Really? Is it clean? Wind power is not clean - it is a very expensive way of producing unreliable, intermittent electricity. It is considered by many a form of environmental vandalism that scars vast tracts of land, destroys scenery and view-sheds, and diminishes property values, all without replacing a single conventional power generation facility. It is a big ‘greenwash' scam being perpetrated on taxpayers by big corporations invested in oil, gas, and other forms of power generation who are not just harvesting our tax dollars, but also betting they will be able to raise the price of our electricity in a year of two. As far as powering 60,000 households, how many households would want to depend on the wind blowing 30 mph before they can cook dinner or turn on their air conditioning?

Regarding the industrial wind power project some would like to build next to my town and near my home, I belong to all three of the groups described by Paul Faber. I feel the siting of this project is entirely inappropriate, I have little faith in the ability of wind power to make any meaningful contribution to renewable energy. I am outraged by the devious and undemocratic process by which this project has been foisted on unsuspecting citizens. I have researched extensively the dangers of industrial wind energy, helped establish a website for a new coalition, and organized a community presentation. But all this has not been accomplished without tremendous personal cost; financial, professional, psychological and medical, and I am sure the same can be said for many others in our group.

On April 25, The Hays Daily News ran a fairly extensive news story on the proposed development of the industrial wind power generation plant west and southwest of Hays. That article stated that about 80 local families have expressed their opposition so far, but it did not say much about why there is this opposition. Let me try to explain very briefly some of the multiple sources of opposition. But please understand that this is an extremely brief explanation of each. More information is available at a public meeting being held tonight in the Fox Pavilion, starting at 7 p.m. and sponsored by the Ellis County Environmental Awareness Coalition. (Full disclosure: I am a member of this group.) I would say that the opposition can be divided into three groups, and these groups often overlap.

Project isn't all it's cracked up to be Fellow Ellis County citizens and Hays residents, please take the time to educate yourself about the proposed wind farm southwest of Hays. People don't seem to realize the impact that is going to have on our lives.

A more meaningful truth I have come to realize is that people, who accuse someone of being a NIMBY obstructionist, do so thinking they are illuminating some great character flaw in the recipient. That being the case, if the accusation has merit, it certainly is an indictment of humanity as a whole. The thing is, people do and should care about what affects them, and those close to them. When this accusation is leveled, it is done so because of an agenda, in this case, a strong financial incentive and a wish to discredit those expressing concern. In reality however, it is a natural and healthy reaction for those who must live with the consequences of an action to proceed with concern.

For every wind farm that is built, a more reliable energy source has to exist to back up the farm's maximum potential output. It's a vicious circle we ought not to be participating in.

Friends in Kansas have been fighting for the past 5 years to protect the world's last Tallgrass prairie ecosystem in the Flint Hills of Kansas from predators. The predators in this case are a bunch of US and foreign "wind farm" developers and lobbyists - who gain cooperation from receptive legislators, regulators and other government officials - plus some electric utility executives who don't have the fortitude to tell political leaders the truth about the real environmental, ecological, economic, scenic and property value costs of wind energy.

And, it is my educated guess that, in time, we will be left with an abandoned wind farm, scarring the hills to the north for all to see. Tourists certainly will scurry on through Kansas to avoid these. Landowners with dangerous towers on their land will want "someone to do something about it". No one wants to live near a wind farm...let alone an abandoned one.

The proposed wind farm west of Hays, Kansas (in western Kansas) will represent a nightmare development for everyone living in the area. It is not a project driven by local needs, nor will it represent a net benefit to the Hays community. It is a project driven by individual and corporate greed that will export both the power and the profits. It is a four-year old conspiracy by a handful of greedy landowners to make huge profits and saddle this community with an ecological catastrophe for perpetuity. Representing only a few families, all inter-related by marriage, these people have been planning and pushing for such a project for at least four years now and they appear about to realize their dream - at the expense of their neighbors and the environment of the Hays community.

There are only a few who are going to benefit from this upheaval of our land and landscape and those are the few landowners who have sold out to false claims. They will benefit financially. That’s the point. It’s straight downhill for the rest of us.

Facts now demonstrate that much of the information about wind energy distributed by the wind industry and its advocates simply isn't correct. The public, media and government officials have been misled. Accepting the misinformation and adopting policies based on it isn't in the best interest of electric customers, taxpayers, or the environment – even though “wind farms” are highly profitable for organizations that enjoy the huge tax breaks and subsidies. Income for landowners who lease land for turbines is often at the expense of their neighbors........Please keep in mind that electricity generated from wind has less real value than electricity generated from reliable (“dispatchable”) generating units that can be counted on to be produce electricity when it is needed to serve customers demand. (Electricity from wind is intermittent, volatile and unreliable and most likely to be available at times when it is not needed to meet high electricity demand.) If electricity generated in Kansas from wind energy were to bear anything near its true cost (and considering transmission costs discussed below) there is no realistic basis to believe that it would be competitive with electricity from reliable generating units located near population centers.

On Feb. 15, Larry Patton testified in opposition to HB 2842 (creating a "wind energy stimulus package"), and in opposition to RPS, eminent domain, and other incentives for wind development in the Flint Hills, before the House Utilities Committee.

Still, I weep for the industrial erosion of this wondrous region, even as land owners rejoice over this new use of their land.

Environmentalists fought against oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, fearing it would spoil one of the last pristine places and that the rigs and access roads would hurt caribou. These are very close to the arguments against filling places like the Flint Hills with turbines.

We would all like to find a clean, renewable answer to our energy needs. Wind turbines don’t provide that answer.

Manhattan (Kansas) benefits greatly from the scenic and intrinsic values of Flint Hills ranching landscapes and the from the stewardship of ranch landowners who struggle to preserve a way of life in the Flint Hills in Riley County and the two adjacent counties to the south and southeast.

All too often I hear an enthusiastic statement that wind generators will replace the power plant and become the singular source of our energy supply. Despite what the infrequent visitor to western Kansas may think, the wind does not always blow. Consumers want to turn on the television or do the wash at any time, illustrating that the demand for electricity is present even when the wind is not blowing.

Scientists compare the environmental importance of the tallgrass prairie to that of the rainforest. Its roots act as a carbon sink, cleansing the air of pollution. Its plants and limestone soils purify rainwater. Per acre, it provides more environmental benefits than any other ecosystem in North America.

With increasing resistance to wind turbine industrialization in Europe and other U.S. states, it makes no public policy sense to allow the Flint Hills to be ripped up while people throughout the world voice concern about the negative impact of industrial wind turbines on the general health and welfare of inhabitants.

There is less than 4% of native tallgrass prairie left in North America, and two-thirds of it is right here. Once you have experienced the spaciousness and exceptional beauty of open native grasslands, you know there is nothing in the world quite like it. These native grasslands are truly a national as well as a Kansas treasure.