Op-Ed
A page where people can oppose the publishersWhether you are a contractor or homeowner, Mid-Cape Home Centers and our group of businesses can meet your needs. For over 112 years, Mid-Cape Home Centers has been synonymous with service, quality and commitment to community on Cape Cod. (Dennis)
Wide selection of gas and wood-burning stoves, fireplace inserts, mantles, accessories and BBQ grills. The owner, Larry Carbonneau, supervises the entire installation of stoves, chimneys, plumbing and electrical components to ensure your satisfaction. (Harwich)
Cape Wind and Tabloid Journalism
Cape Wind and Tabloid Journalism
By David G. Tuerck
Let's conduct a thought experiment: A developer has calculated that he can make some $139 million in profits by putting an industrial project smack in the middle of a site world-renowned for its natural beauty and as a Mecca for tourists. The project would be spread over 24 square miles of ocean, within view of expensive homes and tourist spots. Because of its obtrusiveness, the project would be blocked by zoning and maritime laws were it located on land or just a few miles closer to land. But this developer has chosen carefully: Located where it is, the project falls under federal jurisdiction, making it mostly immune from state or local regulation.
He's lucky to be able to escape the scrutiny of local officials. According to a comprehensive survey, residents with homes near the project expect it to diminish their property values by more than a billion dollars. The same survey shows that business related to tourism would fall by as much as $200 million a year. Concerns abound that the project would pose threats to navigation, fishing and birds.
There's more. Because the project would not otherwise be commercially viable, it would depend on subsidies for 48% of its revenue. The economic cost of the project would come to well over a billion dollars - half again as much as the benefits it would confer. And that's when we account for the reduction in fossil fuel consumption and the improvement in air quality that it would make possible.
Does this sound like a project about which someone might reasonably be expected to raise an objection? Not in the world of Wendy Williams and Robert Whitcomb. In their book, Cape Wind: Money, Celebrity and Power, all such arguments are to be casually dismissed. In their book, the project developer becomes a selfless, swashbuckling entrepreneur and his opponents "rich, arrogant and smug" plutocrats, notable for their elitism and smarmy commitment to environmentalism. Any fact that gets in the way of the authors' fawning admiration of the developer is to be dismissed as dubious and the source just another lackey in the employ of the spoilsports who oppose the project. It's good versus evil in the battle to save the earth from global warming.
The hero in this battle is, of course, Jim Gordon, who formed Cape Wind for the purpose of building 130 windmills in Nantucket Sound. The villain is the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, portrayed by the authors as a collection of pampered heiresses, delusional media personalities, multi-millionaires and strange political bedfellows who, in a shameful display of self-interest, are trying to keep the project from happening.
In the Williams/Whitcomb world of tabloid journalism, there is no room for thoughtful discussion, for weighing costs against benefits, for understanding that self-interest is at work on both sides of the issue or for any kind of honest discussion. Such thoughts would get in the way of the facile thinking and cynical blather that fills their book and that is now commonplace on TV, radio and the Internet. Do you find yourself bored now that Don Imus and Rosie O'Donnell are off the air? Does the Internet no longer meet your need for trash talk? Then read this book. You won't learn anything substantive from it, but it'll be great entertainment.
Disclaimer: I am a co-author of the studies attacked by Williams and Whitcomb. And a few years ago, I had an exchange with author Williams that told me all that I need to know about her journalistic standards. For me, the only mystery is how she got Whitcomb, an otherwise respectable journalist, to team up with her. I suppose that he'll be crying all the way to the bank. I just hope that he makes enough money on the book to compensate for what this will do to his reputation among journalists who still think that their job is to provide a balanced and carefully researched account of the facts.
David G. Tuerck is Executive Director, The Beacon Hill Institute, and Chairman and Professor of Economics, Suffolk University. The Institute's studies on Cape Wind can be found here.
47 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.
You site a study that assumes property values will fall & tourism will be lost, how do you reconcile that with Nystead & Horns Rev NOT losing either. Neither are in your report. Perhaps because the closest example to CW would prove you wrong? The Coast Guard asserts it would aid navigation, Audibon & Denmark studies show little to no bird impact, Denmark fishermen have reported no loss of catch or boat impacts.
The subsidies you mention are available to anyone producing renewable energy over a certain kw limit. These monies are taken from our Nstar bills in an effort to stimulate clean energy & satisfy energy portfolio requirements, are you upset it would go towards the purpose intended?
I believe it is true that Wendy colors the actions of major players based on her opinions, but what do you find to be untrue in the book?
