BBE claims ludicrous

To the Editor:

I would like to respond to your recent article on the environmental impact of the proposed Oxford Casino in which I was quoted.

We are entering an age of diminishing fossil fuel resources and runaway climate change associated with the burning of those fuels. Furthermore the regional economy is dangerously dependent on a steady supply of those fuels for our food, domestic energy, and transportation needs. To hinge our local economy on a business that does nothing to respond to these critical issues, while in fact exacerbates them by relying on filling a parking lot with a thousand cars at a time and producing nothing real, is short sighted at the least and potentially dangerous in the long run.

Mr. Lally’s talk of renewable energy in future phases of construction while hopeful, is simply talk. There is certainly no guarantee that those phases will ever happen, especially if rising gasoline prices and competing casinos, such as those proposed for Lewiston and Biddeford, limit gambler visits.

To Mr. Robinson: To criticize the carbon footprint of an enterprise that will rely on tens of thousands of auto miles per day is NOT “a criticism of commerce in general.” I don’t think anyone in the local environmental and sustainability movements is opposed to commerce. We simply need to be developing locally-based commerce that will build community resilience and not increase our vulnerability to events outside our control, like the price of foreign oil.

You also say that manufacturing will not come back to the Oxford Hills. In case you didn’t realize, we still have a number of successful manufacturing operations here making everything from running shoes to precision machine parts, one of which is owned by one of your own investors. None of these businesses rely on thousands of customers driving tens of thousands of miles daily to buy their goods and services. There is no reason we couldn’t have more, although the ROI might not look as good as slot machine revenues.

Mr. Boldebook’s claim that there is not “another industry that we could put in this town with a smaller environmental negative impact footprint," is simply ludicrous. There are dozens of innovative businesses that could help reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and decrease overall carbon emissions. An eco-resort as outlined here before is an obvious alternative. Other obvious alternatives to casino gambling would involve renewable energy like manufacturing solar panels, wind generators, or compact florescent light bulbs. Adding value to our forest products or anything to do with re-localizing our food system would also be a step in the right direction. For instance, a cannery could utilize the area’s apple harvest, which is now mostly shipped out of state while we import apple juice from China. The opportunities for a green economy are limitless, but again, maybe not as lucrative as slot machines.

Obviously, the BBE investors are not going to build anything in this area in the foreseeable future besides a casino. If they truly care to limit environmental impact of their operation they will at least build the facility with as much locally manufactured materials as possible and to a certifiable green standard such as LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), offset the carbon footprint of both the operation as well as the increased auto traffic through purchasing carbon credits, and do everything they can to transport gamblers with mass transportation. I’m not holding my breath.

Scott Vlaun

Moose Pond Arts+Ecology

Otisfield