With Byron voters rejecting Independence Wind's proposal for wind power, plans for 20 turbines in Roxbury are moving ahead, despite efforts from some townspeople to reverse approval of that project. Meanwhile, another company - First Wind - plans turbines for nearby Black Mountain and will hold a meeting Thursday night to provide information and, probably, to quell the inevitable protest. And, in a plot twist, Independence Wind has announced a "Power to the People" campaign. If the zoning needed for their turbines is approved and the turbines are built, they promise free electricity to all Roxbury residents.

Kathryn Swegart's letter concerned former Gov. Angus King's proposal to research the feasibility to build 1,000 wind turbines 26 miles off the coast of Maine. Just wondering, has King lost his mind? The cost of $15 billion is astronomical and with the rising costs of steel, copper for windings, not to mention the maintenance cost being 26 miles off the coast. This is just plain nuts. ...The United States produces more power from geothermal energy than solar and wind combined. This type of power is definitely under-utilized. Wind power is not the answer; any expert in the power generation field will tell you that it's too intermittent. It's time to get real about our energy concerns in this state and explore all options but leave the crackpot ideas on the table.

Roxbury Selectman Mark Touchette suggested visiting Mars Hill. My husband and I chose a neutral area 400 miles away. The 220-foot windmill towers we visited were overwhelming. It was a reality check. The swooshing and clanging of those industrial machines as they rotated were alarming. There was a persistent humming, strobe light-like and flickering shadows swirling around the cleared land that surrounded each turbine. ... Rob Gardiner of Independence Wind is now going door-to-door peddling his goods, trying to sway residents into his pockets of this big business, money-making venture.

Byron is doing the right thing about wind turbines, by wondering whether it wants to have them at all. It is a discussion more towns in Maine should start. ... Communities that wish to encourage wind power projects should say so. Those that will oppose one should say so too. There's little equity in Maine, which now has expedited reviews of wind projects for all its organized towns, to have more site-by-site fights. ...The irony is, by stopping a wind project, Byron is now showing the right way to approach one.

We all support clean energy - but what if its expectations are unmet? Maine has one windmill project up and running in Mars Hill, with its share of controversy. There are additional projects proposed in other sections of Maine. The governor's wind power task force has proposed at least 2,000 megawatts within seven years, and an additional 1,000 megawatts within five years after that. I was a proponent of clean energy - something must be done for our environment. But after much discussion, a lot of listening and some research, I now have questions that must be answered before I can support any wind power project in Maine.

I'm sorry to inform you that there is an institution in Maine that repeatedly makes promises to the public, but rarely fulfills them. This same entity is also prone to issuing statements containing exaggerated claims about its accomplishments. And when it comes to the financial benefits it bestows on the public, let's just say its veracity is questionable. The Legislature? Don't be silly. The Legislature's veracity isn't questionable. It's nonexistent. I'm talking about the wind-power industry.

By giving organized Maine expedited status for wind developments, the state's task force has invited developers to consider these areas for projects. It's an incentive, plain and simple, to know where planning reviews will have priority, and where they will not. Reaction in Byron indicates towns and cities won't take to this designation, even if they think alternative energies are necessary. The belief somewhere else, or some other energy technology, is more appropriate is just too strong. It was in Byron, and if a reputed repeal effort in Roxbury gains strength, there, too. And these are emblematic of the towns wind companies should target - rural, mountainous and with low populations, and therefore low impact. But it's a choice to accept wind power, as communities and commissions have myriad reasons to reject proposals.

The reason for "little real debate" about wind power is the result of the media's refusal to initiate discussion by supplying the information necessary for a debate ("Maine steps forward, into the wind," Feb. 16). Rather than providing the facts on the issue, we hear and read only the bellowing hype of unsubstantiated promises by the industry and its developers. ... The newspaper would better serve its readers by offering a look at the other side of this coin.

This week has been a particularly windy one for government regulators: The U.S. Minerals Management Service also declared that a wind farm proposed off Cape Cod in Massachusetts would have little lasting impact on wildlife, navigation or tourism. This ruling could clear the way for construction of a 130-turbine wind farm in Nantucket Sound, 5 miles from the nearest coastline. ...I say: Before we start defiling shorelines and mountaintops with manmade contraptions, let's spend more energy on conservation. Besides, getting through Wicopessett Passage in a kayak, or climbing to the top of Redington, is hard enough without having to duck beneath a spinning turbine.

