Thank you to Art Kruegger for raising the question about whether big wind turbines built on Vermont's mountaintops will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That is a question Vermonters for a Clean Environment has been attempting to answer for seven months, and we are still looking for answers.

There was a very interesting forum held at the West Rutland town hall on Oct. 22. Three speakers presented information that should cause anyone to think very hard about whether an industrial wind "farm" in their community is a good thing. Or whether it's even useful to meet Vermont's renewable energy goals.

Why would Vermont Community Wind Farm be willing to spend huge amounts of money on lawyers and experts only to find out that the wind does not blow enough to merit placement of wind towers? Why does the state of Vermont not have any siting standards for wind turbines?

Rutland Herald staff writer Gordon Dritschilo, who was not at the meeting in Ira on Aug. 26, wrote an article entitled "Ira wind supporters begin to stir publicly." From those who were there, it is reasonable to believe that this article was generated not from the facts in attendance, as the author was not there, nor were there that many supporters, but rather from the public relations effort of Jeff Wennberg and Vermont Community Wind Farm.

Plans for a wind farm in Ira and nearby towns received a boost on Wednesday when the Public Service Board approved the installation of wind-measuring towers on Herrick Mountain in Ira and Susie's Peak in Clarendon. Opposition to the project has been strong in Ira and Clarendon, where town officials and other residents have expressed fears that a wind farm would destroy the scenic beauty of their towns without yielding significant electric power or benefits for the environment. ...Vermont Community Wind Farm has been alerted to the sensitivity of residents in the region about potential for damage to the environment and the beauty of the landscape.

It has only been a few months since we first learned of the proposed industrial wind project being considered for the town of Ira and surrounding towns. At first, I really had no opinion about the project since I was totally unfamiliar about wind power. That is, until now.

There is no question that between the number and size of the proposed wind towers in Ira that it does raise questions of aesthetics. Thirty-three industrialized wind turbines between 400 and 500 feet in height in such a small town are an abomination and absurdity. The town and its townspeople do have the right to make an argument of aesthetics. But it is not the primary argument.

Living in Vermont is not like living in the rest of the east coast megalopolis that stretches from Washington, D.C., to Portland, Maine. The dominant identity of our state is found in and of the mountains. The past 40 years of citizen-legislative effort has been to preserve the breathtaking beauty of our home. ...Big wind turbines, and developers trying to force them onto mountaintops, result in uproar everywhere in Vermont.

The town of Ira is enveloped by this massive proposal, even after some recent scaling back by the developer. Opposition in Ira and west Clarendon to this project is extensive, vocal, persistent and persuasive. ...The Vermont Community Wind "Farm" is a bad idea for this already settled, beautiful, unique spot on Earth. Let's hope the developers, Herald editor, and other regional politicians come to this same conclusion and soon.

Most people's understanding of wind turbines, as those gathering signatures for the petition realized, is that of "closed" systems promoted decades ago. You had wind or sun; it collected the energy and stored it in batteries in your basement to be used as needed. Industrial wind turbines are, comparatively speaking, an "open" system whereby the energy is distributed immediately. This sounds wonderful except for one significant issue. The industrial wind turbine process is intermittent.

Today Vermont is once again facing a significant threat to its environment and one which, ironically, was specifically dismissed as essentially unimaginable 40 years ago in the commission's report. In section 3 of their recommendations, the commission states: "Generating plants for electrical energy do not differ appreciably from other manufacturing installations." They couldn't imagine back then wind turbines as a generator of electrical power, scattered about our ridgelines and mountains, standing over 400 feet tall and consuming hundreds, if not thousands, of acres.

We live in a place of few cash crops. One is the scenery that drives our tourism. The other thing we have is a few wild places where you can plant a foot, pivot like a hoop-star, and gaze at a landscape uncluttered by anything but the Milky Way. The value on that? Incalculable. Again, tourism, and the stuff of the soul. A whole bunch of far-seeing people walked both sides of the aisle to preserve the Connecticut Lakes Headwaters Tract for your grandchildren and mine, for all time, for jobs, recreational access, and the sheer value of the landscape itself. Good thing we did - just look all around at everything else.

The Green Mountain National Forest released the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Deerfield Wind Project in September and we will accept public comment until Friday. ...I look forward to more feedback on our DEIS. As the final information and opinions flow in, I know this is an important decision and it will weigh heavily on my mind.

In January 2007, Deerfield Wind and Iberdrola Renewables (formerly PPM Energy, a subsidiary of the Spanish energy company Iberdrola) applied for a Certificate of Public Good from the Vermont Public Service Board in order to construct a 34 megawatt (MW) wind turbine project in the Green Mountain National Forest in Readsboro and Searsburg. ...Wilmington voted at a town meeting in December 2007 to oppose the project based on concerns about wildlife habitat, aesthetics and lack of public benefit including the areas of property values and the impact on tourism.

How many miles of once scenic ridgelines will be dominated by towering industrial wind turbines replacing nuclear power? How will they be connected to the power transmission grid? What will be the visible, audible and environmental impacts of spinning blades and mountainside access roads and powerlines? Where will we get electricity when the wind doesn't blow, or blows so hard that turbines have to be stopped? ...Proponents of "clean energy" alternatives are pitching them against nuclear power instead of detailing their feasibilities, risks and impacts. Vermonters deserve much better information as we debate, plan and implement our energy future.

The statement that the project "is expected to begin moving forward soon" is incorrect, unless the reporter knows something I do not. The Public Service Board's decision is pending this fall but a number of interveners are currently fighting the project before the PSB, including Save Vermont Ridgelines. Should this project be approved, one of the largest bear habitats in Vermont will be destroyed. As this is the first wind project proposed on national forest land, it will pave the way for similar projects in other national forests, such as those currently proposed in Virginia, West Virginia, and Michigan.

While the proposed turbines are located in Searsburg and Readsboro, their impact on neighboring Wilmington would be substantial, particularly for residents living in the viewshed of the ridgeline. Should we not be compensated as well? What about the potential decline in the value of our real estate? ...Perhaps more important, aside from the monetary value, what about the decreased enjoyment of our property because of the turbines?

Here at home, the Vermont Supreme Court heard arguments about the only new wind project in Vermont with permits from the Public Service Board. The company, recently renamed FirstWind, won permission to erect 16 turbines on a ridgeline in Sheffield. The permit was appealed by local opponents organized as Ridge Protectors. As far as I can tell from an internet search, only the Barton Chronicle covered the session. ...The Chronicle story quotes Justice Reiber as asking the attorneys, "How could they measure economic benefit without the contracts?" Of course it takes two to tango, so who knows whether it's First Wind or the Vermont utilities that are reluctant to reach a power-sale deal. No telling when the Supreme Court will decide the appeal, but First Wind said recently it doesn't expect to start putting up the turbines (assuming the permit stands) this year.