''If you want to see how invasive a wind farm can be, just take a ride in Schuylkill County,'' he wrote. ''A ridge that stretches from Mahanoy City to Centralia, an area of the best hunting and passive recreational woods in that part of the county, has been ruined with these monstrosities.'' I had not visited that area for years, and the worst environmental damage I recalled was from anthracite mining. That, however, had a legitimate purpose; wind turbines are a scam that serves only to enrich those who peddle and build them.

An eight-page Deficiency Letter from DEP on March 17 cites unacceptable plans for restoration of disrupted streams, an undisclosed timber disturbance, improper labeling and scaling of the construction site drawing, inadequate documentation of approval by the Federal Aviation Administration, etc. Gamesa hasn't satisfactorily met its legal obligation to consult with the Pennsylvania Natural Diversity Inventory. This is especially egregious because of the presence of state and federally endangered Indiana bats at the site.

On March 17, the state Department of Environmental Protection rejected for a third time Gamesa Energy's plan to install industrialized wind turbines on Shaffer Mountain. What part of "no" doesn't Gamesa - and Berwind Corp. - understand? DEP's eight-page "Technical Deficiency Letter" was sent to Timothy Vought of Shaffer Mountain Wind LLC and lists questions that must be answered if the permit application is to be resubmitted.

A Gamesa representative recently claimed that its industrial wind plant sites are selected with ecological concerns in mind. If this is true, why was Gamesa not aware of the golden eagle transmitter study in the Alleghenies on going for more than a year? ...I believe that Gamesa uses research that only benefits its projects, not comprehensive studies.

The Wall Street Journal recently noted that increasing wind power to 20 percent in the next two decades alone would require a $2 trillion investment. Energy costs already strain household budgets, especially those of lower-income families and individuals. This year, U.S. households bringing home less than $50,000 a year - that is, half of households - will spend a quarter of their after-tax income on energy, double the percentage they spent in 2001.

The destruction of lush forests full of life will only encourage global warming. The state's new Carbon Management Advisory Group (CMAG) Report notes that loss of forests to development causes a one-time surge of greenhouse gas emissions and eliminates the forests' future ability to sequester carbon. ...The wind industries target small rural areas ...Maybe it would be more beneficial to install them in every mall parking lot and big cities where there are no trees, plenty of noise to drown them out, and where the people that really want them can see them and enjoy them as much as they think they do.

Now, there are people who think it may be a good idea to build wind turbines on the Kittatinny Ridge (Blue Mountain). On Monday, a letter to the editor from Donald Heintzelman of Zionsville talked about the first such proposal. Lower Towamensing Township, he noted, is considering a request to put windmills around the Blue Mountain Ski Area. Heintzelman said that would place them in the path of America's most spectacular migratory route for eagles, hawks and other raptors. "As an ornithologist involved in raptor migrations ... I am unconditionally opposed to the installation of all wind turbines on this internationally famous ... migration corridor," he wrote. I am unconditionally opposed to it for other reasons, as well.

To the best of my knowledge, this is the first proposal by any company to site wind turbines on the Kittatinny Ridge or Blue Mountain ...As an ornithologist involved in raptor migrations and hawk watching along the Kittatinny Ridge or Blue Mountain, and author of several books, I am unconditionally opposed to the installation of all wind turbines on this internationally famous, and vitally important, raptor migration corridor.

But before you go all wacky for wind power, certain opposition groups like the Industrial Wind Action Group and National Wind Watch want you to hear their side of the story. Their claims are more than just not-in-my-backyard, wet-blanket-complaints. They believe the wind energy industry is spinning lies along with the turbines, luring large public subsidies for a system that is, at best, secondary to fossil fuels.

"Symbolism aside, Potter and Tioga County mountain ridges may not be as impressive as Yosemite's El Capitan, or the Grand Tetons, but something very real would be sacrificed on the questionable altar of Renewable Energy for Profit. Potter and Tioga county mountain ridges are not just a backyard. They are a heritage and a legacy. And they are as good a place as any to make a stand." Preserve the beauty of our region, say no to industrial wind.

