General or Utah
Most people live in an area because they love it and here we have the McGuinty government expecting rural people to take one for the team because he knows what's best. The arrogance is appalling. How much longer are we going to hear that there is no impact on people's health and property values?
In defending their quest to erect wind turbines in scenic places, First Wind writes: "Fishermen can orient their boats away from the turbines or situate themselves in one of the many coves if views of the turbines become undesirable. Or they may recreate at other nearby lakes with fewer views of turbines, if preferred."
Are they serious? Can you think of a more grating arrogance?
If wind turbines are as green as wind developers profess them to be, the studies we want will show that. The wind industry's fear of having these very specific studies done seems proof positive that they are fully aware the results will not be in favour of wind energy.
The development of wind power along Vermont's ridgelines has divided Vermonters in a way development issues do not normally split environmentalists. Is Green Mountain Power's Kingdom Community Wind Project planned for Lowell Mountain really a needed investment in our local quest to confront climate change or will it unnecessarily despoil what is at the heart of what Vermonters cherish -- our scenic ridgelines?
The subsidies available for wind projects allow Duke to earn returns on equity of 17 to 22 percent.
In other words, for all of the bragging by the wind-industry proponents about the rapid growth in wind-generation capacity, the main reason that capacity is growing is that companies such as GE and Duke are able to goose their profits by putting up turbines so they can collect subsidies from taxpayers.
In a cynical manipulation of the well-meaning public, which is desperate for progress with renewable energy, gov. Peter Shumlin and GMP are justifying the destruction of the Lowell Mountains as "green" and "local." Shumlin argues that he is diversifying Vermont's energy portfolio, and that this mountain range must be sacrificed because Vermont Yankee is closing. He is giving Vermonters a false choice.
On the other side of that tape there is no quarter for Mother Nature. She's in the way, and so being reformed to suit the needs of the trucks that will climb the mountain with the bits of the machines that will be put together to, in their turn, put together the 21 turbines.
Energy rates continue to climb. Xcel customers have endured a 21 percent rate increase over the last six years with another 20 predicted over the next six, thus reducing consumers' purchasing power. Continuing the trend of budget shortfall, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities projects Colorado's 2012 budget shortfall to be $450 million, 6.2 percent of the state's general fund.
Eolian has yet to produce a single watt of electricity anywhere. They admit to "not having done a good enough job" of clearly presenting their project to the town. Two of their mailings "overlooked" dozens of residents who live around Mt. Waldo and would be most affected by these massive 450-foot turbines. Heck, they can't even get the name of the local store right.
It was pretty clear all along that building a wind farm in the waters of Lake Erie or Lake Ontario would be way too expensive.
What we didn't know until last week was that it wouldn't just be way too expensive: It would have been a boondoggle of epic proportions.
If the criteria were objective or the environmental protection standards were consistent, then either the towers would have to go or the cross could clearly stay ...Instead Vermont has created a regulatory climate in which the aesthetic impact of a project is decided by political favor.
A decommissioning plan needs to be included in the revised county ordinance to protect the property owners and the county in the event that the wind company breaches its contract and abandons the wind farm, leaving the mess and the liability with the residents of Lee County.
I was disturbed, but not surprised, to read Rep. Stacey Fitts' letter in the Sept. 14 edition of The Times Record.
Mr. Fitts wrote, "Wind power has been a real boost to Maine's economy: $1 billion of investment..."
No matter how high-minded, well-intentioned or politically correct wind power is, the siting of such a massive, commercial turbine on this historic property is legally and morally wrong, and a gross misuse of invaluable, limited shoreline open space in the small and dense city of Salem.
Clearly the turbine is too high, too wide, too loud and too dangerous for this small island park.
The homeowners who are expected to host the power lines do not wish them, nor the access road. The homeowners and business owners of Ferndale just showed they don't want the project either.
Shell Oil representatives went around to the media pitching their deal. Why? Because they know they don't have community support in Ferndale nor much support in Rio Dell.
Robert Bryce notes for National Review Online that on an "unspeakably hot" Aug. 24 in Texas, 10,135 megawatts of wind-generation capacity supplied just 880 megawatts of power "when electricity was needed the most" -- in the afternoon, when wind subsides while heat and electricity demand rise.
Without Kessel, the offshore wind farm's leading advocate, to shepherd it through the Power Authority, the project quickly lost momentum, just like a spinning turbine when the wind suddenly turns calm. And there were plenty of forces pushing against the project.
Leaving aside the questionable economics, inefficiency and massive tax subsidies required to induce investment in wind turbines, there are several other concrete -- and local -- reasons why the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors should vote against an ordinance allowing and encouraging industrial-scale wind turbines.
Alas, despite all the practical evidence to show why wind power is one of the greatest follies of our age, those who rule our lives, from our own politicians and officials here in Britain to those above them in Brussels, seem quite impervious to the facts.
Some of you may be aware that the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin appointed a committee of experts to create statewide wind siting rules, but may not know the majority of that committee benefits financially from the wind industry.