Cape Wind Conversation

The #1 Argument AGAINST Cape Wind

Is Nantucket Sound too important and too beautiful?

An awful lot of the Cape Wind debate is devoted to “technical” issues:  Costs, fishing, navigation, aviation, tourism, etc.  Anybody who has read my stuff knows that I spend most of my time on technical issues and I usually argue that, when we look at the evidence, these issues don’t work against the wind farm.

 One of the nice things about the technical issues is that evidence can be gathered and evaluated.  Over the years, the appropriate government agencies have been assigned to do this.  The FAA is reviewing effects on aviation.  The Coast guard has reviewed navigation.  The Interior Department has reviewed effects on fishing, mammals, the sea bottom and a host of other environmental issues.  Almost without exception these agencies have determined that the effects of Cape Wind will be minor or that they can be mitigated.  By this score Cape Wind is on a long winning streak.

 But there is one very important issue that cannot be evaluated technically:  Whether or not Nantucket Sound is too important and too beautiful a place to devote to industrial development.  Even if you have the stamina to read every word of the Marine and Mineral Service Environmental Impact Statement you won’t find a section that examines this issue.  Why?  Because it can’t be evaluated technically.  Deciding this issue involves a judgment call.  At the risk of being maudlin, deciding this issue requires one’s heart, not one’s head.

 I can understand the frustration of Cape Wind opponents who feel very strongly that the Sound shouldn’t be developed.  Even though the review process has taken an unprecedented amount of time and been of unprecedented depth, it has not considered their fundamental concern.  It has not validated their fundamental belief.

 It’s my personal opinion that this frustration drives many Cape Wind critics to support all of the technical criticisms that just don’t hold water.  And I believe that, in so doing, they hurt their case.  They lose credibility.  But they’re driven to this by the failure of the process to consider the "non-technical" value of the Sound.

 I also believe that many critics have heart felt opinions in this area that are being lost in all of this technical talk.  Lately, I’ve been encouraging the Cape Wind critics I know to go back and voice their opinion about the Sound.  That is, to forget about cost, fishing, aviation and the rest and tell us why it’s too important a place to develop.

 So I hope that, if you read this and you feel strongly that the Sound must be preserved, you will write a post and describe those feelings.  This most important issue gets lost in all the technical talk.   So let’s talk about it.