Letters to the Editor
- July 10
July 10, 2005
LYONS
Tire burning: Where
does the buck stop?
Let's see, 1 million
tires a year? That's almost 3,000 tires a day. Up a smokestack at the Cemex
plant 10 miles north of Boulder, eight miles west of Longmont. Prevailing
winds? South and East. Tires will be burned in an antiquated cement kiln more
than 30 years old subject to regular "upsets."
Cemex's own tests,
conducted under ideal burn conditions, show that benzene emissions triple; arsenic,
cadmium, formaldehyde, lead, and chromium roughly double; mercury, nickel and
manganese are also up. Fines leveled on Cemex by the state — as large as
$280,000 in recent years for "multiple clean air violations" —
suggest that burn conditions are not always ideal. In an "upset"
event, all pollution monitoring goes out the window; who knows what goes up the
stack? Profits go to the world's third largest multinational cement
corporation, air pollution to the local community — all to be subsidized by Colorado
citizens.
When not fining Cemex
for clean air violations, the state will pay the company $225,000 yearly to
"recycle" tires by dumping them into the air upwind from Boulder and
Longmont.
What's wrong with
this picture?
Cemex says: Hey, all
good with us!
Boulder County air
quality control so far says: No problem.
Boulder County
commissioners: It's up to the state regulatory bureaus.
State regulatory
bureaus: It's a Boulder County matter.
So, Downwinders,
what's wrong with this picture? Is this how it's going to happen here?
Longmont
Letters to the Editor
- July 14
July 14, 2005
TOXIC FUMES
County leaders wink
at poison
Is it really possible
that Boulder residents will actually tolerate a massive tire-burning operation
to fire up its smoke-belching kiln on our border with Longmont? How could the
Boulder County commissioners collectively experience such an immense lapse in
judgment and critical thinking all at once, with regard to the collapsing Cemex
cement factory just 10 miles upwind from our fair city?
When my wife and
infant daughter moved here from San Francisco to recover after a near-fatal
liver injury, we thought that such a bizarre scenario would be all but
impossible. Environmental responsibility was among the leading quality-of-life
factors that drew us here and makes Boulder the proper headquarters for
Colorado's environmental movement. Or so we thought.
Longmont resident
John Martin's letter in the Sunday Camera (July 10) describing the
1-million-tire-per-year incineration plan should have every sane Boulder
resident in an uproar! Pouring this toxic spew into our skies and lungs, if it
were to happen, will prompt blockades, arrests, and a campaign to recall those
blundering Boulder County commissioners who voted in favor of this
"Jerseyfication" insanity. If need be, I will be on those picket
lines and barricades disrupting the flow of toxic Cemex fuel into our
environment. Come on, Boulder! Wake up and smell the arsenic!
Boulder
Letters to the Editor
- July 26
July 26, 2005
TIRE BURNING
This isn't recycling,
and it isn't progress
Advertisement
Cemex, the cement
plant east of Lyons, would like to burn tires as fuel. In response to community
opposition to this proposal, Cemex environmental manager Eric Hodek stated that
"at some point, (opponents) should stand behind and stand for
progress." Hodek implies that burning tires is somehow
"progress." But is it?
According to Cemex's
own tests, burning tires increases the levels of toxins in the air we breathe.
While Cemex says these increases aren't notable, communities must decide
whether ANY increases are acceptable. Shouldn't the goal be NO increase in
toxins? Wouldn't "progress" mean a cleaner environment rather than a
dirtier one?
Cemex often refers to
tire incineration as "recycling," yet true recycling yields new
products. For example, tires can be recycled into rubber asphalt, playground
matting, and landscaping mulch. Given Boulder's commitment to recycling
household and construction waste, is incinerating tires rather than truly
recycling them "progress"?
Additionally, burning
tires for fuel is wasteful because only a portion of energy is recovered: while
producing a pound of rubber requires 55,000 BTUs, burning tires only yields
14,000, while recycling them into granulated rubber takes only 1,000 BTUs,
preserving 54,000 BTUs. Is wasting energy that could be converted into useful
products "progress"?
While Cemex portrays
itself as ecologically solving the problem of tire stockpiles, their solution
takes tires out of circulation permanently (while sending toxins up the
smokestack). Currently over 30 states including Colorado support programs for
new uses of scrap tires. In fact, tire-recycling businesses predict tires will
be in short supply within 20 years. If burning tires eliminates potentially
useful resources, is that "progress"?
Boulder County must
decide what progress means for our community. Burning tires brings us one step
closer to health risks, resource mismanagement and environmental degradation.
Surely that's not progress.
Boulder
Letters to the Editor - Sept. 13
September 13, 2005
TIRE BURNING
We're losing out
by paying Cemex
I am writing in
response to the article "Judge hears arguments in tire burning", by
Todd Neff (Sept. 8). I would like to thank Mr. Neff; this article presents the
issue extremely well.
It is very
disturbing that John Lohr, the plant manager at Cemex, could make such a
blatantly false statement concerning the recycling of tires. By paying Cemex to
take the tires, our Colorado cities and schools are really losing out.
In 1998, the
Colorado General Assembly passed legislation that makes grant money available
to counties, municipalities, and school districts to purchase products that
contain recycled or reused Colorado waste tires. They are called DOLA grants
(http://www.dola.state.co.us/lgs/fa/WTP/Recycling/wtf-recycling.htm).
As Mr. Neff's
article states, JaiTire is one of the companies that provide products made from
chopped up Colorado tires. All the school districts in the state could use this
grant money to transition their playgrounds, running tracks, landscaping,
roadways, and walkways to rubber-based products. Imagine the water that could
be saved by using rubber-based mulch as a landscaping. It traps the water and
holds the moisture much better that wood-based mulch.
The Cemex and
Holcim cement plants have the capacity to take all the tires in Colorado, so
companies like JaiTire will not have Colorado tires to use, and the grant money
cannot be utilized by our cities and school districts. Furthermore, the Cemex
plant in Lyons is not a growing company. Their staff has changed
insignificantly in the last 10 years. Recycling companies like JaiTire can grow
and can hire people like scientists and machine operators.
We already have a
real recycling solution for the tires with companies that chop them up, like
JaiTire. We do not need to burn them and endure all the toxic waste that may be
caused by insufficient disposal conditions at Cemex's 30-year-old cement kiln.
Cemex may think they are recycling, but burning is disposal. Cement kilns are
not designed for waste disposal, incinerators are.
We do not need
either to recycle Colorado tires.
ANNE GEORGE
Longmont