After Seattle Steam opened its biomass plant near Pike Place Market in 2010, converting part of its operation over from natural gas, the company received glowing coverage from Sustainable Industries Magazine, NPR and other media outlets. Seattle Steam chief executive Stan Gent tells SW that its biomass plant, which supplies heat to some 200 buildings downtown, has reduced the company's carbon emissions by 60 percent.
Activists, however, claim that biomass plants emit more carbon, not less. They also say such facilities pollute the air with small matter known as "particulates." Badgley, part of a group called No Biomass Burn, which has also protested planned facilities in Port Townsend and Shelton, says it's these particulates that can cause grave health hazards like heart attacks and strokes.
The post has continued to spark commentary from Daily Weekly readers, nearly a full week after its posting. Some of these comments are predictable. Some, on the other hand, are not ...
As Rob writes:
burning wood has been part of the enviroment since the begining of time, it is 100% natural and probably very important to are overall ecosystem. Fires have rage across this planet for thousands of years and is a very impotant part to the climate, you can't prove that its not because this planet seems to be a very healthy place to live. we have been successfully putting out fires for over 100 years now and I'm not saying we need to start forest fires, lets log it, bring the biomass to a biomass facility and make some electricity and some smoke lots of smoke. Just a theory, maybe this planet needs more smoke to cool it down. you can't disprove what the planet has done for many years all on its own