82.0°F Fair [Forecast]
:: Thursday, July 29th, 2010Cape & Islands News
The ideal newspaper should be "irreverent, rash, feisty, and really care." - Jim BellowsMaking your business fun by making it work, Barry Neagle is a business and executive coach who can help your business with sales leadership and business planning. (Barnstable)
A full service interior decorating company offering a wide variety of services including redesign, home staging and workshops. Located in Sandwich, MA, we have been serving homeowners and realtors all over Cape Cod and the South Shore since 2006. (Sandwich)
State Agency Confirms Federal Jurisdiction over Cape Wind
Cape Wind wins another appeal:
Endangered Species Act and wildlife issues do not apply
A Final Decision issued by the Director of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MDFW) upheld an earlier decision that Cape Wind does not constitute a “taking” under the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act and that wildlife issues will be managed by the appropriate Federal Agencies.
“At a time of record high oil prices, this Final Decision brings us closer to delivering stable electricity prices, greater energy independence, good jobs in the clean energy sector and cleaner air from America’s first offshore wind farm on Horseshoe Shoal,” said Jim Gordon, president of Cape Wind.
“At a time of record high oil prices, this Final Decision brings us closer to delivering stable electricity prices, greater energy independence, good jobs in the clean energy sector and cleaner air from America’s first offshore wind farm on Horseshoe Shoal.” - GordonOpponents of the renewable energy project have consistently attempted to usurp the authority of Federal jurisdiction over the Federal portions of Nantucket Sound, in this case by having petitioned for adjudicatory hearings to challenge the state agency’s prior decision that its jurisdiction did not extend into Federal waters.
Cape Wind and the MDFW filed motions to dismiss the
opposition group’s petition.
In his final decision, MDFW Director Wayne F. MacCallum found the legal reasoning of project opponents to circumvent Federal authority as “not persuasive,” and that, “the federal law on point is overwhelming.”
The Final Decision also indicates that there had been no question regarding the portions of the project's cables located within Massachusetts: "Petitioners also concede that no 'take' of Massachusetts protected species would occur as a result of the proposed Cable Project..."
Below is a summary all of the Judicial and State and Federal Agency decisions / milestones concerning Cape Wind to date:
|
Court or Agency |
Ruling or Order |
Determination |
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (DFW) |
Final Decision on administrative appeal of DFW’s no-take determination |
Issued final determination that transmission lines would not result in a prohibited “take” under MESA and that DFW did not have jurisdiction to consider and apply MESA to facilities located in federal waters in Nantucket Sound. |
July 2, 2008 |
|
Barnstable Superior Court |
Town of Barnstable v. Cape Wind Associates, LLC, BACV2007-00506-A |
Judge Kane issued ruling dismissing several counts of lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This action was brought by the Town of Barnstable and citizens groups challenging the issuance of Sec. Bowles’ Certificate issued under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). |
June 17, 2008 |
|
Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) |
Approval of Project Update under G.L. c. 164, § 69J; Approval under G.L. c. 164, § 72; Extension Granted |
Found that project changes meet EFSB standards; the transmission lines will serve the public convenience and will be consistent with the public interest; and granted extension for commencement of construction for three years. |
May 2, 2008 |
|
Minerals Management Service (MMS) |
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) |
Issuance of favorable DEIS finding environmental impacts from the Wind Park to be minimal. |
January 11, 2008 |
|
Division of Fisheries and Wildlife |
Determination under Massachusetts Endangered Species Act (MESA), G.L. c. 131A |
Issued determination that the jurisdictional transmission lines would not result in a prohibited “take” under MESA. |
July 17, 2007 |
|
Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act |
Secretary of EOEEA issued Certificate on Cape Wind’s Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) |
Secretary approved FEIR as complying with MEPA. |
March 29, 2007 |
|
MA Supreme Judicial Court |
Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, Inc. v. Energy Facilities Siting Bd., 448 Mass. 45 (2006) |
Upholding Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB) decision approving transmission lines pursuant to G.L. c. 164, § 69J. |
December 18, 2006 |
|
Energy Facilities Siting Board |
Approval of Petition to Construct and Operate Pursuant to G.L. c. 164, § 69J |
Found that transmission lines will provide a reliable energy supply for the Commonwealth consistent with the minimization of environmental impacts and costs. |
May 11, 2005 |
|
First Circuit Court of Appeals |
Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound v. Department of the Army, 398 F.3d 105 (2005) |
Upheld District Court decision that Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) had jurisdiction to issue permit for data tower in Nantucket Sound. |
February 16, 2005 |
|
First Circuit Court of Appeals |
Ten Taxpayer Citizens Group v. Cape Wind Assocs., LLC, 373 F.3d 183 (2004) |
Upheld District Court decision that state permitting requirements cannot apply to federal waters in Nantucket Sound where Wind Park will be located. |
June 28, 2004 |
|
Federal District Court (Mass.) |
Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound v. Department of the Army, 288 F.Supp. 2d 64 (2003) |
ACOE had jurisdiction to issue permit for data tower in Nantucket Sound, followed proper procedures and did not have to consider environmental impacts. |
September 18, 2003 |
|
Federal District Court (Mass.) |
Ten Taxpayers v. Cape Wind Associates, LLC, 278 F.Supp. 2d 98 (2003) |
Commonwealth has no jurisdiction to require state permits for data tower located in federal waters of Nantucket Sound. |
August 19, 2003 |
27 comments
Blog posts and comments are entirely the thoughts and ideas of the people who write them and in no way represent the views of CapeCodToday.com, eCape, Inc., or its employees or owners.
