This is a letter of concern requesting commissionerʼs in both counties to enact a moratorium on Wind Turbines until more environmental, safety, and wildlife studies can be concluded. There are many issues regarding turbines that have not been adequately addressed. ...There are legitimate noise and health issues caused by wind turbines. This should be researched more before construction. We question why you are so urgent to bring Wind Energy Farms to our mountaintops before sufficient research and planning is concluded.

Perhaps some will remember that FSU received a much ballyhooed Maryland grant to study the performance of a wind and solar apparatus built several years ago on the campus. But where is the data showing how this project fared over the last 18 months? How much fuel did the campus save? What were the annual capacity factors? How much energy did the systems provide at peak demand times? Such data and more should have been presented so that the public would know how this equipment really performed. Now, thanks to the nation's taxpayers - the source of the DOE grant - here we go again, onward and upward in the name of energy du jour.

In response to the full-page wind turbine advertisements that appeared in recent editions of the Cumberland Times-News, the Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition states that it is important to know the facts about wind power and presumes to list several of their so-called facts. ...Harvesting timber is a valid silvicultural practice and a part of sound forest management. Before logging takes place, tracts of land are cruised (in layman's terms, meaning the amount of available timber for harvest is measured), and a contract is developed with the logger that provides for careful planning of roads, protection of water quality, and forest regeneration. ...Does this person take into account the roads that will have to be constructed and maintained to access the turbines for maintenance purposes? The massive areas of mountaintop that would have to be cleared and the roads that would have to be maintained to keep these turbines up and running would be cleared of forest, the soil would be compacted as a result of installation, and trees would not be able to grow productively on the site in the future.

A statement that was so important to so many citizens and that was brought up so many times throughout this meeting and supported by at least 99% of those in attendance, to preserve, protect, enhance and restore Maryland's natural resources for the wise use and enjoyment of all citizens. After all these are state lands in question and the caretakers are the Department of Natural Resources staff and this is their mission and objective statement to "protect, preserve, enhance, and restore for the wise use and enjoyment of all citizens." Was I the only one that heard this?

In announcing the new hearing, the commissioners referred to county wind energy legislation they enacted in 2002 “to regulate location and setback standards.” However, none should infer from this statement that this legislation had a high pubic purpose. Instead, the record will show the commissioners gutted height restrictions in place at the time, replacing them with “regulations” taken directly from the boilerplate of limited liability wind companies, allowing them virtually unfettered access to Allegany County’s landscape.

State senator Paul Pinksy (D-Prince George's) and delegate Tom Hucker (D-Montgomery) have filed a bill mandating state utilities enter into long term contracts to purchase wind generated power. ...If the Pinsky-Hucker bill becomes law, Google and it's investment partners will be the only winners and Maryland utility customers will be the losers.

First of all, the Board of County Commissioners will not "unlawfully seize property - period. ...Perhaps more important to an understanding of this issue is the reluctance that the county has had in using the power even for its own uses. It is important to note that it has been much more frequent that commissioners have directed staff to look for alternatives that would protect the property rights of the residents of Garrett County. The limited use speaks to this and represents those circumstances where there was no other option. With all of that said, and realizing that this is a power that the commissioners have, we have no expectation that it would ever be used.

Will Garrett County use its power of eminent domain to unlawfully seize private property in the event a citizen refuses to grant an easement of any kind to permit an industrial wind turbine company right of way for a cable crossing, access road, etc.? What is the county's position on the use of eminent domain as it relates to siting, permitting, or constructing anything to do with a 440-foot industrial wind turbine?

The governor's premise in the referenced article is absurd. How can the governor cap the cost to ratepayers at $2 per month? The answer is he can't. Actual costs associated with wind generation will be way higher for a number of reasons.

There is nothing in this bill or in any other Maryland law or regulation that will guarantee or limit how much a ratepayer will have to pay extra for offshore wind-generated energy. If this bill is passed and if a developer succeeds in building an offshore wind farm, don't be surprised if the surcharge exceeds $1.50 in 2012 dollars.

Illegal, unhealthful noise and devaluations of nearby property are only two of the many documented adverse consequences that flow out from massive wind installations. The Criterion project in particular will also devastate hundreds of acres of sensitive habitat, putting at risk much wildlife, some species of which are extremely vulnerable. The county commissioners endorsed this project last month without investigating what it would do to people and property here; this is a chilling take of how avarice overwhelms the common good. Pimping these beautiful mountains away for unsecured revenues represents values I neither understand nor respect.

At a recent public meeting, someone said I was opposed to electricity produced by coal, nuclear, and hydro-as well as wind. Moreover, I was reminded that I was off the mark by saying wind technology could not prevent new conventional power plants from being built to meet increasing demand, pointing to a recent Parade magazine article reporting the governor of Kansas was building a 1000MW wind facility, obviating the need for a new coal plant. Here's reality. ...

Like most Marylanders, I want electric power that is cheap and clean. However, I oppose offshore wind — because it is not cheap, and wind systems are not clean.

Again, US Wind Force spins their claims and half-truths in the April 14 article "US Wind Force Counters Commissioner's Concern." Mr. Friend's cites a West Virginia statewide opinion survey that 57 percent of individuals polled were pro-wind. At best, this survey is misleading, dubious and outdated. ...The uninformed opinion of pro-wind is diminishes when individuals learn that industrial wind turbines are planned on fragile mountain ridges.

Scenery or aesthetics management is a key element of any planning process that is committed to integrating human values into ecosystem management. The proposed wind farms do not fit into this process because they would bring green energy only in an environmentally destructive form. The wind farms would be the proverbial Trojan horse: Masqueraded as a green energy source, they would bring esthetic and environmental destruction.

I think your readers would be interested in knowing what wasn't said about Constellation Energy's agreement to purchase the Criterion wind project of Clipper Windpower, Inc. ("Wind, solar, 'farms' slated for 2 counties, Dec. 1). ...What the industry is not telling you is that to realize that scenario the wind would have to be blowing and capable of producing 50 percent their of their maximum output thoughout the year.

Turbines: It would take thousands of these clean-energy, landscape-marring machines to generate only a slice of the region's power needs.

Gov. Martin O'Malley is to announce his administration's long-awaited decision on Saturday in western Maryland about whether to allow wind farms in state forests. State officials won't say what the decision is in this long-running debate, which has divided environmentalists and drawn overflow crowds to public meetings in western Maryland and in Annapolis. ...Some think he may announce a "split decision," saying that wind turbines may be permitted on state lands but only if they pass strict environmental review. The head of the Maryland Energy Administration, Malcolm Woolf, will be with O'Malley for the announcement, according to an invitation e-mailed to one person by Natural Resources Secretary John Griffin. That makes some think O'Malley's likely to give a nudge of some sort to wind power ...But others take heart from O'Malley's choice of locations for his announcement ...

I have perused two binders prepared by Dan's Mountain Wind Force, LLC, a subsidiary of U.S. Wind Force which, along with several state and local officials, wanted to place 100 industrial wind turbines in our state forests and parks. After nearly 500 people showed up to protest, Gov. O'Malley changed his mind. Now U.S. Wind Force has renewed its interest in the path of least resistance, the Allegany County commissioners.

Having just returned from Annapolis, where I testified on Sen. George Edwards' six wind energy bills, and preparing for the hearing on Thursday, I have a number of questions/comments about the format. It is my understanding that citizen comments will be directed only to the Planning and Zoning Commission report, The Regulation and Management of Wind Energy Devices, A Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission of Allegany County, January 29, 2009 ("Report").