But the visibility issue had several Comstock-area residents questioning the project and its effect on the historic mining district. "This is a very special piece of real estate, and a very fragile piece of real estate," said Ron Reno, an archaeologist who lives in Silver City. "Right now, the landmark is officially listed as threatened. It can't absorb much else that alters the nature of this historical district." The question that is unanswered is just how visible these wind turbines will be from Virginia City.

The California Desert Coalition, which formed to oppose the proposal, took out a newspaper ad that urged residents to wear red to display their anger. Many did so, wearing red shirts, hats, scarves, and even tiny rubber bands to hold back their hair. They said they weren't against a quest for renewable energy but wanted it done without harm to their homes and the environment they hold dear. "We have a lot to protect here; we have a lot to fight for," said April Sall, a coalition leader. Russell Betts, a Desert Hot Springs city councilman, said one transmission route would economically harm the town by slicing through a proposed commercial zone. He suggested that Los Angeles officials are expecting desert residents to "absorb the cost of their operation."

The Resource Management Act states clearly in section six of ‘purposes and principles' that matters of national importance include the protection of historic heritage and outstanding natural features and landscapes from ‘inappropriate subdivision, use and development'. Both the consent authority's commissioned Landscape Architect Ben Espie and Planner David Whitney thought so, suggesting formally that Project Hayes should be declined. Barrister John Matthews, who chaired the Hearing panel and issued a dissenting decision recommending that Hayes be turned down, thought so too. Yet the All-of-Government submissions in support of Hayes evidently held sway, for Project Hayes was given consent in November 2007, with the decision ‘owned' by Central Otago District Council.

The idea of an energy efficient design is laudable. However, in this case, a countryside location is totally inappropriate and would be contrary to the locational policies of the development plan. "Notwithstanding the distinctive merits of the scheme, sustainability objectives would be best served by locating the development in an existing service centre. "This would be a better way of reducing the need to travel by placing the housing and employment closer to key services and amenities, as well as near to a labour pool. The countryside would also be protected from unrelated development."

When the turbines go up, it’s not just the scenery that suffers, it's the atmosphere too. Ed Douglas reveals the environmental costs of wind power

In the next two years, a Virginia company hopes to pump upward of $400 million into what could be Colorado's largest wind farm on private grazing land near Grover.