I just read the proposal in front of the Public Utilities Commission. Deepwater's "cheap" electricity is going to cost "the grid" 30 cents per kilowatt-hour to start and go to 56 cents. I don't know what this will translate to on a Block Island Power Company bill, but if you include BIPCo's fee, plus a transmission fee, plus the cost of the $50 million dollar cable to support the 30-megawatt power plant, I'm willing to bet none of us are going to like it.

Readers of The Journal's Oct. 21 front-page article "Environmentalists decry Black Pt. turbine plan" might be interested in hearing what these environmentalists really asked of Governor Carcieri. Our letter to the governor expressed concern about siting wind turbines and other renewable-energy projects on publicly owned lands absent a transparent public process for determining if and when it is appropriate to do so.

Is it right for the Town Council of New Shoreham to change the terms of a gift of land to the town, 31 years after the gift was made? This is the thrust of the public hearing on October 5, in reference to the windmill project proposed for the Transfer Station site. ...Numerous groups have bonded together to preserve more that 40 percent of this island. For those of you who enjoy these preserved areas, please realize that this kind of "spot zoning" sets a precedent that can put all of these, now public, areas in great danger. For those of you who may be thinking of donating land or are working toward the preservation and conservation of an area for a specific use - think hard - your dreams are in danger!

Last week, the New England Governors' Conference raised green fantasy to new heights with the release of its Renewable Energy Blueprint, which said the region "has a significant quantity of untapped renewable resources, on the order of over 10,000 MW combined of on-shore and off-shore wind power potential." Neither the report nor the news articles about it bothered to do the math. At 7 MW, New England would need 1,429 E-126s to tap that potential. Though the turbines likely would be clustered in "farms," that's an average of 238 per state, or more than one for each town in Connecticut. The cost would be $221 billion that the states don't have, though they might get a bulk-purchase discount of a billion or two.

Gov. Donald Carcieri seems determined to jump-start offshore wind power development. Not waiting for state experts and scientists to complete the process of picking the best ocean sites for turbines, he has had his Energy Office contract for the construction of a small number of wind turbines off Block Island. The main customers, it seems, will be island residents, who certainly appreciate the governor's interest in serving our needs. But still, it's fair to wonder if this contract is real business or just cheerleading?

I helped research the structural failure and noise aspects of wind turbine generators for the Health & Safety (H&S) subcommittee of the CREB (Committee for Renewable Energy for Barrington). CREB says it bases its recommendations only on objective data. If so, why did it selectively ignore research produced by its own H&S subcommittee?

I would not worry about a wind farm off of Block Island any time soon. The technology and cost of placing offshore wind turbines in deep (more than 75 feet) and unprotected (exposed to ocean swells) waters simply does not exist. Real wind developers, like Cape Wind Associates, know this and have not responded to Gov. Donald Carcieri's request for proposals. ...Why would a state publish an RFP for a project that is not possible even with the state-of-the-art for this technology? Great question! Wind energy is sexy ... and seductive ... and this clouds people's minds and makes politicians offer it as solution that is not economically feasible and investors (who, if they did their homework, should know better) pour money into companies.

The [New England] region's power system has had a long history of dependability, but electricity costs have been an issue for businesses and residents for decades. As the region plans ahead, New England's policymakers face a series of decisions that will have an abiding impact on our energy future. ...Economic, reliability and environmental goals are not always perfectly aligned when it comes to electricity generation and transmission. Whatever path policymakers choose to take will require trade-offs. How New England officials balance these sometimes conflicting goals will demonstrate our priorities, impact the regional economy and determine which objectives we can realistically achieve.

Gov. Carcieri's call for bids to develop a wind farm near Block Island, due in five weeks, came as a surprise to islanders, and apparently to most of Rhode Island and even, perhaps, the governor's administration. That's a little disturbing. Is this a bold attempt to speed progress toward the governor's alternative energy goal, or a lurch into unknown quicksand? Does the state intend to lay the legal and scientific foundation for a huge enterprise, or is it trusting corporations to do the right thing? ...One hopes the governor's abrupt call for bids does not foretell a willingness to bypass the scientific studies and plunge ahead. In the push for action, we must make sure it is the right action.

Although the approach is too late for projects that have already begun a federal review process, a dozen New England congressmen and senators have asked for help from the Department of Energy in coordinating a regional approach to siting liquefied natural gas facilities. Reps. Tom Allen and Mike Michaud have both signed on to this request, which makes sense for future energy projects.

Energy efficiency is by no means a permanent solution, but it should be a permanent part of the solution. Sensible energy use, combined with new power resources, is the only workable answer for New England.

...as the reality of the largest proposed offshore wind plant in the world comes into sharper focus, it becomes clear that 130 massive wind machines spread across 24 square miles of the sound threaten not only marine life and wildlife but also public safety.

But that is precisely where the debate begins. Do large wind power facilities actually reduce the effects of fossil fuel use? Opponents look at the evidence -- instead of the industry's sales material -- and find that they do not. Therefore even the most downplayed impact is not justified.

Renewable energy is supposed to be clean and green. It's supposed to assure us that when we turn on our lights or cool ourselves with air conditioners, we are not harming the environment.