Your comment... "I'm ready for a cleaner, more independent Cape Cod, are you?"
Cleaner? How? Coal fired plants will continue to run as backup.
Independence? From whom? Arab oil? Cape Wind will have no effect.
If you are not telling fibs please explain.
PS...has the Federal USF&G ruled yet on endangered species? Just a thought.
I have a few questions regarding CW..
Once on line....
1. What % of demand here on Cape will CW supply to offset the current suppliers?
2.Will any of the local coal/oil/gas/nuclear plants reduce their ouput and subsequent emissions to our air?
3.IF CW goes off line for any reason,will it affect our local grid?
4.What,if any, reduction will we see reflected in our rates?
5.What % do our other suppliers use as foreign energy sources combined?
ie.. imported oil, gas,coal, nuclear.
afterall ..this is supposedly built to reduce our dependence on foreign oil..right?
6.Since the majority of air pollution here on cc is from the midwest coal fired plants..
how will our air quality improve?
7.Final question..
since all of us rely on oil or gas to keep us warm in the winter..
how will CW help us on this factor?
I hope someone can answer these questions..
as I have not seen any results nor statements regarding such..
thank you
possee
Maverick is again making personal attacks.
The next time he does it he will no longer have the right to comment on this site.
The Editors.
I don't profess expertise over Wind Farms--however, I believe that if those in the oil business will not gain by it's inception, it won't happen--bottom line. Just like Ford won't allow the electric car--the oil tycoons will not allow alternative forms of energy. I'm in a place were I see a lot of activity with regard to scientists producing viable forms of energy to replace oil--but all of it seems to be on hold. The politicians continue to keep the keys to the kingdom and that includes doing the bidding of powerful corporations.
The electric car has been around for a very long time--look where it is today--still an idea. Sure there are some very expensive models, but again no surprise. What would the auto industry do if one day, a very bright inventor allowed all of us to drive at a fraction of the cost we deal with today? Politicians control the scientific realm of possibilities--our sad reality. How far have we come with stem cell research and also have the capabilities? Some progress, science finds ways to circumvent govt. regulations--but still behind.
Hoo Yeah Charlie!
why wouldn't unbiased questions be answered?
I hope you are incorrect..
but, then again..
it is the residents..as you say..
my bet..
no one will answer them to the point..
as direct as they may be...
maybe a dance around them and accusations as a member of this ridiculous alliance..
now that is a probability..
(given the nature of this site)..
let's hope we are both wrong..
wait and see..ehh?
anyways..
how's the fishing?
To answer your questions.
#1. To understand where the power will be used see Ohms Law which states V(oltage)=I(current) X R(esistance). When dealing with DC V=IR is correct, with AC it really is V=IZ (Z being impedance). Seeing I am not here to give a class on electrical theory understand that electricity will follow the path of least resistance. Trying to transmit over a long distance delivers said resistance.
Furthermore whom do you buy your juice from. For those of us who have taken advantage of the deregulation law, like myself, don't buy from NSTAR. What this means is when CW is running my juice will most likely come from them, but I will pay my provider as the grid is, in laymans terms, a pool.
#2. When CW ran there would be a decrease in ouput from plants in the following order. First would be oil, second gas, third coal. Pilgrim would not reduce load.
