In the ongoing debate on these pages regarding Cape Wind's proposal to install 130 towers in Nantucket Sound, facts often have taken a back seat to emotion. ...A key question is: How much will the project cost and what is the impact of the cost and the ongoing maintenance and security on the cost of power produced by the proposed Cape Wind turbines? ...The financial data are easily provided by the folks at Cape Wind. Instead, by withholding vital information about the project, Cape Wind has fostered an atmosphere of mistrust and encouraged circulation of misinformation by proponents and opponents alike. Let's have all the facts.

[T]he developer has offered a contribution to Burney to ensure the town profits from the dramatic change to its landscape. Ideas have included a community hall, a recreation district and town beautification. The developer in July outlined donations to a Burney community fund and an educational foundation ...It sounds promising, but the last-minute scramble doesn't instill confidence in the county's due diligence. And springing details at the Planning Commission meeting doesn't give the town time for a fully informed debate about the pros and cons.

People may not want them in their backyard, but some of us would love some closure on the wind turbine debate. This just in: Don't hold your breath. I'm reliably informed not to expect a public meeting about the turbines before the end of January. And that's in spite of pressure late last week from the Governor's Office in Tallahassee, no less.

Finding clean energy sources is a way of the future, and that means we need to seriously investigate opportunities - especially those in our own back yard. Most important is to make certain we do not compromise the environment as they are developed. ...Drilling for natural gas and the creation of wind farms can be economically beneficial to communities as well as landowners. Yet, there are legitimate environmental concerns that need to be addressed.

[H]unters may lose if wind developers have their way in Allegany and Garrett counties. In exchange for a few thousand dollars, the wind company can pre-empt landowners' rights to: allow hunting on their property, plant trees, extract sand and gravel, develop mineral rights, build additional outbuildings, etc. These landowner contracts subordinate the landowners' rights in favor of the wind developers. Leases, typically lasting a generation, prevent a landowner from complaining or taking action against the wind company because of noise, flicker, visual, vibrations, electric and radio frequency disturbances, and other side effects caused by the operation of the project. Hunters could lose their access even if the landowner is amenable to hunting.

Of the proposals under consideration, at least one would be off the coast of Ocean County, 18 miles from Long Beach Island. Although a study prepared for the BPU noted the impact of wind farms off the Jersey coast on the fishing and tourism industries would be temporary and relatively minimal, it indicated there was far greater sensitivity to the visual impact of wind farms in Ocean County than in Cape May and Atlantic counties. The BPU should take that into account. ...The projected loss of tourism revenue would drop off dramatically if wind farms were located 6 miles or more off the coast.

That Manawatu Standard has not taken a stance on whether MRP's wind farm application should be approved, but the outcome is too important to this region for the input of the people to be undermined in any way. The process must not only be fair, it must be seen to be fair. One of biggest battles MRP faced from the outset, whether it knew it or not, was public relations. After doing the dirty on the PNCC and the people it represents, that's one battle it now hasn't a hope of winning.

Wind power and other renewables have their place in the energy mix. But since the federal subsidies for wind farms are so large, it's unclear Texas needs to provide additional incentives. These funds could be better used to raise teacher salaries and otherwise upgrade the quality of public education across the state. Removing or reducing the state incentives for wind generators will not by itself solve the education crisis in Texas, but it would be a step in the right direction.

Much as I like the idea of using these nontraditional methods for power generation, we need a dose of facts when anyone comes forward to propose such changes in power supplies. For example, wind is certainly a non-carbon source, but it's not a non-polluter. ...we also need to keep the "law of unintended consequences" in mind. We need to add these sources to both fossil and nuclear plants and traditional generation systems, which work without wind or sunshine.

Public servants fail the people when they make deals with companies or individuals seeking approval for private projects. Such dealings create conflicts of interest for those directly involved, and the appearance of a conflict of interest for the entire town government. The state must investigate all such conflicts to see if wrongdoing occurred. Local officials must act in a manner beyond reproach by turning down all entreaties from private wind-turbine developers dangling lucrative lease deals in front of them. And the governor, state Legislature and attorney general must study this entire approval process so that localities have clear guidelines within which to operate.

