LETTERS: Trees-for-solar is an odd trade

Regarding "Rooted out for solar plant" [News, Nov. 30], those paragons of environmentalism at BP, along with the Long Island Power Authority and Brookhaven National Laboratory, believe that clear-cutting 42,000 trees from 200 acres of pristine forest is a positive because "Generating electricity from solar cells instead of hydrocarbon fuels will prevent the production of 30,950 metric tons of carbon dioxide a year, while the carbon-dioxide-reducing capacity of the trees is just 842 metric tons a year."

That'll teach those pesky, inefficient trees a lesson. Guess what, guys and gals, trees do a lot more for the environment than just scrub CO2 from the air. They are part of an ecosystem that sustains other plant life, as well as animals, including insects, that are all part of the balance. Not only that, but they're nice to look at, too.

Nothing against progress here, but couldn't this project be built without decimating the beauty that makes Eastern Long Island the gem that it is?

Don't it always seem to go, you don't know what you've got 'til it's gone . . .

Bob Ocon

Wading River

First BP destroys the Gulf, and now we invite it to Long Island to destroy the pine barrens. Are we insane? This is like a starving man eating himself; he may satisfy his hunger but in the end he will cause his own death.

Surely there is a better way to accomplish environmental gain that does not entail environmental destruction on such a massive scale. This is a brutal attack on the resources nature has blessed us with and an irreplaceable loss of the little that is left of what once made our island so incredibly beautiful.

The fact that BP was allowed to do this without even an environmental impact study says that we are truly fools, ready to hand over to the company whatever it wants, no matter the cost to us.

Marie Brown

Baldwin

Let's see, if we divide the $300 million cost by $50,000 (the approximate cost to install a solar system in a home), we could have a total of 6,000 "solar" homes here on Long Island. And if you add in the federal and state rebates and tax incentives, that 6,000 could double. In the process we could have saved 42,000 trees.

And, if those solar panels and installers were all Long Island based, how many jobs would that create right here?

Stuart J. Pastrich

Dix Hills

A key fact omitted from your story was that the pine barrens are protected by state legislation to which BNL, as a federal facility, is not subject. As a result, the Pine Barrens Society had little leverage in the effort to balance preserving the forest with the need for alternative energy. Protecting additional forest and habitat was a hard-won battle.

The fact that the lab is not subject to the state Pine Barrens Act also means that BNL's mitigation efforts were strictly voluntary and were undertaken in appreciation of the dilemma.

Richard Amper

Riverhead

Editor's note: The writer is the executive director of the Pine Barrens Society.