Departments



Articles

Less

Letters to the Editor: Complacency or Vigilance?
September 21st, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Freedom to Read is Basic
September 20th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Lutterloh Fund Grows
June 15th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Airport Safety
June 12th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Letter Praises McCain
May 26th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Grandma`s Boys
May 25th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor
May 24th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Letter to the Editor
May 21st, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Thank You from Vanessa Edmunds
March 19th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Thank You Note
March 16th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Historic Preservation, Individual Property Rights and Public Policy
February 4th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Response to Comp Plan Workshop
February 1st, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Thank You Note
January 30th, 2008

Letters to the Editor: Cedar Key Snow Angel Visits Montana
January 2nd, 2008

Letters to the Editor: "Letter to the Editor"
September 12th, 2007

More

Another View of the Pulp Mill Pipeline

Another View of the Pulp Mill Pipeline

Letters to the Editor

November 14, 2005

Cedar Key News

Dear Editor:

Howard Drew from Buckeye Technologies has argued that their plan for improving Fenholloway water quality will be benefical to the coastal ocean environment, by reducing pollutants (especially water color and nutrients) that have historically caused problems like seagrass dieoffs off the Fenholloway mouth. Part of that plan is a pipeline that would carry their effluent to the Fenholloway estuary, bypassing about 23 miles of the river. Concern has been raised that by dumping into the estuary rather than into the river upstream, the polluted water might reach the ocean in greater amounts or higher concentrations.

Mr. Drew is right in his claim that the main pollutants of concern to us here in Cedar Key (color, nutrients) will not be increased through transport of them by pipeline rather than the Fenholloway River channel. Those pollutants are not significantly reduced or permanently stored by being passed along such a short river, so it really does not matter to amounts reaching the estuary whether those amounts get there through a pipeline or a river channel. It is Buckeye's treatment improvements at source that will make the difference, not how the remaining pollution gets moved to the ocean. A few things like biochemical oxygen demand may be a bit higher in the estuary than they would if there were no pipeline, but those things are not ones that should directly concern people here.

Cleaning up the Fenholloway could create some great riverfront land development opportunities for Buckeye, and you might wonder whether a polluter ought to be allowed to benefit that way from investments in cleanup, but we really do not have good grounds for complaining that they are going to make matters worse in the coastal environment.

Carl Walters

Professor of Fisheries

University of British Columbia

(and Cedar Key winter resident

Click for printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

 

 

© 2013
Cedar Key News

cedarkeynews@gmail.com