[MassHistPres] Nantucket Sound Wind Farm

Thu Apr 29 09:45:38 EDT 2010

Attachment removed, available upon request to _bjdurk at aol.com_ 
(mailto:bjdurk at aol.com) 

Your key point, in my view, is that this historic precedent, Cape  Wind, is 
a complex issue.  "Sustainable", I define as safe, reliable  and affordable 
energy.  The international Peer Review Committee, consisting  of 6 world 
recognized experts in the wind industry, reviewed the Cape Wind  draft EIS.  
Their recommendation echoes  yours.  That a smaller project be constructed as 
they  consider offshore wind technology to be nascent.  Presently, all  
offshore projects are sinking in the UK, (article links  provided).  

The applicant, Cape Wind, has the benefit of special language inserted  in 
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that offers Cape Wind a "no bid" deal  "where 
a data tower exists", Nantucket Sound.  Cape Wind, Wind Management,  LLC, 
Wind Partners, LLC, EMI, UPC, IVPC have thusly not been vetted in  a 
competitive bidding process intended to provide protection to the  environment and 
interests of Nations'.  

In 2008, I learned that land-based wind projects were failing in  upstate 
New York.  And, that 94 U.S. citizens had filed a related  complaint with the 
DOJ under the Sherman Anti Trust Act claiming that an  international cartel 
was engaged in activities prohibited under the Act.   The complaint 
identified Cape Wind by name and shell corporations connected  to Cape Wind.  

I read the below Fox News article that revealed a familiar  problem.  I 
focused on its key points.  A  handful of  people control the wind sector.  
They build wind projects that fail to  produce energy, yet developers still 
collect public subsidies.  

FOX NEWS MAY 2009 (excerpts): Prosecutor Roberto  Scarpinato told the 
Financial Times:  
"This is the amazing thing -- that developers got public money to build  
wind farms that did not produce electricity," he said. 
Furthermore, locally-built wind farms are often bought up by multinational  
energy firms from other parts of Europe, none of which know the true 
identities  of the original owners. 
"A handful of people control the wind sector," said Scarpinato.  "Many 
companies exist, but it is the same people behind them." Eight arrests  have 
already been made." 
_http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519000,00.html_ 
(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519000,00.html)  
As a general contractor, I appreciate the importance of the bidding process 
 and would only hire qualified sub-contractors.  To whom do we entrust our  
most precious historic and cultural resources?  Is a question that our  
government did not ask by "no bid" deal that eliminated a bidding process  that 
should have screened these Limited Liability Corporations under the  Cape 
Wind umbrella. This is, after all, America's first and largest  offshore 
industrial construction project.   
I began to research shell corporations doing business in Italy as I saw a  
pattern between events Italy and the U.S.  Was Prosecutor Scarpinato  
correct?  Are there only a handful of people behind failing wind  projects? 
I have submitted my "discovery" to the U.S. Office of Inspector General  
Resident Agent in Charge, who in response, 9/22/2009, confirmed to me  that 
this information has been sent by him to the U.S. Department of  Justice.  
As a general contractor, I would not entrust my assets to these Limited  
Liability Corporations with expectation that their final product would  
qualify as safe, reliable and affordable energy.  

Most Respectfully, 

Barbara Durkin
Northboro, MA 
Supporting evidence:     
Attached:  Power Point by UPC, (a Cape Wind published partner), UPC  First 
Wind reveals connections to IVPC Managing Director arrested in  operation 
"Gone with the Wind" that to the best of my knowledge is  continuing.      
Body of evidence:  "Who are these guys, Cape Wind, EMI, UPC,  First Wind, 
IVPC?" (a compilation of news reports, legal filings and other  evidence):  
For those who prefer a summary, scroll to the bottom to  read the comments 
section:     
_http://bjdurk.newsvine.com/_news/2010/02/23/3941508-who-are-these-guys-cape
-wind-emi-upc-first-wind-ivpc_ 
(http://bjdurk.newsvine.com/_news/2010/02/23/3941508-who-are-these-guys-cape-wind-emi-upc-first-wind-ivpc)  
Senator Ted Kennedy May 9, 2006 Senate Floor statements on the Cape Wind  
"no bid" deal:   
_http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Science--Technology--and-Society/STS-011Fal
l-2007/EA0F41C3-92B7-48AD-A192-447B1CB25F0C/0/20_kennedy.pdf_ 
(http://ocw.mit.edu/NR/rdonlyres/Science--Technology--and-Society/STS-011Fall-2007/EA0F41C
3-92B7-48AD-A192-447B1CB25F0C/0/20_kennedy.pdf)  
April 2010 articles on the subject of sinking offshore wind turbines:  
"Everybody in the industry has this problem so all of  us are interested in 
solving it," a spokesman for Dong Energy said.  "This shows this is a young 
industry and there are experiences to learn  from."

