Michael Wood from Forestry Tasmania is wrong to suggest that opposition to wood-fired power stations is based on ideology rather than science. (Mercury Letters, December 12).
The most obvious reason for rejecting this particular proposal is that the wood to be used would be sourced from clearfelled mixed wet native forests.
A majority of Tasmanian people are against this form of native forest harvesting as it damages water catchments, greatly reduces habitat and biodiversity and degrades heritage values and scenic amenity.
Given this destruction it is incorrect to describe this model of wood-fired energy generation as renewable and it is simply not the best use for the forests.
The burning of the wood in a furnace will release virtually the same amount of carbon into the atmosphere as if it was burnt on the forest floor. In the carbon and water constrained economy of the future there will be no place for clearfelling deforestation or this technology.
It is inappropriate to waste taxpayers money investigating and trying to justify such schemes.