#3. No. There is no such thing as a "local grid" here. The grid is regional and operated by ISO-New England from their headquarters in Holyoke, MA.
#5. About 50% of electricity in NE is generated by gas. Some of that gas comes from pipelines from Canada, some from domestic pipelines. The exact figures I can't give. The largest plant in NE burns coal and is located in Somerset, MA and they get most of their coal from South America. You would need to contact Pilgrim to find out where they get their rods from. I am betting they are either totally domestic or are reprocessed from Russian nuclear weapons.
#6. What percentage comes from the midwest and how much is just from coal burners in NE?
#7. I know many people here on the cape that have electric heat which they augment with wood stoves. There were a lot of houses built in the 1980's building boom that had electric heat put in. So not everybody uses oil or gas to power their home boilers.
Just one major example...get the transport sector off of oil. How? Looky here ... https://eed.llnl.gov/flow/02flow.php
See that big green slice at the bottom labeled "Imports"? That be the insane amount of US wealth going overseas for crude. Shift that section to PHEVs, EVs, second gen biofuels, etc. Juice the PHEVs and EVs with renewable electricity (no peak oil issues, no fuel cost issues, no CO2 issues). That is how CW and similar projects get us off of oil.
This is not a pipe dream.
Mercedes is doing it ...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/motors/phil_lanning/article1314732.ece
Toyota is doing it ...
http://www.leftlanenews.com/toyota-to-release-plug-in-hybrid-two-new-hybrids-for-2010.html
GM is doing it..
http://uk.reuters.com/article/technologyNews/idUKN0741637620080707?sp=true
#5. The NE grid being 50% natural gas dependent is exactly why rates are currently soaring. We're over dependent on gas. CW and similar mitigate this issue.
Thank you for the information!
Regarding question 5..
Is there any reference point of what % CW will generate to reduce our reliance from gas fired plants?
An alternative is demonstrated at http://www.energybulletin.net/node/18239
And it won't require the destruction of Nantucket Sound.
All of these judicial and quasi-judicial bodies must be wrong. Every one of them. Or no -- they've been bought by crooked lawyers. It's a conspiracy.
These CW folks must be pretty stupid, spending all this time and money on something that will not work. Why won't they listen?!
http://www.projo.com/news/content/bz_fishermen_energy22_06-22-08_0LAIIUS_v21.3a4af69.html?npc
The statement the State makes is that the "cable" would not take endangered species. It is therefore a narrow technical issue about jurisdiction, that demonstrates the state's gutlessness.
It says nothing about whether the whole Cape Wind project will kill endangered species. Everyone, including DFW, agrees that it will, because the wind turbines will kill plovers, terns and other species.
The state should have stepped up to the plate as this project will have impact on state's interests.
A California court has ruled that as regulators failed to provide adequate protection to citizens and the environment, the environmental damage caused by wind turbines was not the fault of the developer held harmless for environmental damages caused by wind turbines. That decision is a harbinger of what we can expect.
Cry, bitch & moan all you want Barbara...
Common sense & law will prevail over each & every challange the D'alliance bring against the project...
And eventually, the judicial system will say: "That's it! - No more!"...
And just refuse to take any more BS cases from your silly group of prostitutes for the COAL & OIL industry and the selfish / self-centered super rich and just shut the door in your face once and for all - No matter how many millions of dollars you burn.
Just think!... Over 40,000 comments in favor of CAPE WIND.
Only 1,000 or so of you paid letter writers against...
Time to look for other more respectful employment before you embarrass yourself anymore woman - Your credibility has been severly compromised at this point; no sense going down with the D'alliance ship.
'Repent while there is still time!'
The truth of that is entirely contingent upon people continuing to drive vehicles powered by fossil fuels. If folks switch to electric cars, as Britain is recommending their people do, then Cape Wind can definitely help.
Abandonment of common sense is as rampant as is the concept that federal laws are optional to observe. NEPA, observed, will prevent fossil fuel Guru, Jim Gordon, from realizing his dream, Cape Wind, the "no bid" Boondoggle and theft of a national treasure.
Gifting Jim $1 billion for nothing in return would allow us to cut our losses significantly.
There was not much thinking attached to the submission of 40,000 CW favorable post cards. It's more of a tribute to Jim's cunning and evidence of our gullibility and naivete'.
Killing up to 6,600 birds per year to save them is as illogical. And so is Cape Wind.
It pays your rent, though.
Upon what specific info source are you basing that 6600 bird deaths/ year #?
