Building wind farms and "protecting" the environment do not sit comfortably together, as she claims. When remnant native vegetation is in the way of turbine sites and their extensive associated infrastructure, wind power companies simply blast or bulldoze their way through it. (If you remain unconvinced, go and look for yourself at what is happening along the Waterloo Range).

Our governor is proposing emergency legislation mandating the installation of what would amount to thousands of wind turbines within three miles of our Maine coastline (L.D. 1810: An Act to Implement the Recommendations of the Governor's Ocean Energy Task Force). This has been referred to as "offshore" wind development. It is actually "near-shore" wind development that would displace fishermen and disturb the treasured views of Maine's fantastic coastline.

My grandmother, Agnes, lived in Monterey Township at the turn of the 20th century. Her favorite saying was, “a place for everything and everything in its place.” What do you think she would say of the placement of gigantic wind turbines on the hillsides and in the fields of her beautiful Monterey? ...would she say, “Go for it. It’s progress and it is for the good of the country?” I don't believe that she would.

Recently Gov. John Baldacci scoffed at the Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power when we asked him to issue a moratorium on industrial wind power projects until adequate noise regulations are implemented. The Bangor Daily News backed Baldacci in an editorial titled "Wind Ban Wrong." The Feb. 25 piece did acknowledge how right we are on several wind power issues, yet it still concluded that giving the state time would be wrong. We disagree with this, with the conclusion that noise is our primary consideration and with the common assumption that wind power's supposed benefits outweigh its costs.

Imagine how you would feel if turbines were built in your neighborhood and suddenly you were forced into an unimaginable situation? There are so many families in Maine that are overwhelmed trying to deal with problems related to wind farms because the Maine state noise regulations are outdated.

Imagine this scenario: The oil and gas industry launches an aggressive global drilling program with a new type of well. Thousands of these new wells, once operational, emit a noxious odor so offensive that many of the people living within a mile of them are kept awake at night. ...Now substitute wind for oil and gas and consider the noise complaints being lodged against wind projects around the world.

I am writing to dispel misinformation presented as fact by a representative of Farm Bureau Insurance to Goodhue County officials on the behalf of 484 families that belong to Goodhue County Farm Bureau. That letter is untrue and not endorsed by all those members. In fact, they are almost entirely unaware of this representation.

This letter was written last fall by one of more than a hundred people (to date) in Ontario who have reported adverse health effects from wind turbines. They are people who are genuinely suffering like many from around the world - Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Europe, United Kingdom and United States among other countries. All live near wind farms (within 2.5 kilometres) and share one thing in common: they have symptoms when they are in their homes and get better when they are away for a few hours. The wind farms are too close to residences.

Proponents of wind energy state that blade failures, fires and collapse are small in relation to the number of turbines and we should not consider those failures when siting. How does that protect abutting businesses and residents? I witnessed the process steamroll through to develop Port's standards — decreased from what the state models recommended for safe setbacks to property lines for ice throw, blade throw and collapse. Ours is only 150 feet, not even the minimum of 1x turbine height (Mass DOER recommends 1.5x).

Wind Energy Ordinance has opened up for 22 of these to be built inside the city limits. This means that not just one neighborhood will be affected, but neighborhoods from Quail Run to homes near Low Street could be impacted. Apparently, the city is poised to repeat the same mistake it did with the landfill. And with the adoption of the conditions of the GCA, it will be nearly powerless to protect the citizens from the negative effects of these huge towers.

The opponents to wind power are concerned with the pace at which its development is occurring in the state of Maine. Skepticism and caution are necessary anytime new industries and possibly lucrative business opportunities develop. There are big bucks and big questions now associated with wind power.

Certainly no one in South Dakota should be against wind power development, but the city and county also can't ignore concerns and questions raised by individuals who will live close to the modern-day version of the windmill. One or two turbines might not be an issue but what happens in months and years to come if more and more requests are made to allow individual wind turbines in residential areas?

The decision by the federal gvernment in 2007 to recognize the Mashpee Wampanoag as a historic Indian tribe documents tribal efforts to preserve their rights. The decision relies on extensive evidence, including census records from 1694 ...Gov. Deval Patrick is now pressing President Obama to break this promise and to ignore the federal rights of the Aquinnah and Mashpee Indian tribes.

To date the Ontario government has refused to either impose a moratorium or initiate any serious investigation into the adverse health effects on their own citizens. Instead they have introduced a Green Energy Act that will effectively allow the wind industry and its contractors to bypass already inadequate safeguards and legislation.

It's time for our representatives, both state and federal, to take a serious look at the possible health effects of wind turbines. It's possible reported problems are psychological, but we will not know conclusively until a reliable test is available. Yes, this will cost a lot of money, but it will be nothing compared to the price we will pay if we erect hundreds of turbines in the Upper Thumb and then find proof of a problem.

The intersection of health and renewable energy is a brand new area of medical inquiry that must be studied. To say that no further study of the issues is necessary as the AWEA-CANWEA authors did is shameful. The precautionary principle must be applied to projects that have the potential of worsening our lives. I and others will continue to work unceasingly on issues we believe in.

"The noise caused by wind farms can make some people ill", reported The Daily Telegraph. It said experts ... have acknowledged that the irritation caused by the noise can affect certain individuals. The story is based on an industry commissioned review of the current research on the possible health effects of wind turbine noise. It found that the sound (including subaudible sound) is not unique, and does not pose a risk to human health. Although the sound may cause ‘annoyance' for some people, this in itself is not an adverse health effect.

If industrial wind turbines installed in close proximity to human habitation result in sleep disturbance and stress, then it follows as surely as day follows night that wind turbines will, over the long term, result in these serious health effects and reduced quality of life. The question is, then, do they?

This isn't a "clash of cultures" between "longtime ranch families" and "wealthy newcomers," and it's pure fantasy to say that anti-wind sentiment in the oil and gas industry motivates opposition to industrialization of the Northern Laramie Range. ...Industrialization of these mountains will destroy the business opportunities and property value of an unsullied Western mountain landscape, and the nonmonetary value of open space, silence and a black sky at night.