Patricia Spindel, resident of Ontario Canada
We are concerned that we are about to become collateral damage in a poorly conceived wind-farm project with questionable returns for the sake of symbolic politics.
Paul Gaynor, President UPC/First Wind
I know there was an expectation [in Mars Hill] about what these were going to sound like. These are big structures and they do make sound.
They [industrial wind plants] make no economic sense and the cost is passed on to the consumer or taxpayer. If they are to proceed it can only be done where they don't do any damage.
Wind farms don't live up to the hype that they are an environmental saviour and a serious alternate energy source and the effect they can have on their neighbours are so serious it means they should not be allowed to get away with the exaggerated claims, their claims are fraudulent.
WIND farms are a "complete fraud'' that "only exist on taxpayer subsidies''.
Phil Carvalho, owner of Beaumont Wind
Beaumont Wind no longer recommends wind turbines for its residential customers because the economics don't support it. You have to go too high and spend too much money to get power. A more cost-effective turbine would have to be about 205 feet, and require a one-year wind study. We feel solar is better for residents.
There is also the need to overcome outdated perceptions about different forms of energy, such as “coal is dirty”, “nuclear power is unsafe” and wind and wave can “save the world” (without doing any environmental damage). These perceptions are political bunkum, and it is depressing to see the Liberal Democrats, and even the Conservatives, pandering to such misinformation for cheap gain.
Professor Saiful Islam
If we don’t develop an efficient way of storing energy from renewable sources like wind and solar power, then it will be the equivalent of a water company only supplying tap water when it’s raining.