Upon what specific info source are you basing the plovers, terns, etc. claims?
Thanks
I read the link. My understanding...these options all mean continued burrowing, blasting, and burning of fossil fuels == CO2 issues, said likely to be heavily taxed, etc in the coming years.
Germany did coal to liquid during WWII. This is also considered a way to keep the US military gased up in the event we are denied petrol. We have lots of coal.
Pumping the CO2 into the ground = carbon sequestration. My understanding is that this is barely off the drawing board and many years away. Google FutureGen. Also book "Big Coal".
Shale oil...again, carbon.
IMO (I'm no expert) for transport sector. Efficiency improvements, PHEVs and EVs, cellulosic ethanol w/ flex fueled vehicles, algae based petrol, longer term maybe get to hydrogen. Renewable juice for the EVs.
From DOE...interesting...Hydrogen using Wind. http://www.physorg.com/news87494382.html
BTW, NE grid is currently 25% oil fired (from Cape Light Compact).
Cheers
2/23/05
USACE Reference File No.
NAE-2004-338-1, EOEA No. 12643:
"By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year."
08/03/06
South Coast Today, Taber Allison:
"Mass Audubon scientists have never concluded that up to 6,600 birds, or any number of birds, would be killed if this project is permitted…”
...because it puts them in conflict with federal species protections to support a project that would kill so many birds, (what dead birds?)...
www.iberica2000.org/Es/
Articulo.asp?Id=3686
Michael Boyd is President of CAlifornian's for Renewable Energy the NGO whose scientists have standing in federal court re: Altamont suit as my source on the value of MA Audubon's CW "support" condition, ("Challenge" MA Audubon press release).
Mark Duchamp of Spain is cited by Ian Nesbit as an expert in Killer Wind.
Cheers
The battle that is.
Grasping at the LIE of 6,600 bird deaths as usual...
"No bid"... "National Treasure"
Lame arguements reveal your desparation...
And certainly, your self-described: "gullibility and naivete'"...
Especially to think anyone with a half a brain will believe the proven D'alliance's LIES.
Considering the burden of proof is on the applicant to demonstrate that his project will extend public and environmental benefits that exceed supportable costs and risks; where might I find Cape Wind supportable benefits?
Lacking supportable arguments in favor reveal your deperation.
Your seemingly endless obfuscation and obsession, D'alliance dis and dat, indicates to me that you're fully cognizant that you're supporting a dogma, ideology, religion, a myth.
While I may extend more credit than you're due, you are intelligent.
So, how much are you paid for your digression, per word, per hour, by those who seek to destroy a national treasure and abscond with taxpayers' and ratepayers' hard earned money?
Thank you for that info.
My understanding of your position is that 1. CW should not be built as MA Audubon claims 6600 bird deaths/year 2. MA Audubon caved on their CW opposition in order to procure a multi million $$$ adaptive management contract.
Might not a contract seeking MA Audubon have initially inflated the 6600 number?
All in all, the bottom line here is that nobody has definitive data for bird threats at CW's specific site, correct?
Thanks again
Taber Allison flatly denied M.A. testimony that puts them in conflict with the ESA, and their AM contract $$$ condition of "support" for CW.
"With respect to natural resources for which Fish & Wildlife Service is responsible, we find that there is considerable need to correct inaccuracies, explain inconsistencies, clarify ambiguities, fully articulate the limitations of the available science, and reach logical conclusions about the extent of impacts or the inability to predict them in the absence of information," said Michael Bartlett, supervisor of Fish & Wildlife's New England field office in Concord, N.H."
Featuring the watercolor paintings of gallery owner Eileen A. Smith, and the handmade creations of fine American craft artisans. (Brewster)
Serving award-winning seafood for over 25 years! Serving only the freshest, highest quality seafood. No compromise. (Hyannis)
This is a one-time-only process (or if you change the email on your account), and will help CCToday keep out the spammers. If you cannot validate your email because it is invalid, and you are a legitimate user, feel free to contact us and we will update your account to your current email.
Please Login or Register to leave a comment. There are 4,881 registered commenters!
CapeCodToday requires readers register an account with us in order to post comments. Become a trusted commenter and receive the benefits of posting instantly throughout the site. It's quick and easy!
Please note: If you are a CapeCodToday registered blogger, you can use your blogger login. Your login for the blogs is separate from your CapeCodToday main site login (if you have one).