_http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5587102/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5jby
51ay9pbmNvbWluZy9mcmVzaC1ibG93LWZvci13aW5kLWZhcm1zLWFzLXBvc3NpYmxlLWZsYXctaX
Mtc2NydXRpbmlzZWQtMTk0MjI3Ni5odG1s_ 
(http://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5587102/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5jby51ay9pbmNvbWluZy9mcmVzaC1ibG93LWZvci13aW
5kLWZhcm1zLWFzLXBvc3NpYmxlLWZsYXctaXMtc2NydXRpbmlzZWQtMTk0MjI3Ni5odG1s) 

_Sinking  turbines blow ill wind across offshore energy sector - Times 
Online_ 
(http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article7096654.ece)  

International Peer Review Committee Report on Cape Wind:

_http://www.mms.gov/offshore/PDFs/CWFiles/117.pdf_ 
(http://www.mms.gov/offshore/PDFs/CWFiles/117.pdf) 

In a message dated 4/28/2010 10:45:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
d-mountain at comcast.net writes:

I find the discussion  about "pure" preservation vs. "politics" a bit off 
putting.  Life in the  real world is a series of trade offs.  Whether we are 
interested in  preserving our history or our environment, there are many 
cases where the  issues are not black and white.  In my world, "politics" 
covers all the  issues for which there is not general agreement.  When there is 
not  general agreement, it is usually due to groups who differ on the 
relative  weights of the trade offs.  In the case of the Cape Wind project, we are  
dealing with a complex set of issues, both environmental and cultural.  I'm 
sure that the debate will go on, long after the courts finally  resolve the 
issue.  Let's at least admit that we are dealing with a  complex series of 
trade offs and that there is not a simple "right" answer.  The challenge in 
this case is to find the right balance between the  concern for preserving 
our natural and cultural resources and the concern for  providing the energy 
that our society wants, but in a sustainable manner.  Is there a middle 
ground or is it that the two sides are so far apart  that a smaller scale 
project is not an acceptable compromise?   

<plymptonhouse at mac.com><roberta_lane at nthp.org><ce923519-1db8-4cf0-931a-9ed8a
b23e62c at mac.com><jameswhadley at hotmail.com><veronica_mcclure at harvard.edu><rob
erta_lane at nthp.org>
</roberta_lane at nthp.org></veronica_mcclure at harvard.edu></jameswhadley at hotmai
l.com></ce923519-1db8-4cf0-931a-9ed8ab23e62c at mac.com></roberta_lane at nthp.org
></plymptonhouse at mac.com>

******************************
For  administrative questions regarding this list, please contact  
Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE  WHOLE LIST.
MassHistPres mailing  list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
********************************

In a message dated 4/28/2010 10:45:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
d-mountain at comcast.net writes:

I find  the discussion about "pure" preservation vs. "politics" a bit off 
putting.  Life in the real world is a series of trade offs.  Whether we are  
interested in preserving our history or our environment, there are many 
cases  where the issues are not black and white.  In my world, "politics" covers 
 all the issues for which there is not general agreement.  When there is  
not general agreement, it is usually due to groups who differ on the relative 
 weights of the trade offs.  In the case of the Cape Wind project, we are  
dealing with a complex set of issues, both environmental and cultural.  I'm 
sure that the debate will go on, long after the courts finally  resolve the 
issue.  Let's at least admit that we are dealing with a  complex series of 
trade offs and that there is not a simple "right" answer.  The challenge in 
this case is to find the right balance between the  concern for preserving 
our natural and cultural resources and the concern for  providing the energy 
that our society wants, but in a sustainable manner.  Is there a middle 
ground or is it that the two sides are so far apart  that a smaller scale project 
is not an acceptable compromise?   

<plymptonhouse at mac.com><roberta_lane at nthp.org><ce923519-1db8-4cf0-931a-9ed8a
b23e62c at mac.com><jameswhadley at hotmail.com><veronica_mcclure at harvard.edu><rob
erta_lane at nthp.org>
</roberta_lane at nthp.org></veronica_mcclure at harvard.edu></jameswhadley at hotmai
l.com></ce923519-1db8-4cf0-931a-9ed8ab23e62c at mac.com></roberta_lane at nthp.org
></plymptonhouse at mac.com>

******************************
For  administrative questions regarding this list, please contact  
Christopher.Skelly at state.ma.us directly.  PLEASE DO NOT "REPLY" TO THE  WHOLE LIST.
MassHistPres mailing  list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu
http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/listinfo/masshistpres
********************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/mailman/private/masshistpres/attachments/20100429/ef677583/attachment.htm>