Opposition to Cape Wind not about view
Worcester Telegram & Gazette|Edward M. Kennedy|September 9, 2007
As my public statements make clear, I oppose the Cape Wind project because of the numerous unanswered questions about its impact on local fisheries, navigational safety and the local environment and economy. We are now facing the prospect of a private developer essentially seizing, on a no-bid basis, 25 square miles of public lands and waters. I believe that such a project should not go forward until national standards for off-shore wind farms are in place to protect coastal communities. Even though the Worcester Telegram & Gazette disagrees with me on this issue, it does a disservice to its readers when it ignores the detailed arguments I have made against proceeding with this project.
As my public statements make clear, I oppose the Cape Wind project because of the numerous unanswered questions about its impact on local fisheries, navigational safety and the local environment and economy. We are now facing the prospect of a private developer essentially seizing, on a no-bid basis, 25 square miles of public lands and waters. I believe that such a project should not go forward until national standards for off-shore wind farms are in place to protect coastal communities. Even though the Worcester Telegram & Gazette disagrees with me on this issue, it does a disservice to its readers when it ignores the detailed arguments I have made against proceeding with this project.
Opposition to Cape Wind not about view
I am writing to correct a serious misstatement in your editorial, "Attitudes changing on clean, sustainable energy" (Telegram & Gazette, Aug. 25). The editorial states, incorrectly and without basis, that I have voiced opposition to the proposed Cape Wind power plant in Nantucket Sound because "windmills on the horizon will spoil the view" from my home in Hyannis Port. I have never made such an argument, nor does it represent my position. Most disappointing, the editorial totally ignores the extensive record of my position laid out in statements, op-ed pieces and speeches I have given over the past several years. The claim that I am motivated by a concern about the view from my home is a falsehood …
... more [truncated due to possible copyright]Opposition to Cape Wind not about view
I am writing to correct a serious misstatement in your editorial, "Attitudes changing on clean, sustainable energy" (Telegram & Gazette, Aug. 25). The editorial states, incorrectly and without basis, that I have voiced opposition to the proposed Cape Wind power plant in Nantucket Sound because "windmills on the horizon will spoil the view" from my home in Hyannis Port. I have never made such an argument, nor does it represent my position. Most disappointing, the editorial totally ignores the extensive record of my position laid out in statements, op-ed pieces and speeches I have given over the past several years. The claim that I am motivated by a concern about the view from my home is a falsehood conjured up by the supporters of Cape Wind, and it serves only to help them evade an open and honest discussion of the merits of the project.
As my public statements make clear, I oppose the Cape Wind project because of the numerous unanswered questions about its impact on local fisheries, navigational safety and the local environment and economy. We are now facing the prospect of a private developer essentially seizing, on a no-bid basis, 25 square miles of public lands and waters. I believe that such a project should not go forward until national standards for off-shore wind farms are in place to protect coastal communities. Even though the Worcester Telegram & Gazette disagrees with me on this issue, it does a disservice to its readers when it ignores the detailed arguments I have made against proceeding with this project.
EDWARD M. KENNEDY
Senator
Washington, D.C.
Source:http://www.telegram.com/