Footnotes

To Barbara (cont'd)
If you don't address it, the public
is going to wonder why and possibly
arrive at a conclusion that may be
detrimental to your endeavour.

Or is it happening already?

Even the Alliance site is way behind on this
issue as their "alternatives" are YEARS
away.
The Cape Cod Commission "Land based energy review"
http://www.capecodcommission.org/windenergy/home.htm
was last UPDATED IN 2005!!!!

What's going on here???

And you've actually posted,
"Cape Wind will die of self-inflicted wounds."

If the Alliance had applied 3 or 4 strategies earlier in the scenario
as opposed to focusing on one,
they would'nt be fighting the war on three fronts like they are now.

I'm actually finishing this at about 10min till midnight.

Prophetic, is'nt it?

"Overseas" examples (links) are exactly that-- overseas. It's a European issue
which you can't seem to let go of.
It seems like a "smokescreen tactic"
but the winds of time and truth are quickly blowing away the smoke.

Also, Barbara, the first line of your post 3/21/09 3:41 p.m. is'nt
exactly precise:

"add a dose of common sense"

If "common" means all Americans, and not
just a two-mile radius around Nantucket Sound you're dead wrong and I think
you know that.
I don't have to quote statistics or post
links to prove that most Americans are
SICK TO DEATH of depending on a treacherous energy source like petroleum and are desperate for an alternative.
There is NO WAY ON EARTH this fact
has slipped your mind, Barbara.
You are not a zombified "Manchurian candidate".
You must have thought of this at
least 10 times in the last few years,
yet you SO VERY conspicuously avoid
this crucial issue.

It's your achilles heel.

I suggest you address it.

Carl, 'nuf said and seen here:

http://coalicionventanasverraco.org/node/255

Telegraph UK

'Windfarms: One of the great deceptions of our time'

"The total power generated by all the 2,300 turbines so far built in Britain, is less than that contributed by a single medium-size conventional power station."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2910741/Windfarms-One-of-the-great-deceptions-of-our-time.html

Shell Wind:

“Shell will no longer invest in renewable energy technologies such as wind, solar and hydro power because they are not economic, the Anglo-Dutch oil company said today…”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/17/royaldutchshell-energy

...continued.

costs

please explain how you're on the side of law and yet haven't won a court case yet not to mention even a legal challenge? Even with uncle ted throwing his weight around you just can't get a judge or regulator to go your way.

That has GOT to be driving the blue blood establishment nuts!

This battle between the wealthy elite & the best interests of all the rate paying breathers on the East coast.

It has been legally shown to you how the power market CANNOT function as you claim it will, yet, undaunted you push on in Johnny Cochran defiance of the truth to see if the corporate lords you sycophantishly work for will allow your twisted facts & real life example challenged stories to get past public scrutiny.

But that's just it, you've done all you can to drag this out, but I believe the story is too big and important for the public to stop paying attention to their best interests and let clean power be stopped now!

Bankers will look long term at the $'s and they will decide if they will loan money for a wind farm. If you have your permits, that's all you need!

I'm not Carl I'm wiggie!

uh, you go Carl .... you tell em!

Barbra & all who believe the worst of the windfarm, it seems odd that allegedly scientific, pragmatic, well reasoned people who know to look both to opinions & research for the complete answer seem to miss that
Barbra gives about 80% conjecture & 20% misleading facts, both by link and personal statements.

Real life examples of modern wind technology working well & cost effectively, while dong the tiniest fraction of environmental damage as the power-source, by default, you advocate; seems to dispel your worst-case scenarios of terrible harm you repeatedly claim are inevitable should a windfarm be erected.

Within you own statements lies truth(which you must begrudgingly brush up against now & then)

Whether the windfarm is built does not depend on my thoughts, nor Barbra's ilk.

Babs:"I'm siding with applicable law"

The applicable law has spoken quite loudly that it believes that emission free power from the wind has negligible impacts. If what you really mean is law that makes an exception to the powerful that don't notice the 5%-10% increase of our current power

OMG!...

Imagine that...

Shell -OIL-... "Dumps WIND"!

"Who could imagine?"...

-Frank Zappa/'Freak-Out' - 'Help I'm a rock' (COAL?) -circa 1966

Shell...
"plans to invest more in biofuels which environmental groups blame for driving up food prices and deforestation..."

Sounds like it's right up the D'alliance...

Alley.

Dear Piggie:

Just the facts, I'm siding with Nantucket Sound and applicable law, add a dose of common sense, and you have my attention.

http://bjdurk.newsvine.com/_news/2009/03/21/2577658-wind-power-cost-clarified-by-glenn-schleede-?mode=edit

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/17/royaldutchshell-energy

'Shell dumps wind, solar and hydro power in favour of biofuels'
Tim Webb
guardian.co.uk
17 March 2009

"Shell will no longer invest in renewable technologies such as wind, solar and hydro power because they are not economic, the Anglo-Dutch oil company said today. It plans to invest more in biofuels which environmental groups blame for driving up food prices and deforestation..."

Dear Barbara-

Please don't place my name before Carl's.

