Cape Wind At Center Of NPR Program Debate

Those were the central topics in a discussion last Thursday at Chatham Bars Inn, sponsored by the National Public Radio program Justice Talking.  “Wind Power: The Wave of the Future?” featured three nationally known experts who engaged in a spirited debate on the topic, as well as taking audience questions focusing on Cape Wind.  About 200 people attended the taping, a benefit for the Cape and Islands NPR stations.  The show will air the week of Aug. 7, and will be broadcast on the Cape NPR stations Aug. 12.

While wind power has a long history --- it’s been used to power ships for centuries, and was first used on land to grind grain in Persia in the seventh century --- but wasn’t seriously pursued in the United States until the 1980s, said Robert Righter, a research professor in history at Southern Methodist University and the author of “Wind Energy in America: A History.”

“It was really the result of the failure, in a way, of nuclear energy, or at least our questioning nuclear energy,” he told host Margot Adler.  “Up to that point there was absolutely no federal incentive to develop wind energy.”

That federal subsidy for development of wind energy is used as a tax shelter by investors and corporations, said Jerry Taylor, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute who specializes in federal and state energy policy and environmental protection.  All energy subsidies, including those on nuclear energy and oil, are nothing but “corporate welfare” and should be done away with. That would allow the market to decide which form of energy is most cost-efficient, he said.

But John Passacantando, executive director of Greenpeace USA and co-founder of the anti-global warming group Ozone Action, said the subsidy allows wind power developers to operate on a level playing field with other energy providers.  And although Taylor asserted that wind power will not reduce oil consumption by “a drop,” Passacantando said wind power would replace power generated by coal- and oil-burning plants and reduce carbon emissions, which contributes to global warming, causes 24,000 premature deaths a year and is increasing asthma rates.

“Wind is only part of the answer,” he said.  “To reduce global warming, it will take all [forms of renewable energy], including wind power.”

Taylor countered that wind power is not reliable, because it can only generate electricity when the wind is blowing.  Back-up power provided by traditional plants will still be needed when wind power isn’t producing.  “The grid has to be balanced by supply and demand, or there’s a blackout,” he said.  Wind power is most reliable when demand is lowest, at night and in the winter.

The mortality rate of birds, bats and other creatures killed by wind turbines has been an issue elsewhere, primarily in California, Adler said, asking the panelists if that should be a significant concern in citing wind farms.  She played an audio clip of Jack Clarke of Mass Audubon talking about the group’s support of the Cape Wind farm proposal.

While that should be part of the decision-making process in determining the best location for wind farms, modern turbines kill fewer birds than older ones, said Passacantando.  They are also responsible for fewer bird deaths than the common house cat.

“If you’re really worried about the birds, you should be rooting for the coyotes,” he said.

Taylor said it was “delicious” to hear Greenpeace siding with energy corporation and government regulators against environmentalists and citizens.  But Passacantando said the anti-Cape wind farm forces are fueled by rich shorefront property owners who believe their view will be impacted.  He said Greenpeace’s support is a “signal to the wind industry, a signal to investors, whether or not this is viable.”

“We wanted to see one go through,” he said. “This wind farm off Horseshoe Shoals is a sign of hope for the industry.”

Taylor countered that if shorefront property owners who oppose the wind farm, such as Senator Edward Kennedy, also support tax subsidies, the wind farm “should be put outside his compound.”

While the Cape Wind farm proposal is in some respects a NIMBY (not in my backyard) issue, “without NIMBYism, there wouldn’t have been an environmental movement,” noted Adler.

Love of place means not only not polluting your own backyard, but seeing the larger picture of not spoiling an entire ecosystem, said Passacantando.  “Cape Wind won’t stop sea level rise, but it’s part of the answer.”

“The same argument John is making can be made for any development,” countered Taylor.

Wind energy is “the fasting growing source of renewable energy in the world today,” said Righter.  “It’s probably the most benign way to create electricity that we have. But we’re going to have to be selective. We’re going to have to make compromises as to where we put wind turbines.”