Pedestrians in the road
I was pleased to read the May 27 article about new “Complete Streets” policies to “enable safe access for all users, regardless of … mode of transportation.” However, as these programs expand, communities would do well to consider implementing or enforcing ordinances regulating pedestrian behavior. Day after day, as I drive the side streets of my neighborhood on my way to work, I pass folks running, jogging or walking, sometimes two or more abreast, right in the auto lane of the road, next to a perfectly usable sidewalk.
If I drove on the sidewalk, I would expect serious consequences, but pedestrians routinely usurp with impunity the motorists’ part of the road. I understand that where no sidewalk exists and there’s no walkable shoulder, foot traffic must move into the road. But a plowed sidewalk in the winter or an available sidewalk at any time of the year should, I believe, be the prescribed route for pedestrians, to make the use of these “Complete Streets” equitable for all users.
Cheryl L. Spencer
Old Town
Young driver stickers
While I sympathize with the parents of Taylor Darveau on their loss of their daughter, I feel a decal for young new drivers is not in anyone’s best interest. By placing these decals on cars, you are now letting everyone know a young person is all alone.
Who will be the first teen to be terrorized by some 18-year-olds on a Friday night looking for some “fun”? Who will be the first girl to come back to her car at night to be raped or taken? Who will this save? How? Of the thousands of teens driving, this was one sad and tragic incident.
What happens when it’s time for the decal to come off the car? The facts are that the girls were in a car, going too fast and got in an accident. Tragic, yes. Could it have been preventable? Maybe.
When looking at this, we must look at the bigger picture and ask ourselves, what will it prevent and what will it cause?
Deborah Jewett-Chretien
Holden
Biomass misinformation
The Bangor Daily News has, yet again, allowed its newspaper to become a platform for an anti-science, fringe group. The organization called, interestingly enough, the Partnership for Public Integrity got a lot wrong in a May 28 column on biomass. The BDN covered a report released by this group more than a year ago accusing Madison Paper of emissions for a facility that was never built.
U.S. Sen. Angus King’s strong support for biomass energy is the same support by his Republican and Democratic colleagues in the Senate and the House by countless federal agencies and by President Barack Obama, who recently proclaimed his support in an April White House statement.
The column’s author, Mary Booth, signed a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency in February, characterizing biomass from wastes and residues as “truly low in carbon … which can result in lower net emissions compared to burning fossil fuels.” This is exactly what our industry does and, by her logic, should be encouraged. We purchase the “leftovers” that are not fit for sawmills or paper mills to use as fuel. If our industry used anything for fuel other than low-value materials, we would go out of business, especially given current low power prices.
King’s bill helps not only Maine and its declining forest industry; it also enables wider biomass use in other states with available resources. Using wood residues for power and heat is the very definition of renewable: The fuel already is part of the atmosphere, grows back and is putting to use materials that have no other value.
Bob Cleaves
President and CEO
Biomass Power Association
Portland