"We are living in a situation where the sounds penetrate our house. I'm losing sleep. They frequently let these turbines go at high speeds in the middle of the night. It's not uncommon for me to be woken up at 3 a.m. and not be able to get back to bed. I'm a physician, and I have to be at my best. I'm doing procedures on patients and it is not a fair situation for myself, for my patients, and not fair for the other residents who are affected by this. We're not the only ones affected; we have a petition with 40 names on it. ..."I'm not against putting in green energy. I'm not against wind turbines. What I am against is the irresponsible placement of these turbines in places that are not appropriate.

What's good for communications towers should be good for wind turbines, which can be 200 feet tall. ...Already the largest wind producer east of the Mississippi River, and with an ambitious goal of increasing wind power in the state 20-fold, Pennsylvania has a special obligation to ensure that each proposed wind farm is subject to environmental review. Such analysis must reject sites that are likely to lead to significant fatalities for birds and bats. The sooner such a scientifically based process is in place, the sooner the state will have a set of rules by which wind developers can proceed on projects with greater predictability.

The initial wave of windmill farms in Pennsylvania has focused on the state's famed ridge tops, where blowing winds are strongest and most frequent. This is an attempt to maximize the ability of individual windmills and farms to produce energy, which doubtless translates into the best ecnomic model. That is unitl you start counting the cost of litigation to deal with the growing opposition to clearing Pennsylvania's signature landscape and creating a "scenery" laced with windmills. And it likely doesn't hold up if you add up the lost forests and vegetation that is sacrificed in the process of clearing acres of trees for the turbines and the roads necessary to build and service them. Add in the carbon emissions associated with manufacturing, transporting and servicing windmills, and there is a carbon cost of some magnitude. We just don't know what that is and there is no evidence to indicate that the Rendell administration has done its homework to establish what that contribution is, or if it even wants to know.

After seeing the full page ad in your paper on Jan. 29 entitled Wind Opponent Myth No. 4 - "Wind Turbines are Very Noisy," I knew I had to respond. Basically, the Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition is saying you do not have to worry about noise from industrial wind turbines if they are coming to a ridge near you. Well, I am not sure how they conduct their decibel studies, but for all practical purposes, they mean absolutely nothing. You see, our home is over a half mile from one of those ridge-top industrial wind plants, and I am here to tell you the noise from those turbines has had a dramatic impact on the sanctity of our country home.

Audubon Pennsylvania and others concerned about bird habitat on the Susquehanna River are relieved that Norfolk Southern Corp. is no longer considering building a wind turbine at its Enola freight yard. It's particularly good news, they contend, for the state's only colony of great egrets on Wade Island north of Enola. ...This is a great example of why Pennsylvania needs a formal windmill-siting process that would include environmental and other research within a legal framework.

[P]urchasers of green energy will find that wind energy produced in Pennsylvania is much more expensive than wind produced in, say, Montana. This mainly has to do with the location of wind resources. Montana has more areas with a higher sustained four wind than Pennsylvania. Also, since Montana is less densely populated, there are fewer troubles in siting the windfarms. The drawback, obviously, is that Montana is very far away, and electricity grids lose power over long distances. However, some researchers in Europe claim to have found a solution: DC current.

The quarry is one operation with active quarrying being done on approximately 30 acres - self-contained. Would Gamesa's Wind Project be self-contained - I don't think so! Where the quarry is one operation - Gamesa would have 30 operations - for starters! Gamesa's 30 operations would be located in the "heart" of the Piney Run Wilderness Area, atop the many ridges where below, the exceptional value streams flow. The destruction from sight clearings, turbine installations, plus approximately 18 miles of interconnecting roads and transmission lines over the many ridge-tops would devastate not only the land area, but also the bird, fish, wildlife and eco-system of Shaffer Mountain.

In response to your recent article on wind farms in Tioga County, it was with a blatant disrespect for their own Subdivision and Land Development Ordnance, the Tioga County Planning Commission (TCPC) voted unanimously to give AES conditional preliminary approval for AES’ Armenia Mountain Wind Farm at their December 13th meeting. Several specific ordnances were ignored or purposely misapplied ...