Can Mainers promote renewable energy, protect natural resources and agree on sites for turbines? Yes -- but it would take some talking. We have a conflict today in Maine between renewable energy development and natural resource protection. Recent debates about several wind power proposals (Kibby, Reddington and Black Nubble mountains) have brought attention to differences between constituent groups. ...Does this mean every wind turbine proposed in adequate-wind areas should be permitted? No. Should most of them be? Perhaps, but today no one can reasonably make such a statement -- the threshold of ecological sensitivities has not been examined closely enough. The regulatory implications of a clear statement to this effect would obviously be enormous. Therefore, formulating the statement should occur only after a concerted consensus- building process among all groups in Maine with a stake in these issues.

Many people, including the editors of the Sentinel, think that the group of neighbors who oppose the wind turbine project in Freedom do so because they do not want it in their backyard. The issue is far more complicated than that. Here are some of the facts that the Sentinel should have researched if it were to write a legitimate editorial.

While Maine Audubon and the Appalachian Mountain Clubs, organizations I belong to, support this project, their own siting criteria do not. Potential soil damage, loss of backcountry recreational potential, habitat fragmentation, view impact and degradation of a valuable sub-alpine spruce-fir community are being ignored. This project creates a precedent of industrial development in delicate, protected habitats, and permanent degradation of a remote, undeveloped resource. All of Maine will feel the impact of industrializing a protected mountain zone.

Kibby Mountain is just far enough off the grid of our conciousness that we, including our environmental defender friends, can apparently afford to sacrifice it for a few extra watts of juice to power our washing machines, stereos and HDTVs. Ain't that nice? Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy don't it? Think I'm gonna pick a nice warm sunny late October day and make the drive up north to Kibby Mountain for a hike. Make it a wake of sorts. To pay last respects to a mountain that will soon cease to exist as we know it.

If we really need "green power" so badly then we might as well rebuild the Edwards Dam across the Kennebec River in Augusta. Sound absurd? Well it is no more absurd than promoting industrial wind-power development in the protected mountain areas of Maine. The Land Use Regulation Commission created mountain protection areas above 2,700 feet in 1972 for the simple reason that industrial development was not environmentally acceptable in the fragile alpine and subalpine areas of the Maine mountains.

The Friends of the Boundary Mountains are opposed to the TransCanada request to rezone Kibby Mountain and the Kibby Range from a "protected mountain zone" to a zone that permits industrial development, which would enable the construction of a 44-tower wind power project. FBM invites the public to attend an evening of information and a free spaghetti dinner at the Stratton-Eustis Community Building on Friday, July 20 at 6 p.m. The purpose of the dinner is to explain FBM's reasons for opposing this wind project.

"Maine is prepared to host thousands of megawatts of generation capacity from wind and biomass" to serve southern New England's "insatiable appetite for energy," Gov. John Baldacci wrote in a letter to the state's congressional delegation. "However, the development of these resources for New England must not harm Maine consumers or adversely impact our environment, which is the cornerstone of our economy," he wrote. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are working with Sen. Thune to ensure the intent of the amendment - to ensure wind power projects have access to transmission lines - is met without overruling the interests of host states and maybe even assuring that such states' ratepayers benefit as well.

I also reject the notion that this debate is about efforts to reduce global warming, and the opposition to the project is a return of NIMBYism (Not in My Backyard). The debate, in my mind, was and still is about process, and whether a small town is able and prepared to understand the need to treat all landowners fairly, and the importance of planning tools like ordinances to facilitate a fair process. By supporting the repeal as a way to circumvent accountability, CES may get the high ground on Beaver Ridge for its turbines, but in no way did CES take the high ground in serving all residents of Freedom with respect and fairness as it struggled to meet the needs of this project and to plan for appropriate development in the future.

If we focus on just the United States, with 300 million people and 100 quadrillion Btu of energy, the consumption per person jumps by a factor of five: 100 100-watt light bulbs. To be sure, this energy is not consumed in the form of electricity, but in the form of gasoline, coal, hydro power, etc. Yet many people project that this magnitude of energy consumption can be sustained by energy sources such as solar collectors on roofs, biofuel from switchgrass, and wind farms. These people simply can't do arithmetic.

As a tourist who visits the area, I notice what is transparent to most locals, and for me the skyline of Fairhaven is priceless. If the citizens of Fairhaven allow the wind power project to be built at the current proposed location, I believe you will be making a terrible mistake. The town may gain some money in taxes and offset some electrical energy costs, but it will not offset the loss in green space and, more importantly, the beauty of Fairhaven's historic charm.

It is also the truth that wind plants will have little or no effect in on carbon emissions. Wind power is so unreliable and uncontrollable. Conventional power plants have to stay online for backup. The truth is when coal-fired turbines are frequently and rapidly ramped up and down to compensate for wind variations they emit more CO2. The Electric Power Research Institute in California says, "It is technically incorrect to assume that wind energy will displace fossil generated power and decrease CO2 emissions on a kWh for kWh basis."