Previous/Next posts in this blog
About This Blog
These stories about Cape Cod and Islands are written by our staff. You are invited to comment on any story. Your opinion will appear on our front page immediately, and it will be archived and available on this site at any time at no charge by using the search element of the top of every page.
►Walter Brooks, Editor & Publisher
►Maggie Kulbokas, Managing Editor
Recent Comments
- Hey bitter,
Stran It seems I've been mysteriously placed on the
1 min ago - Yes, what we need to figure out is who's interest
33 mins ago - "Also, lets not forget about the billions of dollars your
36 mins ago - Oh boy-you reminded me of something with that one crusader!
41 mins ago - Stupid immigrants....
42 mins ago
CCT Blog List
- Newest Blog Posts
- Newest Comments
- TRB
- Entering Bourne
- Joe's Blog
- Seufert's Scenes
- The Belly Check
- CapeCodToday Featured Event
- EXTRA...
- Long Bridge Runner
- Cape Cod History
- Cape Cod Rock Hopper
- Latimer on Law
- Fox Robbins Business Blog
- Cape Politics
- Police and Fire News
- Town Notes
- Politicalendar
- Soaring with David Gessner
- Bismore Park
- Cape & Islands News
- Travel Tales
- In My Footsteps
- Business on Cape Cod
- Letters to the Editor
- The Ballyard
- One Day at a Time
- Resolute
- Conservative's Conscience
- Entering Falmouth
- The Poet's Perspective
- Cape Yoga
- Off-the-Shelf
- Cape Cod Tracker
- Buckley's Blog
- Cape Eyes
- Trail Hound
- Cape Cod Performing Arts
- State of Cape Cod
- Editorial
- Ned Sonntag
- Wellfleet Bay Sanctuary
- Three plus lives
- Rob O'Leary's Blog
- Cape Native
- College Chat with Christine Chapman
- Dan Wolf's Blog
- My day
- Boston Cod
- Reflections on a Quarter-life Crisis
- Cape Cod Barrister
- Cape Wind Conversation
- On the Campaign Trail with Bill
- Cape Cod Book Reviews
- Sea Street
- Media Watch
- Cape Fine Dining
- Citizen Kane
- Mercy Otis
- Speaking Turtle's Cafe
- Cape Cod Pets
- Energy Media
- Housing Assistance Corporation Media Blog
- Op-Ed
Archives
- July 2010 (29)
- June 2010 (32)
- May 2010 (35)
- April 2010 (35)
- March 2010 (54)
- February 2010 (41)
- January 2010 (38)
- December 2009 (37)
- November 2009 (33)
- October 2009 (25)
- September 2009 (35)
- August 2009 (31)
- July 2009 (35)
- June 2009 (40)
- May 2009 (42)
- April 2009 (50)
- March 2009 (49)
- February 2009 (48)
- January 2009 (61)
- December 2008 (60)
- November 2008 (53)
- October 2008 (54)
- September 2008 (45)
- August 2008 (36)
- July 2008 (18)
- June 2008 (22)
- May 2008 (13)
- April 2008 (13)
- March 2008 (37)
- February 2008 (32)
- January 2008 (50)
- December 2007 (34)
- November 2007 (29)
- October 2007 (41)
- September 2007 (48)
- August 2007 (45)
- July 2007 (50)
- June 2007 (49)
- May 2007 (41)
- April 2007 (41)
- March 2007 (37)
- February 2007 (30)
- January 2007 (49)
- December 2006 (54)
- November 2006 (77)
- October 2006 (68)
- September 2006 (67)
- August 2006 (78)
- July 2006 (67)
- June 2006 (89)
- May 2006 (73)
- April 2006 (82)
- March 2006 (104)
- February 2006 (112)
- January 2006 (106)
Become a CapeCodToday Blogger!
Are you passionate about your community? Do you blog or at least harbor thoughts of doing so?
If so, CapeCodToday.com would like to host your blog on our CapeCodToday weblog publishing platform.
Blog Newsfeed
CapeCodToday uses standard web "newsfeeds" (RSS) to automatically update the latest blog entries in your browser or newsreader.
Use any of the links below in your newsreader or web browser to get "Cape & Islands News" postings delivered to you, or use the RSS icon in your browser's address bar.
What this time line shows is the parade of frivolous law suits the Alliance has used over the years to delay energy independence and cleaner air around the Cape.
At every level, in every instance we can see that opposition to this wind farm is driven only by lies and deceit.
I'm ready for a cleaner, more independent Cape Cod, are you?