This 60-day notice of violations of the Endangered Species Act, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, and other laws, was filed with the U.S. Department of the Interior in connection with the proposed Cape Wind offshore wind energy facility. The detailed notice and supporting appendices explain fundamental failures of the Minerals Management Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Fish and Wildlife Service to adequately assess the risks to the natural environment and to protected and endangered species.

New South Wales Parliament's General Purpose Standing Committee No 5 released this report detailing recommendations for additional standards on siting of rural wind facilities, including 2 kilometre setbacks and improved noise modeling in order to protect neighboring properties. A statement by the Chairman of the Committee, as it appears in the report, is posted below. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the link(s) at the bottom of this page.

This impacting order by New York's Public Service Commission requires renewable energy developers to quantify and qualify whether their proposed project, if built, will displace other renewable energy and in what amounts. (Case Number 09-E-0497)

This Windaction.org presentation was given at the Indiana State Bar Association's 2009 Fall Utility Law seminar held in Michigan City, Indiana on Oct 16-17, 2009.

This appeal was filed by the Concerned Citizens to Save Roxbury ("CCSR") in response to the August 20, 2009 final order issued by Maine's Department of Environmental Protection granting approval for Record Hill Wind LLC to construct a 22-turbine wind energy facility in Roxbury, Maine. The aggrieved parties further request a public hearing on its appeal on the grounds that credible, conflicting medical and technical information regarding the licensing criterion and it is likely that a public hearing will assist the State in understanding the evidence.

A technical critique of Denmark's wind energy development and operation. A brief summary of the report appears below. The full report can be downloaded by clicking on the link at the bottom of this page.

In a book released today, Dr. John Etherington - former Reader in Ecology, Thomas Huxley Medallist at the Royal College of Science and former co-editor of the Journal of Ecology - argues that wind farm technology is a wholly counter-productive and undesirable response to the problems of climate change and electricity generation.

It's commonly believed that new wind power generation will displace coal and natural gas-fueled power plants and thereby avoid all their associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2). The benefits of these avoided emissions have become a major factor in wind developers gaining public support for their plans to site wind farms. These purported benefits also are the reason for the large subsidies governments have provided to offset wind's higher power production costs. Unfortunately, some of these environmental claims are built upon incorrect assumptions about how U.S. environmental regulations actually work and the type of generation a new wind project will displace. On any given power project, the benefits of avoided air emissions can be calculated as the simple difference between whether a designated project is built versus if the project is not built. This simple calculation has been incorrectly done by several renewable project developers and their consultants. Their mistakes have led them to incorrectly claim large air emission benefits from building new wind facilities.

Eric R. Glitzenstein of the public interest law firm Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal in Washington DC filed this letter with the U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar on behalf of a number of conservation and citizen groups concerned with the impact of poorly sited and constructed wind power projects on bat and bird populations and other wildlife resources.