Energy costs have risen about 35-40% since your report, care to amend savings?
P.S. They're Wind Turbines, NOT Windmills.
Many of Cape Wind’s proponents rely on the NIMBY argument as the truth about Cape Wind’s conflicts threatens their dream for Nantucket Sound, Cape Wind. To many Cape and Islanders, Cape Wind is more like a nightmare.
I consider that the NIMBY argument identifies the writer or speaker using it as one who is challenged to provide anything beyond developer’s rhetoric in support of this project, and counter productive.
Thank you, Mr. Tuerck. I appreciate the antidote you have provided to this developer's endless hype.
It's never been about us, it's always been about our money and this resource.
Both of which he covets.
If you have a copy of the book could you look for the passage and tell us exactly what it says? Thanks in advance.
Barbara D...thanks for setting the record straight on NEPA.
" I’m also unapologetically opposed to Cape Wind for aesthetic reasons. Federal law provides assurance to citizens; aesthetic value is a right protected by NEPA under which Cape Wind is being reviewed. "
Neil G...thanks for providing info on average wind speed in the summer. When Cape Wind will provide the least energy and the Cape will need it the most.
" Set me straight if I’m wrong, but I believe I found an ‘un-truth.’ Somewhere in the early chapters, the authors report the average wind speed on Nantucket Sound increases in the summer. That is not true. It’s a major error IMHO, considering W.W. claims to be a science writer. "
Carl B. Free...lapdog, bark a little louder. WB hasn't given me permission to respond to you.
Nice try professor, you still own the reputation for the best polls money can buy.
Every bit of energy produced in this country is done privately and for profit. The more valuable the energy, the greater the profit. In Cape Wind's case we all collectively decided that wind energy is extremely valuable to us, so we are willing to pay for it with TAX CREDITS, if not direct subsidies. Cape Wind gets the credits if they produce the energy. The federal government gets the royalties and the ratepayers get the electricity.
What exactly is the problem with Cape Wind making money? The billionaires who oppose the project have made more than fair their share of profits from producing energy as well as their share of tax credits for investing in it. How else could they afford to pay for surveys of such dubious quality.
There would be no problem with Cape Wind making money if Cape and Islanders' stood a chance on gaining a any return for their investment. Tie our substantial subsidies for wind towers to actual reductions, historically, in harmful emissions, and then get back to us with another site.
" There would be no problem with Cape Wind making money if Cape and Islanders' stood a chance on gaining a any return for their investment. Tie our substantial subsidies for wind towers to actual reductions, historically, in harmful emissions, and then get back to us with another site. "
SM...as for PP the last I heard SHE was fed up with this blog and left. Or did she get bounced like Dona T?
SM...your comment. " Indignation is really one of the last vetiges of a scoundrel. "
You sound like one of the lapdog's litter. Please give us facts vs the Cape Wind playbook.
" SM writes on CCToday "Cape Wind gets the credits if they produce the energy." Not true. The credits are NOT given as an award for performance. The developer gets them whether he performs or not.
What say you SM?
Neil, what you are referring to is when Wendy states to the effect 'The wind blows when it is most needed' in that when it is extremely hot or cold, the difference between the water and the air temp produces great wind. Weren't you against CW before you even saw the proposal? The same can be said for the book.
I looked at the PDF of the research, less than 500 surveyed? I passed that many in 1 mile going off cape on Friday. Not a very scientific sample group.
The book doesn't say "dubious", it says "doubtful"
I guess when Richard J. Egan is paying you around $100,000 to discredit the WF, the truth can be a little inconvenient.
Hey, where's this vast resource of knowledge to dispute me? You wind foes seem long on insults & accusations and very, very short on some real facts.
See you at the water cooler!
Carl B., taking a bite out of the lie!
There are so many things wrong with Cape Wind I can't respond in a comment or two.
And some of the most relevant will be deleted before they ever see the light of day.
Thank God we are not in China or I would be history. But this blog runs a close second.
Carl B...take a bite out of the lie and if WB won't give me a blog take a small bite out of him.
I know! Good lapdogs don't bite their master.
Maverick is right-
“…in the summer… Cape Wind will provide the least energy and the Cape will need it the most.”
I claimed you were a " lapdog ". She said you were a " toady ass ".
You never answered Dona's comment:
" SM writes on CCToday "Cape Wind gets the credits if they produce the energy." Not true. The credits are NOT given as an award for performance. The developer gets them whether he performs or not. '
What say you Carl B?
