CatastropheCat
Well-known member
Mississippi Town Sues Biomass Firm Over Toxic Emissions Permit
A small Mississippi town is taking a UK-owned biomass firm to court after it was granted a permit to increase emissions at its wood pellet production plant. The Amite county facility, owned by Drax Biomass, has been cited for numerous environmental violations in the past, including releasing over 50% more pollutants than allowed.
Residents of Gloster have long complained about the health impacts of the plant's operations, citing symptoms such as dizziness, headaches, and respiratory problems. They say that increased emissions could exacerbate existing conditions like asthma and heart disease.
The community is suing Drax Biomass, alleging that the company has unlawfully exposed residents to excessive levels of chemicals and pollutants. The lawsuit claims that these emissions have not only harmed individuals but also contaminated homes and posed a risk to public health.
"This case is about holding a multibillion-dollar foreign corporation accountable for poisoning a small Mississippi community," said Letitia Johnson, an attorney representing the plaintiffs. "We will continue to fight for justice and ensure that our air is clean and safe."
The permit decision was made despite previous standards violations, including a $250,000 fine for releasing excessive pollutants last year. In 2020, Drax Biomass was fined $2.5 million for underestimating volatile organic compound outputs.
Drax's statement on the permit granted acknowledged that its technical staff and community leaders had provided recommendations, but the company could not comment further due to ongoing legal matters.
Meanwhile, environmental advocacy groups have expressed concern over the impact of Drax's manufacturing on Gloster's residents. A letter to Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves and the MDEQ permit board highlighted the urgent need for measures to ensure safe air quality in the community.
The case highlights the contentious issue of renewable energy subsidies for biomass production, which has been criticized by green groups and climate scientists as unsustainable due to the sourcing of wood used to manufacture pellets.
A small Mississippi town is taking a UK-owned biomass firm to court after it was granted a permit to increase emissions at its wood pellet production plant. The Amite county facility, owned by Drax Biomass, has been cited for numerous environmental violations in the past, including releasing over 50% more pollutants than allowed.
Residents of Gloster have long complained about the health impacts of the plant's operations, citing symptoms such as dizziness, headaches, and respiratory problems. They say that increased emissions could exacerbate existing conditions like asthma and heart disease.
The community is suing Drax Biomass, alleging that the company has unlawfully exposed residents to excessive levels of chemicals and pollutants. The lawsuit claims that these emissions have not only harmed individuals but also contaminated homes and posed a risk to public health.
"This case is about holding a multibillion-dollar foreign corporation accountable for poisoning a small Mississippi community," said Letitia Johnson, an attorney representing the plaintiffs. "We will continue to fight for justice and ensure that our air is clean and safe."
The permit decision was made despite previous standards violations, including a $250,000 fine for releasing excessive pollutants last year. In 2020, Drax Biomass was fined $2.5 million for underestimating volatile organic compound outputs.
Drax's statement on the permit granted acknowledged that its technical staff and community leaders had provided recommendations, but the company could not comment further due to ongoing legal matters.
Meanwhile, environmental advocacy groups have expressed concern over the impact of Drax's manufacturing on Gloster's residents. A letter to Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves and the MDEQ permit board highlighted the urgent need for measures to ensure safe air quality in the community.
The case highlights the contentious issue of renewable energy subsidies for biomass production, which has been criticized by green groups and climate scientists as unsustainable due to the sourcing of wood used to manufacture pellets.