[D]ue to the threats of global warming and skyrocketing oil and gas prices that have caught everyone's attention, all the parties have jumped on the green bandwagon with many promising a future where our dependence on fossil fuels and their harmful consequences to our environment will be a thing of the past. Such Utopian visions are commendable but the devil will be in the details for whoever forms the next government

Many of our small towns are being sold a bill of goods from the wind company charlatans that are backed by information from the AWEA, which also supplies the U.S. Department Energy its information. The U.S. taxpayer will pay for this in tax subsidies. This is why it is important for our citizens to attend informational presentations on wind being held throughout Jefferson, County.

If Environment Minister Trevor Mallard decides to call- in the consent application, it will be referred directly to a ministerially-appointed board of inquiry, or to the Environment Court. And it seems certain that Mr Mallard will indeed decide to call-in the application. Last month, after an editorial in this newspaper opined that to do so would undermine the democratic process, Mr Mallard quickly fired off a letter to the editor in response. He wanted to "correct the misinformation" and defend the process that would be applied if the decision was called in.

I find it amazing that the public is so uninformed on the topic of wind turbines. People think wind is the golden egg of green energy; in fact, turbine companies cannot exist as viable companies without government subsidies. ...Green energy is great, I'm all for it, but not at a cost that will put the average Canadian taxpayer in the poor house.

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.

Industrial wind turbines are being pushed by government and wind developers, doing their own studies, to promote their own interests. All of us who are in the line of fire from these gigantic industrial installations seem to be of little concern. Our rural countryside is threatened with industrial wind power installations with minimum setbacks from homes of only 400 meters.

[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.

It was noted that there are always costs that must be mitigated when producing power for our consumerist lifestyles. One glaring omission from the meagre list of negatives to wind power is the pollution of noise and its sequela. These generators are very noisy. Research into sound pollution is not complete and its effects on both human and wildlife must be considered. ...We must do a full environmental assessment on how the sound vibrations will affect life within its footprint, just as we would any other technology.

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.

Next week Grand Mananers will be invited to a public meeting to hear about a wind farm planned for the "back of the island-" the high western cliffs facing the Grand Manan Channel and the State of Maine. The proponent, First Wind of Newton, Massachusetts, acquired the rights to the site on property owned by the off-island Crabbe forestry company, from a fledgling New Brunswick company that has since disappeared from the scene. The First Wind plan is for 13 wind turbines (over 200 feet or 60 metres high), with the potential for another 50 if all goes well.