And turbines are still something of a novelty for most of us, so the "not in my backyard" mentality hasn't yet set in when it comes to wind farms. In fact, as we reported in the Energy Journal, groups of ranchers in eastern Wyoming -- seeing an opportunity to make some money without significantly disrupting their ag operations -- have banded together to market their properties to wind energy developers. That, of course, could change. As turbines begin to spring up in more sensitive, pristine spots, or closer to residential areas, the novelty could wear off quickly.

Well now you have gotten over the shock value of living next to an industrial wind turbine, maybe you are ready for more technology in your life? How about microwave towers for cell phone communications or emergency response teams or high definition TV and radio? Why not? Your once rural area is now an industrial park anyway, so what does a few more poles and towers matter now? And remember your driveway and small country road? Well it's now been widened and graded and 50' wide access roads carved away from it to provide clearways for giant tractor trailers. And the deer you used to enjoy so close to your home? Gone ...So what was your life once like back in those tranquil old days before your property area became an industrial wind energy site?

The concern over mountaintop mining is one that most people share. Extracting coal is dangerous, transporting coal is hard on the roads, and burning the coal to turn the turbines that generate the electricity is never going to be without some sort of air pollution. However, wind power predates coal, and wind is still far from a practical and reliable source of energy. If wind power were cheaper, electric companies would switch to it in a New York minute. Companies seek to keep costs down, and profits up. If Appalachian Power could replace its John Amos plant with a few windmills, it would. One problem is reliability. The wind is not constant on Earth. The dog days of summer could stop the wind, just as air conditioners are clicking into overdrive.

Being neither pro nor con on wind turbines, I would like some facts on them. How much power do they produce in megawatt hours? Will it take 20,000 of these structures to replace 20,000 megawatts of power in our coal fired grid? Is enough voltage produced to push this power over 100 miles? ... I have 23 years experience in power generation and have seen political fads come and go. We would all like to lower our energy costs. ...Wind turbines are a good idea, but are they practical or just another tax break for power companies?

A company has applied to the Federal Aviation Administration for permission to build 131 wind turbines along 18 miles of ridge line between Virginia and West Virginia. The 440-foot turbines would tower above national forest land in Shenandoah, Rockingham and Hardy counties. If approved, work on the project could start as early as 2010. That, of course, is a pretty big if. As attractive as the concept is - letting wind generate electricity instead of air-polluting coal or expensive Middle Eastern oil - the wind farm proposal will almost certainly trigger a battle royal between corporate interests and valley residents.

Thus, under the guise of environmental values, public policy in Virginia is promoting renewable energy. But under a different set of environmental values, we'll find that many of those projects are undesirable. To my way of thinking, energy conservation is the most pristine environmental policy of all -- avoid consuming the electricity in the first place. Of course, our current regulatory apparatus encourages Dominion and other electric utilities to pursue renewable energy sources, whatever the cost, because they can pass on the cost to rate payers. By contrast, power companies in Virginia only undercut their market when they invest in conservation measures. We're getting what we wished for, and we may not like it.

We keep getting told that wind power will help reduce carbon emissions and help combat global warming. Europe is littered with wind plants yet there are no reports of a single fossil fuel powered plant being closed as a result of wind power. Europe shows no evidence of any significant reduction in carbon emissions due to wind power. Denmark, a country with one of the largest numbers of wind turbines, is one of the worst offenders in terms of carbon output per capita. This failure to deliver carbon savings makes the negative impacts all more important to consider. The impacts from the Backbone Mountain facility have already destroyed numerous bats. That is but a single installation. ...West Virginia suffers enough with the coal mining industry destroying its mountains and endangering coal miners. That it should be subjected to further abuse from what amounts to nothing less than modern day "emperor's new clothing" is a terrible irony.

I find it odd that a state that has such a large percentage of revenue coming from tourism provided by persons who visit us to experience the beauty of our mountains would allow wind farms to exist here. Structure and support funding for skiing, spelunking, rafting, hunting, hiking, fishing, biking and other outdoor activities would much better fill the list of things to enhance our beautiful state - not a farm of minimally useful, 25 percent efficient, 400-plus foot towers with 100-foot blades spinning the bats and birds to oblivion at 180 plus miles-per-hour. Many West Virginia laws have been written to protect our fragile environment, but they don't seem to apply to catastrophic damage caused by wind farms.

