"In order to guarantee reliable electricity supplies when wind farms produce little or no power,e.g. during periods of calm or storm-related shutdowns, traditional power station capacities must be available as a reserve. This means that wind farms can only replace traditional power station capacities to a limited degree."

Given these irregularities, it is not at all surprising that the pro votes won. But under fairer circumstances, the count might have been different.

This thing smells of resources from the Gaspé being used with the majority of profits heading out of the region at the speed of, in this case, electricity. It happened with the fish. It happened with the copper. It happened with the pulp and paper. Now it will happen with the wind.

43 wind turbins on a mountainside are by definition a scarring of Idaho's natural beauty, and one would think that before such a facility would be approved it would be brought before the public.

Industrialized wind is the current "gold rush" for big energy, and like every gold rush, we'll be left with ghost towns, broken promises and tainted landscapes. Why would we rape our vistas, kill migrating birds, disrupt wildlife habitat, create visual and noise pollution, and destroy our children's heritage without investigating other options? Why are we ignoring conservation? The answer is simple: follow the money.

Moreover, 340 Sheffield residents, taxpayers and voters have signed petitions against the proposed development. Copies are in the governor's office in Montpelier.

Opinion on health hazards of wind powered electricity generating turbines of the commercial variety being proposed in PEC is moving from the anecdotal domain to a deeper understanding of causality. However, it should be stated that many conclusions are disputed. There is however a significant and growing trend towards caution.

The Sheffield vote should be a wake-up call. Vermonters, speak up for your state, or lose its very essence to industrialized ridgelines.

So, on Thursday, they "came out of the woodwork" (as one news report described it) to spite themselves as well. They voted 120-93 in favor of UPC's passel of promises and their own delusions.

In this exclusive Q & A for RenewableEnergyAccess.com, Mr. Pratt offers some of his insight gained toward advancing renewable energy at both the state and national level. He articulates some current hurdles and possible solutions for renewable energy, gauges the industry's pulse, and charts the course ahead. "The increasing emphasis on biofuels may be one area of agreement which could help to build coalitions in red and blue states, including farmers and the agricultural sector, the automotive industry, environmentalists and renewable energy advocates."

On Thursday the seven states decided to proceed with this plan, which stands to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from their power plants by 10 percent by 2020.

In reality, nobody has a fog what will happen. This is Virtualia, not the UK. During the last year, global warming has been predicted to lead to wetter winters, drier winters, another ice age, blazing-hot Mediterranean summers killing thousands, greater biodiversity and less biodiversity

Let's just change the names of where the wind power companies want to put their towers from East Haven Mountain, Hardscrabble Mountain, Granby Mountain, Libby Hill, Norris Mountain and the Lowell Mountain Range, to Burke Mountain, Jay Peak, Mount Mansfield, Camel's Hump, Killington Mountain and Mount Equinox. How much of a possibility of municipal approval of scores of 400-foot wind towers on those ridge lines do you think the wind power companies would get? We suspect they would have two chances - slim and none.

Whether the vote, which is nonbinding, has any influence on the proposed project is another question....The town selectboard has said it will respect the decision. The wind developer has made no such commitment. And the Public Service Board, which would ultimately approve or reject the project, is not bound by a town vote, although it could take it into consideration.

Now, a sign in the center of Sheffield reads, "Real Vermonters Can't Be Bought." Perhaps the developers from Massachusetts had failed to realize this difference between the two states.

The process is under the control of the developers and, to a lesser extent, state bureaucrats. Developers, with big bucks, pull no stops to get what they want. Some state bureaucrats see only "more taxes," while others want to feed the unsatiable power desires of growing population bases, such as in Chittenden County. And few state officials care at all about "us poor, ignorant folks" in rural areas of Vermont.

If you have been trying to pin down the truth, like most of us, here are some of the things we know.

There are no answers about what happens when this project is at the end of its useful life and how it will be dismantled. If the answer "I don't know, but we will take care of it" was a home run, UPC would be batting 1,000.

The motivating force for wind development is simple! MONEY! The huge amounts of federal government incentives such as subsidies, accelerated depreciation and green energy credits add up to millions of dollars for the wind developer.

Henry David Thoreau put it so clearly: "In wildness is the preservation of the world."