You are correct when you say 'On average there's more wind speed in the winter than summer.' The book didn't make that statement. You are trying to call in to question facts you thought the book stated, but did not.
The book stated to the effect: in extreme cold & heat the wind would be blowing to give electrical power when it was needed due to demand in extreme weather. It stated a tendency that is true.
It did NOT state there is more average wind speed in the summer.
Niel, did you receive a degree in propaganda?
When did it occur to you to manufacture false facts to attribute to the book so you could pan it, BEFORE reading it?
Why does the truth come with such difficulty to you? I guess this is a prime example of your imagination seeing things that aren't there.
Good luck w/reality!
A simple web search turned up- “A Summary of Fatal Accidents in Wind Energy,” by Paul Gipe, and “Wind Turbine Accident Compilation to 1 Nov 2006”
Update from the UK- May 23, 2007-
“Man Dies After 100 foot Turbine Fall”
“A 19-year-old construction worker has been killed after falling 100 ft down the shaft of a windfarm turbine. The worker was inside the turbine which was under construction at the Earlsburn windfarm in Touch Hills, near Stirling. The accident happened at about 1730 BST on Tuesday. It is understood he was killed instantly... The Health and Safety Executive are investigating.”
1. Early opposition to CW was led and funded by fairly ordinary folks and their efforts led to the founding of the Alliance. No billionaires were even in sight six years ago.
2. Many, many local residents opposed the project even though they had neither large fortunes nor waterfront homes. They still do.
3. While the Army Corps' permit review was ongoing at least one Corps employee was proven to have been blogging on this site from inside Corps offices during working hours, using an alias, supporting CW.
4. CW refuses to publish the wind data collected at its test tower, but wants the world to believe their projections of electric production.
5. If being rich is an evil thing...Jim Gordon is the same as many of those WW vilifies.
6. Gordon said on WOMR two weeks ago that he has lived in Yarmouth for "many years." His parents have had a summer house in Yarmouth. Period. He lives in Boston, always has.
Wendy Williams provided the bird issue as an example of a wild claim made by Cape Wind's opponents during a recent interview with Jim Braude.
At about the same time, a Congressional Subcommittee had been formed, and a Full Legislative Hearing on this issue was underway...
“The fear is that with all the new wind farms rolling out, there is a new Altamont being created today,” says Greg Butcher, National Audubon’s director of bird conservation."
"The exact reasons for the improvement are a matter of debate, but collisions seem far fewer when wind farms keep out of major flyways and give a wide berth to rich prey sites like Altamont and attractive bird habitats such as wetlands.”
Either Wendy hasn’t done her homework, or her dog ate it. In either case, her credibility is lacking, and her book is an incredible extension of that. I don’t need to read it to know that.
I believe the Wendy Williams book is dreadful, not because of the position it clearly takes in support of cape Wind, but because it claims to be an accurate telling of the CW story and is just generally poorly done. My opposition to this particular wind farm in this particular location is well known and nothing has changed my mind.
BUT...it is wrong and dumb for people and media to avoid the WW book. If the book is as bad and if WW is as biased as many are saying...let's have at it. She will surely not do well in open discussion with a reasoned interviewer who knows the whole history of CW.
The bone head who interviewed WW at midday two Fridays ago on WOMR actually finished his interview by saying that he looked forward to reading the book! With opponents such as this and with books such as WW's Cape Wind opponents have little to fear. She should be allowed to explain herself publicly and often. Gee, would she like me to host an interview on Public Access tv? Glad to do it.
Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rahall: “…wind projects are on a regular basis in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Endangered Species Act, yet no enforcement action is being taken."
FWS Dale Hall said, according to CongressNow staffer:
“ …because of jurisdictional limits, it is hard for the FWS to investigate violations of endangered species laws. The agency may only investigate a corporation after the fact and cannot determine whether to prosecute an offender, he said. It can only to refer the case to the U.S. District Attorney.”
"I believe if you go through all this effort to try and come up with guidelines, they should be more ecological," Hall said. "However, I don't know exactly what kind of legal authority you would have to make those guidelines."
No millions to pay lobbyists, PR consultants & attorneys.
Cape Wind passed "Go" in the developer favorable clause slipped into the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that provided this developer with a "no bid" deal for Nantucket Sound. Cape Wind eliminated all competition for our resource. Dennis Duffy of Cape Wind testified in favor of weakening NEPA. Congressman Pombo failed to disclose his family’s interest in wind energy when he sought to tweak the law to favor wind interests. This list goes on and reflects that Cape Wind and friends, GE, AWEA, and to whomever our billion and resource would be payable to, have indeed participated in nefarious activities. That is at least according to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington in Pombo’s case.
