[MassHistPres] Fwd: Wind Farms

Sat May 1 01:53:39 EDT 2010

I understand the strong desire to do the right thing for the future of our environment; perhaps the wind farms are a means to this end and perhaps not.

What concerns me is that this project will permanently interrupt an area of natural beauty.  Does this tradeoff open the door for windmills to be put anywhere they can be fit in. Who's to say what area is acceptable or not acceptable?  If we did away with most billboards on the highways as a respect to the natural environment why would we want to look at 130 steel windmills and a transmission building from a beach.

I am quite skeptical about a project that, as I read in the newspaper, has not released its costs and that the costs will be paid in large part by the taxpayers and consumers of National Grid.  How can anyone really latch onto this if the costs, the burden of those costs and the benefits have not been clearly explained and beyond that how can proponents of this project expect support without answering these basic questions.  The past few years have had enough stories about poor fiscal management;  the big dig comes to the top of the list.  Has it been explained just what the profit formula is for the developer of this project?  At the risk of sounding cynical: in this era of special interests buying favorable legislation I can only hope that that has not happened directly or indirectly with this project.  Finally we should  not lose sight that this project is a business. 

I hope we are not being led by our emotions for a clean environment.

Thanks for your time.

Brian Badrigian 

From: Bjdurk at aol.com
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 23:47:59 -0400
To: beb100acrewood at comcast.net; masshistpres at cs.umb.edu
Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Fwd: Wind Farms

Barbara:

You make fine points in a respectful manner.  I particularly appreciate the sensitivity you demonstrate toward Native Americans whose leaders describe Secretary Salazar's decision as a slap in their face.  The Tribes contend that locating their ancients' countless remains over 10,000 years is not realistic.      

I think you romanticize Cape Wind windmills of yesteryear that bear no resemblance whatsoever to 130, 440' steel and fiberglass industrial turbines, spanning an area the size of Manhattan Island, with red flashing lights, day and night, along with sirens and fog horns.  

I embrace historic preservation, particularly of Nantucket Sound, conservation and nuclear power that is efficient, with a small "footprint", clean, and half as expensive as offshore wind energy.  Industrial wind energy requires constant fossil fuel back-up energy sources as wind is intermittent, and wind energy is unreliable.  There have been no conventional energy plants taken off-line by introduction of wind documented in the world.  Denmark, the cradle of wind energy, has not decreased their harmful emissions.  We do not tie by index our generous public subsidies wind requires to reduction in harmful emission by wind energy.  So, wind energy is a faith-based initiative.   The driver is public subsidies.  

I agree.  Let's come together and explore sound scientific and economic energy solutions that will allow us to retain the integrity of the windows to our Nations' past.   

Most Respectfully, 

Barbara Durkin
Northboro, MA 

Resources:

There is a growing international resistance to wind energy for the aforementioned reasons as the following protest schedules reveal.  

TORONTO April 28. 2010 -Wind Concerns Ontario, a coalition of 44 citizen’s groups from across the province protest against Big Wind. 

"Each and every one of you need to take the time, one day, a workday, to travel to Queen's Park to stand up and to speak up! Take one day to support all who say NO to twenty years+ of an industrial wind installation in our communities!"

http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/ontarians-to-march-at-queens-park-halt-to-wind-development/

30th of April there is a demonstration in Tokyo Japan.

15th of May Germans demonstrate in Berlin.

21st of June there is a second demonstration in Canada.

29th of August a protest concert in South Sweden. 

Nettie Pena's 'They're not green' documentaries well worth viewing on YouTube:    

http://www.youtube.com/user/penaproductionsinc

My colleague and friend, Mark Duchamp, of Spain has command of environmental issues related to wind turbines regarding Scotland, in particular.  This is his Website:  

http://www.iberica2000.org/es/Articulo.asp?Id=1228

'Wind Energy Myths vs Reality' (context fossil fuels v wind) 

http://www.masterresource.org/category/energy-myths-vs-reality/

Getting deeper, Robert L. Bradley, Jr. Policy Analysis, well referenced cost v. benefits:  

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-280.html

'UK offshore wind costs at least twice nuclear: study'
LONDON
Mon Mar 8, 2010 1:05pm EST
Related News
LONDON (Reuters) - Generating Britain's electricity from offshore wind farms is likely to be at least twice as expensive as nuclear power, according to a new report by engineering consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6274S520100308

In a message dated 4/30/2010 9:46:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, beb100acrewood at comcast.net writes:

Has anyone seen the beautiful wind farms on Prince Edward Island?   Although they are built on the island they are visible from both land and sea.  The people of Canada appear to embrace this source of clean energy as well as continuing to preserving their heritage.

Cape Cod and many towns that lie on oceans and bays had windmills built on the shores.  We consider any remaining as historic properties and will fight to preserve them, rightly so.

As former chair of Wareham's Historical Commission I fought long and hard to remove the stigma of "hysterical historians" from being used in our town by preserving our history while being realistic.   I see this continuing battle against Cape Wind becoming labeled as such.

Isn't it possible for us to work together for the greater good of this state, country and the world and continue to honor our past?

Archaeological surveys could identify and document any remaining Native American burial grounds.  However the ocean is destructive in its own way and I wonder what it anything remains. This is an emotional issue for many people including the First People and I would not presume to understand why they feel as they do about Nantucket Sound.  I have not walked in their moccasins.

The issue of their sunrise ceremonies is more difficult.  However if it was part of my belief system I would prefer to honor it with a ceremony that includes wind turbines than ever increasing toxic pollution.  In my humble opinion this would fit in with their belief to think of the impact of their actions for five generations.  

This is written with deep respect for the people who have lived here for thousands of years.

I feel that environmental concerns should be the foremost consideration in whether or not to build wind farms.  

As a proud Scot I would not be adverse to clean energy wind turbines built in the seas surrounding Scotland.  I do not think it is environmentally appropriate that oil wells have been driven there especially after the recent oil well explosion and spreading oil slick. We hopefully learn from our mistakes. 

I am sure that at sometime in the past my ancestors from many parts of the world used land that is now under the sea.  What peoples in the world have not occupied land that is now under water?

We must try to come together and make decisions that preserve our environment.  The alternative will not be so very pleasant for our descendants.

Barbara Bailey

******************************
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/20100501/64ef1da4/attachment-0001.htm>