To the editor:
I would like to state my agreement with George Bartunek’s Guest Spot last week about positioning the solar farm on the runway at the Enterprise Park at Calverton instead of destroying 30 acres of natural beauty and, at the same time, an important asset in climate control. The purpose of a solar farm is to produce energy without carbon dioxide emissions. Trees and grasses are key allies in the same cause because they naturally remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. It therefore seems ludicrous to cut down trees or dig up grasses to accommodate such a farm.
Shouldn’t we strive to maximize our efforts to control carbon dioxide emissions by positioning the solar panels on the runway — instead of covering it over with tons and tons of dirt — and simultaneously using nature’s own method of removing CO2 from the air we breathe? Trees are one of our greatest natural resources and their destruction should not be easily dismissed.
Why would anyone seriously suggest sacrificing one means of carbon dioxide control for another, when other feasible and sensible alternatives are available?
Mark Hobson, Riverhead