I must say that I’m wholly disappointed in your general reporting about the proposed Hanscom expansion. Your articles regurgitate what’s already been written, instead of addressing the impact to the town.
Fact: private jets are the most polluting form of travel per passenger in terms of their carbon footprint. We should be looking to reduce their use and certainly not increase it.
Fact: at least 49% (and likely more) of the flights out of Hanscom are for recreational and luxury travel.
Fact: the proposed plans would effectively nullify over 50% of the climate gains from all the installed solar power in town. Why spend money installing solar if the 1% in their private jets are laughing at us from 10,000 feet in the air?
Fact: the developers say the project will achieve net zero emissions by 2031. This is based only on a reduction in building emissions, with no inclusion of aviation greenhouse gas emissions.
Fact: at the Hanscom HFAC meeting, the developers presented an update to the plan they had submitted last February to MEPA. Not one of the presenters could cite any concrete benefits to the public of the expansion project when asked.
It’s no secret that private jet travel is a privilege for the few at the expense of the many. Or, as the late Leona Helmsley would say, commercial jet travel is for the “little people.” As the “little people,” isn’t it time we did something meaningful about climate change here in Concord? Why doesn’t The Bridge write an article extolling the benefits to the town of Concord of the proposed expansion? What about the benefits to the environment? It seems that as a town newspaper, you should start right there. After all, the little people in Concord are waiting.
Bonnie Polakoff
Whit’s End Road
