Regarding Tuesday, Dec. 17, Governor Ducey unveils.... story, my first response was why doesn't Governor Ducey just write a book like everyone else. At first glance I thought all those people's faces were part of the new signage! Never been so glad to see pant legs. Since I'm here, here's my real opinion. Arizona is NOT just the Grand Canyon State. We have/had the largest Ponderosa Pine Forest in the world. Before all the catastrophic fires of the last 19 years we "had."

I made the mistake of thinking that the Corporation Commissioners would have long enough memories to remember the catastrophic fires of the last 19 years and do something to protect our natural resources from any more of those catastrophic fires. The way to protect our forests is to use them for their intended purposes!

Trees grow, they are a self replacing fuel source. Biomass is a perfect use of the energy of the forest. Biomass in Snowflake and Joseph City is the perfect solution to Arizona's Power Production and Forest Protection Future. The Corporation Commissioners (CC) have proven themselves incapable of coming to logical conclusions about their duty to protect and to serve our environment and resources.

Governor Ducey needs to help the little kids in the CC to do some adult thinking. Our legislators and senators need to help the CC do some adult thinking. Time to do some parenting for power positions that don't have a clue what to do with their power! Help us governor and legislators. Don't let the CC bring Arizona down again. I don't want to have to buy a picture book to read about the world's largest Ponderosa Pine forest.

Twila Goodman Hall,

Taylor

(9) comments

2rusty

Good letter, Twila. It's a shame that so many of the decisions made for our natural resources are made by people whose idea of the great outdoors is a mall parking lot.

ronzim

Let’s see if I got this right: Arizona’s pine forests are being destroyed by the burning of carbon fuels; hence, the only logical way to save them is by cutting them down and burning them to produce even more carbon fuels???

Forests can be thought of as the lungs of the earth, serving a two-fold function in mitigating carbon. As deforestation occurs, sequestered carbon contained in the tree is released into the atmosphere; concurrently, those cut-down trees are no longer able to reabsorb C02 from the air.

More than one acre of forest is cleared every second on earth. This translates to 100,000 acres per day and more than 34 million acres per year -- a landmass the size of Greece. While this is partially mitigated by new growth, the net loss is equal to 18 million acres. Indonesia and Brazil are the third and fourth largest contributors to global warming. These two countries account for 60% of all deforestation in the world.

Science illiterates often claim that biomass is a low carbon or carbon-neutral fuel, meaning that carbon emitted by biomass burning won’t add to greenhouse gasses. But in fact, biomass-burning power plants emit 150% the CO2 of coal (yikes!!! Coal?) and 300 – 400% the CO2 of natural gas, per unit energy produced. And remember, these data do not even count the amount of other carbon fuels required to remove and transport the wood fuels to energy-producing facilities and actually burn them.

This author blurts out, “The way to protect our forests is to use them for their intended purposes!” This statement arrogates some perfect knowledge on the part of the author which the rest of us do not possess. Where is the source of what we must assume is the “intended purpose” of forests to provide fuel to further carbonize the atmosphere and wreck the planet?

Moreover, “Trees grow, they are a self replacing fuel source.” is blatantly false because it ignores the dreadful fact of human actions and pretends that only nature is at work. Even if biofuels were not the climate disaster they are, we would still be depleting the global forests by our actions.

Marc-V-Ridenour

I agree completely! We need to convert coal-burning plants to biomass ASAP!

Russ_in_WML

Cut it, mill it, sell it, build it, repeat. Oh and drill baby drill....

Russ_in_WML

BTW ron would be classified as one of the many environmentalist tards that love to place inunction to stop logging and thinning efforts in our forests. ron doesnt live in the White Mountains, and sits in his easy chair quarterbacking his save the planet - climate change (AKA Global Warming) agendas which are false. Ron claims if you disagree with his rhetoric, you are a "science illiterate", lol. Even NASA admits that climate change occurs because of changes in Earth’s solar orbit, and NOT because of SUVs and fossil fuels... or logging or thinning trees, or burning them for biomass energy.

Stay clear of people like ron. They love black forests.

ronzim

Russ: I have never been party to any legal action concerning our forests. I prefer science to litigation. Forest management is a complex matter and there is not just one approach which works. Rather, it is more of an all-hands-on- deck program where many factors enter into the equation for successful outcomes. Certainly, there is a roll to be played by logging and thinning operations; however, such efforts must be focused on forest health, and not on the profit-making proclivities of the timbering industry. Moreover, I have never labeled anyone as being “science-illiterate” based on their disagreement with me; but rather, based on their rejection of, or woeful knowledge about, science.

For the record, I lived, travelled, hiked, camped and fished the White Mountains for decades, and Patricia and I were homeowners there from 1979 to 2007. I now reside in Scottsdale because it was necessary to move here for her health care. At all events, the matters at issue here are not local, per se. They are merely localized phenomena which arise from global, self-inflicted calamities such as climate change and do not necessitate local residence in any particular place to be of concern.

The following is quoted directly from NASA’s web site in answer to the question, “Do changes in Earth’s solar orbit cause global warming?” “No. The Sun can influence the Earth’s climate, but it isn’t responsible for the warming trend we’ve seen over the past few decades… We know subtle changes in the Earth’s orbit around the Sun are responsible for the comings and goings of the ice ages. But the warming we’ve seen over the last few decades is too rapid to be linked to changes in Earth’s orbit, and too large to be caused by solar activity.

One of the “smoking guns” that tells us the Sun is not causing global warming comes from looking at the amount of the Sun’s energy that hits the top of the atmosphere. Since 1978, scientists have been tracking this using sensors on satellites, and what they tell us is that there has been no upward trend in the amount of the Sun’s energy reaching Earth.

A second smoking gun is that if the Sun were responsible for global warming, we would expect to see warming throughout all layers of the atmosphere, from the surface all the way up to the upper atmosphere (stratosphere). But what we actually see is warming at the surface and cooling in the stratosphere. This is consistent with the warming being caused by a build-up of heat-trapping gases near the surface of the Earth, and not by the Sun getting ‘hotter.’”

Those who deny these data (and science) or worse, those who post falsehoods about them, are those whom I label as “science illiterates”—not a pejorative term, by the way. It has nothing to do with my personal opinions or conclusions.

Russ_in_WML

Human caused climate change is a myth and a hoax as your "science" finds human activity has virtually zero impact on global temperatures. Human activity can account for no more than a .01 degrees C rise in global temps, meaning that ALL the human activity targeted by radical climate change hoaxers (combustion engines, airplanes that the climate changers like to ride on, diesel tractors, etc.) has no measurable impact on the temperature of the planet.

Human caused climate change is a hoax.

ronzim

Readers will take note, of course, that Russ is unable to cite any scientific sources for his claims. That is because they are bogus and reflect his continued denial of science and mathematics. His remarks have no value and deserve no credence, on that basis alone.

Russ_in_WML

The Left's climate change experts:

One was a bartender

The other is a high school drop out.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.