Get into what? You do this for a living. The rest of us are innocent bystanders trying to save Nantucket Sound.
My time is limited? So is ours. We have other things to do with our lives besides spar with the Cape Wind playbook. But Nantucket Sound is that important to us.
Get a life. We already have one that you are attempting to destroy.
" Cape Wind passed "Go" in the developer favorable clause slipped into the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that provided this developer with a "no bid" deal for Nantucket Sound. Cape Wind eliminated all competition for our resource. Dennis Duffy of Cape Wind testified in favor of weakening NEPA. Congressman Pombo failed to disclose his family’s interest in wind energy when he sought to tweak the law to favor wind interests. This list goes on and reflects that Cape Wind and friends, GE, AWEA, and to whomever our billion and resource would be payable to, have indeed participated in nefarious activities. That is at least according to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington in Pombo’s case.
Thanks
I thank the heavens every day for the Cape Wind opposers who are willing to invest their millions to save a national treasure because I personally don't have millions to contribute. It's time for everyone to realize that most of those opposed to Cape Wind ARE NOT wealthy and do not own yachts.
There is plenty of money coming from the other side of this debate and you know it. The difference is, those putting up the cash in favor of Cape Wind stand to reap huge financial rewards if they are successful. Those defending the Sound whether it is with their money, words, or other actions, will simply have the Sound, minus an industrial eyesore, to show for their efforts.
Who is more honorable? I believe the it is the latter.
Between my government pension, charter business and wifes hard work we just about get by.
You are so right. You don't have to be rich to oppose the theft of Nantucket Sound by a true fat cat named Jim.
In a chat with Dona T. I have found someone who disagrees with you.
" Maverick, I just wanted you to know that I have had some email exchanges with William Grimes who reviewed Wendy Williams and Robert Whitcomb's "Cape Wind" book for the New York Times. According to him "Cape Wind" "is a bad book and badly written too".
I think the gentleman from the Beacon Hill Institute said it best when he called the book 'tabloid journalism'.
So, it should come as no surprise that reputable media, places and organizations do not want to promote it. Amen
Long before there was an Alliance and long before the Alliance had any financial backing beyond what a few stalwarts could provide...Cape Wind had the considerable assets of Jim Gordon and his partner to buy favorable publicity and generally flood the media with their side of the story. There is nothing wrong with this BUT why are so many people still so determined to make this a David and Goliath movie? Jim Goredon is not poor and he has not been denied his due access to the process.
In fact, the Army Corps became a virtual subsidiary of Cape Wind. The retiring publisher of the Chicago Tribune in October of 2006 wrote an opinion piece saying he could not understand why so many on Cape Cod and the Islands could oppose a project that will provide the majority of our electricity./ He made some other cute but incorrect statements, but refuses to answer telephone calls or letters. Now that's fair, isn't it?
Gordon has seized every advantage he could find. Now WW is going to have live with the fact that this is a hardball game.
Mr. Boyd stated to me today that junk science is a significant problem as wind interests provide the data upon which critical decisions are being made. He has filed a complaint with the NAS as an NAS scientist has very close ties to the wind industry. He’s advocating for the need for objective science needed to form the basis of wind tower siting decisions. He offers that FWS wind tower guidelines need to be mandated by laws to be enforced.
Some times other children call my daughter names, I aways tell her it says a lot more about them than it does about her.
I guess I can't expect too much from people who furiously dodge the facts on every question about our environment and energy future.
bobcat, please do refer people to the "research". Anyone who uses a footnote to refer to their opinion needs to have the light of day shone on it.
Donna states:
The credits are NOT given as an award for performance. The developer gets them whether he performs or not.
Exactly wrong. More proof of big lie attempts. It is a PRODUCTION tax credit, based on PRODUCTION! It lessens the tax burden of a company that produces clean renewable energy.
Honestly Donna, I'd love to see where you get your misinformation. Most likely the SOS propaganda site.
Who would like to present the next WF lie?
The next WF lie will be what it has always been: Cape Cod will get 79% of its electricity directly from the wind farm. Or, how about the wind farm will cause no damage to the floor of Nantucket Sound. Maybe...the wind farm will reduce the number of fuel carriers transitting Cape Cod waters. Then there is the ever loveable claim; the wind farm has to be built on Horseshoe Schoals because building it in deper water is not feasible. There are lies enough to go around, and around and around.