If they are going to "talk the talk," it is time to "walk the walk." The foreign windmill promoters that are covering Montana like a swarm of locusts will be more than happy to sign you up for a giant industrial wind plant (subsidized by taxpayers) that you expect the rest of us to live with.

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 fate of Dave Parrish (the demoted Idaho Department of Fish and Game regional supervisor) somewhat parallels that of Don Quixote when the valorous knight attacked a windmill he mistook for a giant. ...With the support of Sen. Bert Brackett, R-Rogerson, Rep. Bedke picked up the phone and relayed to the governor's office that he thought Dave Parrish's remarks in his editorial to the Twin Falls Times-News were "inappropriate," came too early in the environmental process and violated Gov. Butch Otter's media policy.

You have heard what T. Boone Pickens says, now read what William Tucker says in his new book "Terrestrial Energy." ...Wind power only can be considered a supplement to and not a replacement for conventionally generated electricity. Some coal and gas-fired generators must be kept running continuously to balance supply and demand for electricity. Therefore, the savings of these fuels will be minimal. The power is free, but harvesting and delivering it to consumers will be expensive.

For a company that hopes to start construction on Virginia's first wind energy plant in the next few months, Highland New Wind Development appears to be dragging its heels. Recently, the state Department of Conservation and Recreation said it had not heard from the developer after requesting more information in its initial review. Last week, Virginia's Department of Historic Resources said it still awaits a view shed study, among other things, before it can offer recommendations for softening the impact of 400-foottowers on Highland County's tallest summit. In the last three months, updates from the developer to Highland's supervisors haven't yielded much new information. HNWD says it's still seeking investors, has not finalized a power purchase agreement, and cannot complete a final site plan because securing turbine equipment has become harder to do.

Wind farm opponents will suggest Mighty River's motives for asking Mr Mallard to take the decision away from the PNCC are a sinister ploy to subvert the democratic process. However, the company is more likely motivated by pragmatism. If the decision is left with the PNCC and the wind farm is approved, it will almost certainly be appealed to the Environment Court anyway. Mighty River would no doubt prefer to cut to the chase. The decision-making process shouldn't be unnecessarily convoluted, but the people of Palmerston North must be given the chance to have their say and, more importantly, they must be listened to.

However, wind energy is not the panacea that its proponents claim. The true costs of wind energy include more than the upfront capital of $3 million per windmill, leases and noise pollution. The fact is the wind does not blow continuously. Consequently, redundant generating capacity must come from sources such as coal, oil and natural gas. The costs of operating and maintaining these plants at less than capacity must be considered.

Wind turbines are the latest popular "answer" to our country's energy problems with talk of three-bladed monsters covering vast areas from Texas northward. T. Boone Pickens is spending millions to promote his vision of generating 20 percent of our energy from wind power (although he refuses to install any of the turbines on his own 120,000 acre ranch). ...The variability of wind power makes it very difficult for power companies to integrate wind power into their grid and still maintain the stable power supply required to avoid user-operating problems. This is a particularly severe problem if wind power is a large portion of the total power output.

A few months ago, the Dallas area experienced rolling brownouts when a front moved through and the wind died unexpectedly, causing a large amount of wind-generated power to die out. Power plants had to scramble to get their gas- and coal-fired generators up to speed to offset the lost power when the wind generators dropped off. That's a problem because generating stations and their equipment do not take drastic changes in load easily, especially the big coal-fired plants. Equipment has to warm up, and keeping them "on standby" requires energy, in addition to "wear and tear."

Shame on you, Gov. Butch Otter, and every other representative for Idaho (including the Fish and Game) who is letting our Fish and Game regional supervisor take this in the backside and then deny that you've even done anything wrong. Don't you advertise for people to move to Idaho because of its wildlife? Why do you, governor, do commercials with the backdrop of eagles, wildlife and green pastures? And why does the governor's office need to OK a government employee's opinion to the editor? This isn't just Fish and Game's problem.