His posts are much more scholarly
and authoritative than mine.

Your friends Maverick and Bobcat are attacking
me with all vulgarity and it is damaging
the image of all anti Cape-Wind activists.

As weel as exposing the
true frustration of defeat.

Since you have'nt resorted to such tactics with me
or the hundreds of others you've
discussed this issue with, it's
agreed that you'll be granted "corrective priviledge"
which I will have the honor of administering to your posts as soon as
I am finished with your
cerebrally-handicapped colleagues.

What are you DOING siding with people like them?
You're professional, and their debate/discussion "tactics" can be found amongst children!

Think about your reputation!

JUMP THE FENCE!!

Piggie and Carl:

'Offshore' is not viable/

February 12, 2009
Bloomberg News

"Offshore wind-energy installations in Northern Europe have lost appeal among financiers because of increased costs and difficulties in building and running equipment miles at sea, a German banker said.”

Senior VP of Vestas Peter Kruse: "The only way forward is more turbines in virgin ground onshore," and, "Politicians want offshore so they can avoid the Nimby discussion, but they are allowing a tiny minority to force the rest of the population to pay double for renewable energy.'

"GE Wind Energy Europe Managing Director Rainer Broring states the 3.6 MW GE 3.6l has been shelved for the moment, "GE's initial plan to install a prototype this year will therefore not materialise yet..."

"GE Wind, the subsidiary of the American energy giant General Electric, has left the risky business at sea altogether. Although seven 3.6-MW turbines have operated since 2003 ten kilometres off the Irish port of Arklow, the more secure business is on shore, says a spokesman of the company."

BOOST in G.E. Turbine sales:

http://www.reuters.com/article/internal_ReutersNewsRoom_BehindTheScenes_MOLT/idUSTRE52F66920090316

"Last year we announced the introduction of our 2.5 MW machine which we think will adapt well in Europe," Victor Abate, vice president for the renewables arm of GE Energy, told Reuters in an interview."

"There are many factors in the air: the financial crisis, the capital crunch, the recession and now you have $800 billion in a stimulus package and an administration which is focused on alternative energies," Abate added.

Nice to have met you bunny

have a good bunny-sleep

hi peck ;-) will send ya an email. Nice to have met ya piggie, ttys peck... this bunny is goin' to bed.

Heya somebunny!... Thanks.

P.s. Whatchabeendoin?... Send a note.

Yeah Richard Egan--
He starred in GOG (1954)
it's on my Youtube channel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W0_xJl_g2A

He also starred in a lot of good
b-movies
in the 50s.
Barb's got "my kind" of people
for friends, i'll say.

And here I am opposing their cause.
God life is strange.

So funny to see you note succinctly what most us earlier commenters have picked up over the years piggie...

Blabs loves to cut & paste all kinds of (crap) stuff out of this 'n that...

And when you actually do go and check out most of what she quotes...

It...
More often than not...
Refutes her basic premise.

I don't have the time nor inclination to point it out time and again...

Other paid letter writers use the same lines of BS too...

So my friend...
Have some (a lot) of fun with this (fake blonde) woman...

Who professes to be ~only~ concerned for the sake of 'ol Cape Cod...

While living in Northboro...
The adjacent town of one of the incorporators of the D'alliance to 'Protect' the -VIEW of the FEW-...

Richard Egan...
Who just happens to live in Southboro...

(And she has -NO-... business/financial/personal relationship with the man... Go figure)

Billionaire & part-time resident of none other than OYSTER HARBORS... Osterville's gated community.

As Mav likes to say:
"Hmmmmmmm"?

bunny-

quite to the contrary-
I thought I might had found an
old friend.

no scare at all

I know Barb's throwing up a smokescreen
but i'm wondering wether she
looked at #3 close enough.

Hell, that PDF file was slanted
like a glacier and I still pulled
a few good things from it.

thanks... sorry for the scare lol

Somebunny-

Oh, o.k. it's just the way you posted
"yeah that's him"-- I thought
I might have went to school with
you or something.

Cute name BTW

Again, EPAW is really
like a twin sister of SOS.
I don't see any ALTERNATIVES
to wind listed there.
That's a little spooky
to me but not to Big Business.

The Brits (telegraph) have there own
thing going. It's their task, their job
and there's many differences
between U.S. and them.

Let me look at #3 a little more....

piggie: no you don't. Just doing my daily reading and saw your post to fb. I usually read most links that are posted.

Somebunny- Do I know you?

1.EPAW is against ALL Wind Power
and LIKE THE ALLIANCE offers NO
alternative, This is spooky.

2. "The Telegraph" cites this as
(about the) primary reason against wind power:

Even with modern turbines, wind farms are unable to operate at full capacity because of the unreliable nature of Britain's wind.

Problem with this is that we're
not in Britain. It's their technology
they are probably working with too.

3. THANKS FOR THE COOKIE BARB!!!
On Tuesday, California voters overwhelmingly -- 65 percent of the vote -- rejected a statewide ballot measure that would have required 50 percent of power to be generated from renewables by 2025. The measure was fought by both environmentalists and utilities because, they said, it was poorly drafted and would hinder renewable power development."

