Last month, the Magic Valley's regional Fish and Game supervisor, David Parrish, spoke his mind about how a proposed wind farm might injure wildlife. Parrish got demoted and transferred to Fish and Game's headquarters in Boise. But the real victim is the political independence of Idaho's wildlife agency and its staffers. ...He ran afoul of three Republican lawmakers - Rep. Stephen Hartgen of Twin Falls, who worked as a consultant on the project; Sen. Bert Brackett of Rogerson, whose nephew owns land on which part of the wind farm could be built; and Assistant House Republican Leader Scott Bedke of Oakley -- who complained to Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter.

Iberdrola of Spain, owner of Elk River, realized over $9.9 million in PTC allowances in 2007. Foreign companies are not regulated by the Kansas Corporation Commission. There are no state or federal regulations of any kind on WECS. Few Kansas counties have wind regulations. WECS will force consumers to pay for their electricity three times; to build the WECS, build conventional power as backup, and additional transmission lines to carry power from the WECS to the grid. WECS will not produce large economic benefits to a community as evidenced by records from Gray County (Montezuma), or Butler County (Elk River). Elk River has produced seven jobs. Most employees live outside the community.

Moreover, 340 Sheffield residents, taxpayers and voters have signed petitions against the proposed development. Copies are in the governor's office in Montpelier.

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.

What do wind developers look for in a county and its township before putting their cross hairs on them? ...I think they scope out elected officials to see if they have any moral or ethical values, using a proverb like "they will fall for anything, because they stand for nothing." They found Herkimer County. They came in under the cover of darkness, behind closed doors and found their scarecrows. A scarecrow is a landowner who signs a contract to have industrial wind turbine erected on their land for money, but they must sign a contract that says they cannot bring a suit against the developers due to any nuisances (ill-effects, though the developer says there are none) the turbines cause them or their family.

There should be great hesitation before swallowing the Chicken Little du jour. The good news is that the bad news about the climate is exaggerated.

Glenn Schleede's letter to the Editor of Time Magazine regarding its article "War of the Winds" appearing in Time's Oct 31, 2005 edition.

This article is available in 'documents'.

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.

Money spent on wind turbines from China will not jump-start an industry in America. The whole point of the federal government's stimulus program is to create jobs. In America. Unfortunately, that's not how it's working out, according to four U.S. senators who raise concerns that should not be ignored.

"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 certainly hope that the residents of Sheffield and Sutton continue to look and listen very carefully to what they are shown and told, ask every question that they can, and consider this plan before allowing it to go forward. Something tells me that UPC will make their money and be gone, leaving NEK residents to live for many years with something they may eventually regret. I truly hope I'm wrong.

Last week, Ian Bowles, state secretary of energy and environmental affairs, urged Congress to carefully plan and manage the development of offshore renewable energy projects. ...After urging Congress to develop a comprehensive regulatory regime to plan and manage offshore energy projects, Bowles, with a straight face, last week called for the speedy approval of deeply flawed offshore renewable energy regulations now before the Secretary of Interior.

While the process of formulating that policy is under way, all wind applications must be put on hold. Fenland is now on the tipping point of total rural landscape and skyline industrialisation. I say enough is enough.

Yes, I have strong opinions about the wind farm issue, not that I believe wind energy is good or bad, rather that the whole episode has been handled so wrongly. Thirteen months ago I had no opinion at all, then I attended a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing and could not believe the audacity of the supporters and participants toward those who objected. ...Then eleven months ago I was part of a group of residents from both Lancaster and Waddams townships that drafted a compromising plan for proper and safe zoning setbacks of wind turbines with property protection for neighboring residents. When that proposal was presented to the county's Plan Commission it was rejected with one board member making the comment "we don't owe these people anything,"

The big problem is that practically nobody understands how electricity works. It is pathetic to see and hear the amount of misinformation being bandied about concerning the ideas for replacing crude oil and coal. The electric co-ops have tried for years to tactfully inform us that we have to use coal. People are apparently not listening.

By banking heavily on wind power, Oregon and the Northwest are building their future comfort and prosperity on air, both figuratively and literally. It's a risky proposition, as indicated by a couple of announcements from the Bonneville Power Administration. ...The need for better forecasting illustrates the fickle nature of wind strength and direction. As amateur sailors know, the wind in Oregon can't be relied on to be either steady or strong for a very long time ahead.

In Ireland we too have wind farms, but they are always located away from local habitations. Wales should follow Ireland's lead and not let big business bully small communities into accepting eyesores that are far worse than the slag heaps that dotted the upper Afan valley up to the late '60s.

Add to this the damage to the tourism industry, and the whole concept of ranks of wind turbines across the roof and shores of Wales, producing intermittently and unpredictably amounts of electricity far less than developers lead us to expect, seems utterly foolish, especially when there are much less damaging ways to produce electricity (in which Wales is self-sufficient, in any case).

I drive a hybrid car, heat my home with biodiesel fuel, and understand the need for action on global warming. I can empathize with individuals and organizations anxious to just get going and start doing something. I draw the line, though, on supporting absolutely anything that comes along without due consideration of its effects. This is easy in this case, because the benefits of this proposal are hypothetical. The damage it will cause is not.

The Dartmouth Select Board just approved the permit to build two giant wind turbines off Chase Road in North Dartmouth. I believe this to be a mistake. ...the Select Board has made a very inappropriate decision to locate the two giant (328-foot) wind turbines in a beautiful rural area of Dartmouth. The scale of the turbines is not feasible for the site, being positioned just 600 feet from Chase Road.