Laserfiche WebLink
CHAPTER 6 <br /> ALTERNATIVES <br /> INTRODUCTION <br /> The four alternatives assessed in this section of the EIR include <br /> the following: 1) No Project; 2) Alternative Site Locations; <br /> 3) Alternative Sizes and Location; and 4) Alternative Fuel Sources. <br /> Among the classes of alternatives, the applicant paid the greatest atten-� <br /> tion to alternative sites. The criteria for the eventual siting and size <br /> decision pertained primarily to the economic and locational feasibility <br /> and traffic circulation. <br /> NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE <br /> Without the project, the approximately 20 acres that would have <br /> been taken out of production for the agricultural waste processing facil- <br /> ity would remain in active farming. In-field processing of agricultural <br /> wastes would still continue, realizing about one-tenth of the production <br /> capacity of the proposed project. At the same time, air quality impacts <br /> and potential energy loss associated with the burning of agricultural <br /> waste would persist, as would the problem of proper disposal of lubri- <br /> cating oils. <br /> ALTERNATIVE SITES q <br /> Near the outset of the project development period, the applicant <br /> did an extensive survey of five potential sites in the region (Figure <br /> 6.1) . All of the sites were within a fifteen mile radius of the selected <br /> site in order to be appropriately located in relation to the sources of <br /> the agricultural wastes. The selected site was chosen for its <br /> 6-1 <br /> 101-40.R3 4/10/89 <br />