Eco-terrorists and Alternative Energy

There is an interesting story coming out of Plainfield, CT. Reports in the local papers claim that eco-terrorists have executed a ‘chemical attack’ against the future sight of the Plainfield Renewable Energy (PRE) plant. The Norwich Bulletin reported that it had received a letter announcing the attack on the site, a company officer’s home and the home of a local supporter of the project. The Hartford Courant reported that State investigators had found trace amounts of a ‘chemical of concern’ at the site location.

Earth First Attack? 

The letter claims that Earth First was responsible for this ‘attack’. This has been questioned because of the letter’s reference to the Earth First Journal, a ‘reporting’ organization that is careful to remain separate from any organization ‘action’ since they are the public face of the ‘organization’. Referencing this publication has not been a signature of this group. Earth First Journal has denied any knowledge of any planned action in the Plainfield area or against the PRE in particular. If past history is any guide, a successful action by any of the loosely affiliated groups would have been reported on the Journal web site. 

Chemical Attack 

What is interesting in this case is the mode of attack. The letter claimed that the homes had been attacked with a mixture of “mercury and solvents”. Additionally, 1200 lbs of “the same pollution that PRE intends to dump on their neighbors” was supposedly buried at six locations on the future construction site; the letter provided the location of one of the sites. Those chemicals, according to the letter, include lead mercury, asbestos, toluene, benzene, perchloroethylene and creosote. None of these chemicals is acutely toxic, but all have well known long term health consequences associated with relatively low level exposures. 

Depending on the method of burial, directly poured into holes instead of in buried containers, the chemicals could pose a long term threat to drinking water in the area if the materials are not found and properly cleaned up. Chemicals buried in containers would be harder to find. According to the news reports there have been small amounts of ‘chemicals of concern’ found on the site. While the authorities currently refuse to identify the chemical found, one news report says it could be “petroleum-based product” which could describe some of the chemicals listed in the letter. 

The Connecticut DEP told newspapers that there was “not enough contamination to pose an immediate threat to public health, the environment, groundwater, drinking water or other natural resources”. 

My Analysis 

Well, the FBI eco-terrorism team is on the scene which is not surprising considering the ‘Earth First’ letter. If there actually is 1200 pounds of these materials poured into the ground on site it would certainly be a violation of EPA regulations. I don’t think that it would rise to the level of ‘terrorist attack’, but it would certainly be chargeable under anti-terrorism statutes. If there was an attack on the houses of company officials and supporters with mercury and solvent mixture, I think that the situation would certainly change to a terroristic attack. 

What I am not convinced of is the involvement of eco-terrorists or even ecological activists. The method of communications does not feel like an action by the Earth First ‘organization’, nor does it seem showy enough to be one of their actions. I am not familiar enough with the PRE project to really know how ecologically sound it may be, but I would expect that there are enough dirtier projects around to make this rather low on the priority list for such groups. 

What this sounds like to me is that there is someone local that has personal or financial reasons to oppose the construction of this project. The news reports indicate that there has been some opposition, but the normal ways of legally stopping the project seem to have been exhausted. This may be a last ditch attempt by a portion of that opposition to stop or delay the project. 

 What concerns me is that now that this ‘action’ is in play, it might seem like a usable technique by actual eco-terrorist groups. I can think of a number of ways that hazardous chemicals could be used in a public way to enforce an ecological message. That could have a disturbing effect on security issues at chemical distributor locations where these chemicals could be acquired in transportable quantities.