Edward Ritter

Based on current findings, PFAS represent a substantial public health threat at very low levels. The production and use of PFAS should be severely restricted in PA where suitable alternative chemicals exist. Additionally, PFAS remediation strategies need to be explored to decontaminate potable water supplies in drinking water.

I understand there are some promising new technologies employing microbes to attack and break down PFAS. This technology is admittedly early stage, but should be explored using available federal and state funds.

There are available studies sponsored by the EPA and the NIH outlining toxicity threats.

As of September 3, PA has confirmed 540 cases across 36 counties. This represents a serious public health risk. I am concerned that vaccine hesitancy has been increased by suspect statements from federal HHS leadership. I would greatly prefer that these leaders correct the record and emphasize the significant health threat posed by reduced vaccination rates.

Infants too young to be vaccinated have been infected and there have been deaths due to measles - a disease that was considered eliminated in the not so distant past.

I feel it is reasonable to require current vaccinations for attendance in public schools, and for all those employed in healthcare. This would include the full slate of vaccines. Also, all these “required” vaccines should be available through all private insurance companies with $0 deductible. For those reliant on Medicaid or other public health programs, I feel the state / federal government should fully fund vaccination costs.

Sadly, I feel it would be counter-productive to attempt to force vaccinations beyond school attendance and employment restrictions noted above.

I am not prepared to answer this question. If elected, I would take any opportunity to discuss with health professionals and those in the agricultural community that have relevant first-hand knowledge.

Anything I would now offer in response would simply be a regurgitation of information found on Google searches, and not productive in assessing my scientific qualifications to serve as your legislator.

I was supportive of federal tax credits for solar and wind power installation before the current federal administration suspended these programs. I believe they should be re-instated. I understand that solar is not the low-cost producer of incremental electrical capacity in PA. Based on this, I would like to see our state energy portfolio prioritized in this order, top to bottom: solar, natural gas, geothermal, nuclear, wind, oil and coal.

It is likely that all feasible hydro plants are already operational - unless there are economic low-head hydro options to be employed in the Susquehanna watershed. I do not favor using eminent domain to displace agricultural / residential use as has been proposed at Cuff’s Run on the Susquehanna.

I have no understanding of the reported need for the number of hyper data centers that are reportedly under consideration. I am concerned about AI uses for Flock cameras and the data that was essentially stolen from public databases during DOGE’s tenure. The potential for misuse seems extreme! That said, it seems there is some legitimate need for data centers.

1. Electric demand / grid infrastructure: Require data centers to pay for electrical grid upgrades that they require to support new grid electrical demand. It is unfair for individual rate-payers to bear the costs of these upgrades.

2. Acoustic / noise pollution: Any gas-fired OR diesel generators should be required to use best available technology to reduce ambient noise with substantial acoustic shielding protecting persons, livestock and wildlife within a large radius. I do not know what that radius is; much study is needed to understand some reported negative effects on pollinators and livestock. Alongside these concerns, it would be prudent to locate data centers away from all residential areas, including schools, churches and daycare centers.

3. Water Usage: Water use for cooling servers should be closed loop to the greatest possible extent with no evaporative cooling used unless sited on a substantial surface water source such as the Susquehanna or Lake Erie. Drawing sub-surface water should be limited to potable water usage for staff use only - drinking and sanitary needs. There should be no risk to aquifer depletion from data centers.

4. Light pollution: Data centers should employ dark sky compatible lighting with light trespass less than one foot-candle at all property boundaries.