ROBIN Ball (Letters, August 5) has been a victim of the wind-energy deceivers. Those sails in Germany were not producing any energy at all.

The state's incentive package includes a $17 million grant from a clean coal technology fund that was included in the Fiscal Year 2007 budget approved earlier this year. State officials must be aggressive in courting this project and not letting it get away. Our large coal reserves are among the state's selling points.

...coal power plants provide over a quarter of our energy in Massachusetts (and over half of our energy nationwide). So while researching alternative energy sources is important, cleaning up our existing plants will have a much bigger and more immediate effect on the environment.

...nuclear power emits no carbon dioxide and causes no air pollution. It can be argued that because of the large amount of base-load electricity it produces from a small amount of fuel, nuclear power is the only energy source that can make a real difference in the battle against global warming.

If the Government endorses a programme to build new nuclear generating plants, there are a number of measures that might be taken to improve the planning system. These measures could have implications for a number of forms of development.

Compared to conventional shallow water offshore wind farms that cost about $2 million per MW installed, the fixed-pile foundation Talisman project at $5.8 million per MW is almost three times as expensive and prohibitively uneconomical in the near term.

The debate was put into a proper perspective by the Times-Tribune newspaper in Scranton., which wrote: “America’s future as a world power and leading economy will be determined largely by its ability to meet the increasing demand for energy, while weaning itself from foreign oil and protecting the environment.

With proper oversight and operation, nuclear plants have been as safe as any other, and are infinitely cleaner and less polluting.

Recycling waste energy is cleaner than nuclear or clean coal, and more cost-effective than wind or solar.

Cheap hydrogen, the most viable low-carbon heat source, depends neither on nuclear power nor renewables - but on gas

It is not necessary to sacrifice the privilege of Massachusetts' magnificent coastline which sustains us. In allowing the destruction of an ecological sanctuary like Nantucket Sound we will fail in our commitment to uphold the public trust placed in us to protect our coastline for future generations.

CRITICS OF PROPOSED US offshore wind farms have recently lauded efforts to develop deep-water offshore wind energy technologies that would allow wind farms to be built far from shore. They suggest that advances in research and development are proceeding at such a rapid pace that thousands of wind turbines could soon be operating off the northeast coast without encroaching on anyone's view or posing any threat to the environment. Clarification about the current state and potential of deep-water offshore wind energy appears timely.

A Research Into the Achilles' Heel of the Wind Industry. With a wealth of examples and references, Dr. Etherington enlightens us on the principal weakness of windfarms: their erratic, unpredictable production of electricity. A modern economy cannot afford blackouts, so wind power production must be backed up 24h a day by conventional power, which substantially reduces the C02 savings

These examples show that offshore wind technology is advancing so rapidly that sacrificing Nantucket Sound for a project like the one currently being proposed is shortsighted. In the near future, the public could get the same benefits from building an offshore wind plant farther out to sea with far fewer negative impacts, and at the same time avoid being saddled with what may well become an obsolete technology.

Wind power is an idea that is appealing to the imagination. It sounds like a "free" source of energy that would be non-polluting and stable in cost. I am an optimist, and I love technology. If I thought for one moment that windmills would be a source of low cost energy, I would be building them. The reality is quite the contrary--wind power is wasteful of human and natural resources.

"These projects are very expensive and wouldn't happen without tax subsidies," he [Glenn Schleede] said. "Ordinary taxpayers are getting taken to the cleaners on this."

Local power generation could be achieved by installing tidal turbines in Auckland's regional harbours. Two harbours are superbly suited for this purpose, and tidal-current power generation is cost-effective and environmentally friendly.