Wendy could have used it in her book. However, she would have been inaccurate again. It was inspected by the USCG and passed with flying colors.
And it is much prettier and can be seen at http://www.maverickchartersltd.com or at http://www.capecodcharterfishingboats.com.
P.S. we have a pump out station at Allen Harbor.
I believe you take the daily average wind speed x the efficiency of the wind turbine in question x 130 to get the output. Based on that, I believe with last year's wind speed, the % was above 79%.
Where have you read 'no damage to the floor of Nantucket Sound'? We all know it will stir things up for a little while, perhaps you meant the draggers who come by and rip up the floor frequently.
Yes, there would be less tankers going though the canal, do you dispute that?
Has someone proposed to build a deep water wind farm, shucks, I'd thought I'd hear about it. You see, anyone can SAY deep water wind is viable, I'll believe it when someone actually proposes it. It would be great to avoid all the, in my view, unjustifiable whining about the view when the real problems of pollution plague us every day.
So, you oppose the book, what do you find untrue about it?
The bookvery clearly intends to paint Cape Wind as the victim of political assault and battery. Perhaps they have been...but congressional earmarks and other back room tactics have been used for a long time. The only earmarks we hear people objecting to are the ones aimed at Cape Wind. So...the tactic is not the problem, just the use of it against pet projects. Nowhere does Williams talk about the behind-the-scenes influence peddled by Cape Wind. Why not? I find any book claiming to be a factual telling of events to be untrue if it said omits one entire side of the events chronicled. Eisenhower used to call this lying by omission.
I do dispute the claim that fewer tankers will transit the canal...and Gordon has failed to tell us how many fewer he can predict, although he certainly has been asked. And yes I do oppose the bottom danmage done by drag rigs, but what does that have to do with several miles of trenches 100 feet wide x 12-20 feet deep? Where will the spoils go? Deep water - try Europe, as deep as 100 now being tested.
Why is Solon's response a ban from his blog, no answers to questions asked regarding his comments and then a false insulting caricature of my boat?
Because I insulted his feelings after he puked all over this blog. If he is looking for face-feces all he has to do is find the nearest mirror.
Just because you WANT there to be something wrong, doesn't make it true.
Real life buddy, real life.
"Let us contemplate our forefathers, and posterity, and resolve to maintain the rights bequeathed to us from the former, for the sake of the latter. The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude and perseverance. Let us remember that if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom."
Samuel Adams [1771]
Nantucket Sound activities include fishing, recreational boating, and navigation. Tourism fuels the economic engine of this historic and quaint seaside community. Massachusetts' 800,000 anglers generate nearly one $billion in annual economic activity. Nantucket Sound is the heart of state's fishing industry.
I look forward to catching fish, (your unalienable right), on your charter boat this summer, Maverick! You're right, it's very pretty, thanks for the pictures and all that you're doing to help SOS.
A story in today's Berkshire Eag;e has him quoted thuis;
"The state has transportation needs before we start giving away higher education," said David Tuerck, executive director of the Beacon Hill Institute.
Donna, where is the apology for your out right lie about federal tax credits? CW must produce or there is no tax credit. Explanation please.
Peter, glad to see you agree that many rich have tried to shaft CW throughout its due process. Jim won't tell you how many less tankers will travel the canal? Peter what will your electric bill be in 2 years? WHAT!? You won't tell us, why are you lying to us?
There will be less tankers, how many remains to be seen. I'm not sure about you Peter, I've always been against back door deals in Washington, I just don't find out about most until its to late. Lucky this time, people like me who see our energy policy going horribly wrong were able to expose it. If you can find crooked back door dealings of CW, please bring them to light. Its not CW's fault SOS has been caught crooked dealing so often.
I stated early on in the discussion my opposition to the project had nothing to do with my business. It won't affect me at all.
However, I believe without the waterways and Ocean the Cape loses it's appeal and is just another unattractive, overdeveloped piece of land. And now they want to include the Sound in that industrial development.
barbaradurkin, your quotes are deceptive, out of context and not at all applicable to the Cape Wind project. This type of demagoguery is nothing new to the foes of wind power on Cape Cod. Go here.
and scroll down past the quotes you lifted to this:
"The CEC has concluded that re-powering projects (replacing numerous outdated turbines with fewer turbines on taller towers, so that the blades are above most raptor flight patterns) have the best potential for reducing bird kills at APWRA."
