass plant where you need it to process dead matter that concerns me, but then again I guess I worry too much, especially about not getting that burial after death.

Bio-mass plants are a really serious subject matter once you get into what bio-mass plants are really set up to do. This is why any large scale plants need to be noted around the nation and it is those plants that need to be known about by locals and others so concerned. before they are converted to body disposal centers producing bio fuel waste products for profit. Like I said, every time one of these plants gets opened, I like to remind people of the side no one discusses because of course its a delicate subject, but I would rather know about their covert uses than to be surprised by their existence, if you catch my drift.

Thanks for the posting.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaxBlack
"It is these new Biomass plants that in my opinion will one day be converted to disposing of human bodies. That process will instead of costing money to achieve, will actually create profits from the bio-fuels that can be produced by processing human corpses into some bio-fuel with almost no waste issues."


Originally posted by MaxBlack
"Such plants will be near Death Camps and that is why I firmly believe that they will try to locate the FEMA victims nearby or will perhaps they will just neutron a city and then it is a matter of body recovery and disposal. Add in bio weapons and or chemical attacks or death in large numbers from pandemics and these bio mass plants will serve to dispose of what the government chooses while producing a bio fuel in the process. Of course there will be no funerals for anyone during such process."

That sounds similar to the HR8791 Homeland Terrorism Preparedness Bill.

"00:55 - 1:27"
Talks about: "Body disposal actions."




Originally posted by MaxBlack
"Well, it saves the government a lot of money in disposal process and it generates a beneficial end product. In such a way the new New death camps will operate and it is that understanding that we better grasp and share with others. Death camps with ovens is an outdated and unfeasible approach to mass genocide."

Keep in mind that it isn't about the money, but what has to do with "power", being able to control. I like to use Henry Alfred Kissinger quote/s:

Henry Alfred Kissinger
"Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac."

Source: As quoted in The New York Times (28 October 1973)

Lesser known variant:

Henry Alfred Kissinger
"Power is the great aphrodisiac."

Source: As quoted in The New York Times (19 January 1971)


I would like to direct the current viewers to the fallowing statement:


"The proposed Adage and Simpson biomass incinerators would do these things:

- Emit, between them, 825,000 tons of CO2 per year, according to statistics from the federal EPA and Department of Energy. These high volumes of CO2 would stoke our unfolding climate crisis. This CO2 would also accelerate the acidification of waters, including the Puget Sound, now threatening the entire marine chain of life in Northwest waters.

- Emit nano-and PM2.5-particulate matter (PM) pollution so toxic, despite air pollution controls and permits, it can kill humans from a single exposure. The American Lung Association State of the Air Report-2008: "First and foremost, short-term exposure to particle pollution can kill. Deaths can occur on the same day when particle levels are high." Nano-PM (or ultra-fines) are unregulated and uncontrolled by any permitting process. They are the most lethal PM pollution."

Source

We are talking about dangerous levels of pollution that KILLS!


Originally posted by MaxBlack
Thanks for the posting.

Your welcome. Best wishes!

[edit on 13-8-2010 by millicake]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   

source.

But seriously, it would be better to compare biomass with other sources of electrical energy, such as combined cycle natural gas, coal, wind, and nuclear on the basis of cost, emissions, and reliability.






Mean values of health effects, presented as deaths/TWh for the respective forms of electricity generation throughout the EU (Source here).





pollution so toxic a single exposure could kill.

The article repeated this about 5000 times. A single exposure? Everything depends on the amount...

[edit on 14/8/2010 by C0bzz]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0bzz
pollution so toxic a single exposure could kill.
The article repeated this about 5000 times. A single exposure? Everything depends on the amount...


We must first take a look at the facts of biomass incinerators:
According to Dr.Tom Termotto, National Coordinator of the Coalition Against Chemical Trespass, in Tallahassee, FL:
1)


"To the point, biomass incineration is NOT clean and green, sustainable and renewable, carbon neutral and cost effective, or environmentally friendly and ecologically sound. It is quite the opposite of these beautiful and alluring marketing slogans. Biomass incineration is in reality quite polluting, unsustainable to the extreme and, in some cases, less environmentally friendly than coal burning plants."

2)


"Remember the old-fashioned hospital incinerator that nobody ever wanted to live downwind from. Who would want mercury vapors, and the many other highly toxic aerosols, wafting through their neighborhood? Well, then, why would a community want a biomass incinerator sited within winds´ reach of their schools, subdivisions and businesses. The post incineration output of these biomass plants can be much worse than a hospital´s depending on what is being incinerated."

Source

We then must find/seek/see what types of pollution is/are being emitted by biomass incinerators alone:



Let´s be clear about the assortment and type of contaminants which will inevitably show up in the surrounding air of these biomass plants. As follows:




(1) Dioxins and Furans
(2) Particulate Matter – 10.0, 2.5 and 1.0 microns
(3) Hydrogen Chloride
(4) Nitrogen Dioxide
(5) Carbon Monoxide
(6) Hydrogen Sulfide
(7) Sulfur Dioxide
(8) Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4)
(9) Mercury, Lead and Arsenic
(10) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC´s) such as benzene, toluene and naphthalene

Source

One can only imagine all the combined contaminants will and do make an impact on not just our environment but to our health. There are some levels that a single dose kills but even if the dose was less it still impacts you in a long run.