But demand for electricity continues to increase by about 2 percent a year and could double in just 35 years. Simply to keep up with that level of demand would require construction of 72,391 2-megawatt turbines on 434,347 miles of ridges and hills annually. An even larger stumbling block is that wind energy cannot by itself replace any coal-fired power plant. Because wind energy is variable, it needs help from conventional power sources to keep energy levels even. Wind advocates claim cleaner-burning natural gas-fired units can handle the load, but those units emit carbon as well. There is a limited availability of natural gas and a lack of pipeline infrastructure in many areas where wind turbine development is projected. The basic problem with wind is that it cannot supply power on demand. ...This is no doubt troubling to those who have been led to believe that wind power is a worthwhile antidote to atmospheric carbon buildup, but the facts indicate otherwise. Each remedy proposed by wind advocates to compensate for the failings of wind technology requires more and more taxpayer-funded support, masking the true costs of letting wind energy loose on the grid.

Nedpower's continuing blundering puts them in strong contention as the World's Worst Wind Project. If it was not so sad it would be funny. Their grasp of a what a carbon neutral foot print is would make Al Gore cringe. Here's the easy "How to run a wind farm project like Nedpower" 20 point check list:

It isn’t over by a long shot, but residents of Pendleton County, W.Va., who banned together to argue against industrializing Jack Mountain have a lot to be proud of. In the course of nearly three years, the very grass roots group Friends of Beautiful Pendleton County gathered reams of research, raised thousands of dollars, and successfully made the point that Liberty Gap LLC and its parent company, U.S. Wind Force LLC, should not be allowed to ignore the potentially damaging effects their 50-megawatt wind utility could have on the environment and quality of life for residents here who have little to gain from the project — and much to lose.

The state of West Virginia needs to step in and demand answers from Nedpower. First, their destruction of five miles of state road needs to be paid for. Next clarification of the Spanish turbine purchase, how many turbines are they now planning to install? And then last but not least, the illegally sited turbines that are in breach of federal siting requirements - when will they be removed or relocated? Shell Oil executives should rightly be very nervous, and the state executives should be monitoring the situation to ensure the State is not left with a massive clean-up operation if Shell Oil pulls out aburptly.

In rejecting the application, the Commission cited specific deficiencies including (1) fundamental inadequacy of a required 5-mile radius map characterizing the surrounding area, (2) failure to address historical and cultural impacts, and (3) inadequate evidence regarding viewshed, noise and endangered bat species. The Order stated thatthese deficiencies alone provided sufficient grounds to reject the application. The Order also provided a long list of other areas where it was felt that the application was adequate.

Thanks for publishing Congressman Molohan's rebuttal to your article. He is right. I find it hard to believe that, after all the facts and truths about wind energy that have been revealed during the past 2-3 years, that somebody at HNN would approve the initial story that you published.

My basic position on wind energy in our state is that before decisions are made on building industrial turbines across our mountain ridges, we should have a good idea of what the costs as well as the benefits of those projects will be to West Virginians, both now and in the future. There can be honest disagreements about what those costs and benefits will be, and how they should be weighed. But I hope no one would disagree with the proposition that the decisions to be made on wind turbines - which raise the prospect of permanently altering the face of our State - should be made in a fully informed, considered way. To that end, I believe the immediate need is for there to be a serious, public discussion of wind energy in this State. Members of the news media can play an important part in this discussion, but only to the extent that they report the facts, study the issues carefully, and issue thoughtful commentaries -- rather than merely publishing industry talking points.

Wind developers also covet those ridge tops, but for different reasons. It's an opportunity for them to make money - risk-free and at taxpayer expense. While there's nothing unusual about businesses scrambling to take advantage of government handouts, the justifications of the wind developers for getting this special kind of treatment need a dose of informed public scrutiny. Indeed, industrial wind development in general could use a major reality check.

Rep. Alan Mollohan is proving refreshingly thoughtful and farsighted on one of the emerging issues facing West Virginia - the pros and cons of wind power. He makes a persuasive case that the state should regulate its newest energy industry now. On Tuesday, the 1st District congressman told a congressional subcommittee he is very concerned about the impact wind farms could have on the wildlife and natural beauty of the state......Mollohan is right. It's time to slow this heavily subsidized stampede.

Justice Benjamin said the Public Service Commission was "punting" its responsibilities in the permitting .......... We'd like to take the punting analogy one step further - not only did the PSC punt, it was a quick kick on third and long.

What I would like to propose is that people of good will, who are concerned with our economy and the future of the environment, meet together to balance the needs of industry and the basic realities of environmental concerns. The state could set up a commission or panel of all interested groups in an effort to reach a compromise and then give expert advice to our Legislature.