Essentially, the turbines at that location are outdated, small, low, fast-moving blades. The group you quoted suggests to SOLVE that problem by installing modern turbines, exactly the kind they will put in Nantucket Sound.
Here's what the Mass. Audubon says about Cape Wind: ...''Our preliminary conclusion is that the project would not pose a threat to avian species,"" See the story from March here:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/03/29/audubon_review_supports_wind_farm/
The illogic behind the misleading Altemont anecdote is like saying that since Corvairs or Model T's were dangerous, you shouldn't build or buy a new Volvo. It is wrong and doesn't make sense.
Providing all types of landscape construction and design on Cape Cod and beyond. Since 1995, whether you need a lawn maintenance program or just need a "yard clean up" our professional team can do the job to your satisfaction guaranteed! (Barnstable)
Located on the grounds of the Cape Playhouse, the Cape Museum of Fine Arts, and the Cape Cinema. We feature a star-studded cast of service, food and drink. Enjoy chef Mark's fabulous creations in our dining room or a whimsical martini in our in our pub (Dennis)
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 2,055 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
An op-ed is a piece of writing, expressing an opinion. The name originated from the tradition of newspapers placing each columns on the page opposite to the editorial page. Thus the term "op-ed" is simply a combination of "opposite" and "editorial." The difference with this one, however, is that you can reply immediately by commenting below.
►Walter Brooks, Editor & Publisher
►James Kinsella, Managing Editor
►Maggie Kulbokas, Editor
►Peter Robbins, Investigative Reporter
►Julie Brooks, President, eCape.com
Recent Comments
- Pick colors that don't fade in the sun and be
39 mins ago - #2 is key to me... I like not being an
49 mins ago - There should be more police beatings of lousy DJs.
51 mins ago - They forgot the all important centrally-loca tavern.
57 mins ago - I swear that a friend of mine named her kid
59 mins ago
CCT Blog List
- Newest Blog Posts
- Newest Comments
- Cheap Gas
- The Poet's Perspective
- EXTRA...
- Cape Cod History
- A Red State Hero
- Cape Cod Kidz
- Politicalendar
- Massachusetts Democrant
- CapeCodToday Arts Calendar
- Cape & Islands News
- Ned Sonntag
- Police and Fire News
- Trail Hound
- Robbins Report
- One Day at a Time
- Cape Politics
- Rifkin's Reflections
- East of Boston
- The Phantom Cyclist
- Op-Ed
- Entering Falmouth
- Off-the-Shelf
- Brewster Rec
- Cape Cod Rock Hopper
- Solon Economou
- Rep. Jeff Perry in His Own Words
- The Opinionator
- Bree's Blog
- Media Watch
- Travel Tales
- Cape 20 Something
- Conservative's Conscience
- Cape Cod Sports
- CG Heritage Museum
- Letters to the Editor
- State of Cape Cod
- Boston Bureau
- Heart of the Matter
- American Primitive
- Entering Bourne
- Mahler's Music Notes
- Historic Harwich
- Priscilla for Probate
- Don Howell's Blog
- Anastasia's Blog
- Art vs. Life
- Barnstable County Report
- The Great Gadfly
- Cape Cod Crusader
- Cape Cod Profiles
- Buckley's Blog
- Ray Gottwald's Blog
- Politics Etc.
- Matt Patrick's Blog
- The Savvy Thrifter
- Theatre
- The Blogfather
- Through a Washashore's Eyes
- Codfish Press
- Toward Democracy
- Eastham Windmill
- Cape Cod Baseball League
- WampaGate
Archives
- October 2008 (1)
- September 2008 (3)
- August 2008 (5)
- July 2008 (2)
- June 2008 (5)
- May 2008 (4)
- April 2008 (1)
- March 2008 (5)
- February 2008 (2)
- January 2008 (3)
- December 2007 (5)
- November 2007 (3)
- October 2007 (8)
- September 2007 (6)
- August 2007 (4)
- July 2007 (10)
- June 2007 (7)
- May 2007 (6)
- April 2007 (7)
- March 2007 (7)
- February 2007 (4)
- January 2007 (2)
- December 2006 (4)
- November 2006 (2)
- October 2006 (4)
- September 2006 (3)
- August 2006 (1)
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.
David G. Tuerck is Executive Director, The Beacon Hill Institute, and Chairman and Professor of Economics, Suffolk University. The Institute's studies on Cape Wind can be found
the book authors;
Great column!
Congrats to the author