For example lets look at hydrogen cyanide being released by Biomass incinerators:


"Crutzen and Carmichael (1993) have recently suggested that biomass burning represents an important source of atmospheric hydrogen cyanide. The combined worldwide emissions of hydrogen cyanide and acetonitrile due to biomass burning have been estimated to range from 0.5 to 1.7x1012 g of N/year (≈1.1–3.7 billion pounds per year) (Crutzen and Andreae 1990)."


Continue...

[edit on 14-8-2010 by millicake]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Continued...

What is cyanide?

The term cyanide in this Toxicological Profile means a compound that contains the cyanogen (CN) radical. Since the CN portion of the compound is of concern in poisons, any reference to the amount present in air, water, soil, sediments, or other media refers only to this part of the compound. The term free cyanide refers to hydrogen cyanide and cyanide ion (CN–) (EPA 1981e; Oudjehani et al. 2002; Shifrin et al. 1996; WHO 2004b).
Cyanide (reported as cyanide, hydrogen cyanide, sodium cyanide, potassium cyanide, or copper (I) cyanide) has been identified in at least 464 of the 1,662 hazardous waste sites that have been proposed for inclusion on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL) (HazDat 2005). However, the number of sites evaluated for cyanide is not known. The frequency of these sites can be seen in Figure 6-1. Of these sites, 462 are located within the United States, 1 is located in Guam (not shown), and 1 is located in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (not shown).



Amount of hydrogen cyanide released:

"The amount of hydrogen cyanide released to the atmosphere in 2003 by U.S. industrial facilities sorted by state is given in Table 6-1 (TRI03 2005). According to TRI03 (2005), an estimated total of 1.14 million pounds (approximately 517 metric tons) of hydrogen cyanide was discharged into air, amounting to approximately 42.2% of the total amount of hydrogen cyanide released into the environment from manufacturing and processing facilities in the United States in 2003. The release of cyanide compounds (as X+CN–, where X+=H+ or any group where formal dissociation can occur; for example, KCN or Ca(CN)2) into air by U.S. industrial facilities is given in Table 6-2 and sorted by state (TRI03 2005). According to the data given in Table 6-2, it is estimated that 0.313 million pounds (approximately 142 metric tons) of cyanide compounds were released into air in 2003, which amounts to approximately 4.97% of the total environmental release. The TRI data should be used with caution since only certain types of facilities are required to report. This is not an exhaustive list. No information is available in the TRI database for other cyanide and thiocyanate compounds in this profile because these compounds are not included under SARA, Title III, and therefore, are not among the chemicals that facilities are required to report (EPA 1993g, 2001).

Source




Environmental transformation:

"Cyanogen is reactive and does not persist in the environment unchanged (EPA 1978c). Cyanogen reacts slowly with water to yield hydrogen cyanide and cyanic acid (HOCN) among other products (EPA 1979) and this hydrolysis reaction may be a possible atmospheric degradation pathway. Cyanogen has also been shown to react with hydroxyl radicals in the gas phase (Atkinson 1989). Based on a rate constant of 2.5x10-15 cm3/(molecule-sec) at 27 °C and assuming an average hydroxyl radical concentration of 5x105 molecules/cm3, the residence time for the reaction of hydrogen cyanide vapor with hydroxyl radicals in the atmosphere is ≈25 years. Therefore, the reaction of cyanogen with photochemically-induced hydroxyl radicals will not play a significant role in the degradation of this compound in air."

Source


As you can see biomass burning is a major sources of cyanide released into the air.
Source: (Crutzen and Carmichael 1993; Lobert and Warnatz 1993)

And thats just looking at one type of contaminant, so you can imagine the amount of impact that Cyanogen and other types of contaminants have on both environmental and health.

External Links/Other Source/s:
www.atsdr.cdc.gov...
www.cdc.gov...

[edit on 14-8-2010 by millicake]



posted on Aug, 14 2010 @ 10:51 PM
link   
reply to post by millicake
 


Your video is not a source my friend. That is an Onion production. It is satire. Look at the bottom right, that logo is the Onion logo.



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
Your video is not a source my friend. That is an Onion production. It is satire. Look at the bottom right, that logo is the Onion logo.

I'm aware of the Onion's satirical fake news agency that is for entertainment and comedy. The video was added for a bit of "dry humor" effect to the opinion's/view's of MaxBlack. For those unfamiliar to the "hoax video" here are some links:
[Hoax] U.S. Rep. John Haller intros bill HR8791 [Hoax]

The main point of this thread is to show what types of pollution is/are being emitted by biomass incinerators alone, and the effects/impact it has on the environment, and health. As I stated earlier the type of contaminants are dangerous and shouldn't be overlooked.

External Link:
www.atsdr.cdc.gov...

[edit on 15-8-2010 by millicake]



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 01:13 AM
link   
“It must be understood that FEMA is now ordering portable and mobile bio-mass processing assets”
Portable! that can only be to send to a city that some one just wipe’t out.
terrorists poison a city, or the government.
then you need some way to get rid of all the bodies.

MaxBlack. can you give more info on them?

[edit on 15-8-2010 by buddha]



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   
I always thought biomass just meant burning wood, and wood chippings?



posted on Aug, 15 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by C0bzz
 


biomass is any think organic.
that is any thing living.
grass trees fish birds dogs cats cows and you!
humans...



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join