You point me to THIS????
The first thing it says is that the
California State Legislature can't
even draft a bill right to get this started.

What's going on here???
Okay, i'll read the rest but I
doubt i'll find much.

sorry to insert my two cents in.. piggie just peeked at your facebook, yup you are he. hiya Peck... keep up the good work ;)

And don't forget that
Thomas Edison once
said AC current is dangerous.

You're using it this moment.

I'll look through them, Barbara
but I think by now you're not
about to hand me a cookie.

I'll give it a look.....

Piggie:

I'm offering two more reports for your hopeful evaluation.

Why do you suppose 292 signatory organisations from 15 European countries are calling for moratorium on wind energy?

http://www.epaw.org/

Perhaps because...

Telegraph UK

‘Wind farms fail to deliver value for money, report claims’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/
newstopics/politics/2910739/Wind-farms-fail-to-deliver-value-for-money-report-claims.html

This report is by the California Public Utility Commission:

Reuters
November 7, 2008

‘California study shows high cost of renewable power’

“While renewable power one day may compete with baseload power sources such as natural gas, coal and nuclear, it currently is more costly, and much less dependable.”

http://in.reuters.com/article/
governmentFilingsNews/idINN0629356520081107?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

And--
This is the FUNNIEST
video you will ever
see in your life
with 160,000+ hits
so far:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lqDxKQ300k

This is my latest achievement
which took TWO WEEKS to create:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB_w_M4z8lg

DR STRANGELOVE with Peter Sellers
with "hidden scenes" very, very funny.

This is my poor lonely
Pre-70s Sci-fi "Blog"
http://zoppy.blogspot.com

And this is my WONDERFUL
Youtube channel with 250
of the best b-movies,
Pre-70s sci-fi and
other stuff:
http://youtube.com/randywilharm

Okay, i'm back on topic---

Page 35
Mike Logsdon, director of development for Invenergy, the company develop-
ing the wind farm highlighted in The Oregonian article, does not find Pierpont’s findings credible. “We’ve had a number of other wind farms over the country and residents living by them and never had any
problems", said Logsdon.

Perhaps the greatest virtue of wind energy, from a fuel-cost perspective, is that wind is free. Combined with the
financial help the PTC provides wind-energy developers (see Incentives/Subsidies section), the free nature of wind as a fuel source leads to wind energy’s extremely
low marginal cost; and considering the high cost of oil and natural gas—the latter being the dominant fuel
source in Texas—wind as a free fuel source is highly attractive.

Incidentally, peck, I am a
"he piggie". This is me:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1405734695&v=feed&viewas=1405734695

Mav...

I asked you (at least once)...

When are the blues running?

After all...

I told you the FACT...

CAPE WIND...

Not...

Going to...

DREDGE...

Unlike your fishing buddies do.

FESS UP!...

Got a hankerin fer blue.

Whoa piggie!...

We got us a PRO-WIND...

-PIG-...

On -OUR- side!

You go guy/girl...

FACTOID!

:~)

I forgot to add--
The bird "issue"
was from page 35

Sorry to blow you outta yer boat mav...

I, nor my significant (I might add) other have any financial interest in, nor stand to gain one DIME from CAPE WIND being built nor its ultimate success.

Regardless...

If you consider CW "an extension of everything that has put this country in the trash heap."...

Just what do you consider what the FOSSIL FUEL industry has done for...

-US-?

And...
The AIR we breath...
The WATER we drink...
The FOOD (& FISH) we eat...
Tell me that.

You are blinded by the FACT that we -ARE- poisoning ourselves...

By...
BURNING FOSSIL FUELS...
To the degree we do.

We must...
Start somewhere:
CAPE WIND...
Is a START.

P.s. Not much I resent or take offence in the way of comment; but to suggest I am 'on the take' as far as this project is concerned...

Personally, deeply offends me.
For one significant reason...
It, is not FACTUAL.

AIG...
On the otherhand.
Has offered me -REALLY BIG- bonus.
(I might take it)

Here's something on
the bird "issue":

Wind-farm proponents dismiss avian-death arguments as misleading.
The AWEA writes:

For every 10,000 birds killed by human
activities LESS THAN ONE DEATH
is caused by turbines.

HELLLOOO BARB--
This is what you post
about ALL THE TIME.
I'm only using the info you pointed us
to and it's all accurate- you can check
it yourself....


Wind energy development’s overall impact on birds is extremely low compared with other human-related activities. No matter how extensively
wind is developed in the future, bird deaths from wind energy are unlikely to be ever more than a
small fraction of bird deaths caused by other human-related sources, such as cats and buildings.

I gotta take a break--
Doing cut-and-paste from a PDF
is a Royal B-tch even on Linux.

Page 32
Both environmental benefits and concerns accompany wind-energy development. As a result, wind energy
finds support and opposition from environmental and
conservation groups.
The spinning of wind-turbine blades produces no pollution. According to Michael Goggin.

Wind energy provides a number of environmental
benefits...Emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) from
Texas’ electricity generation sector fell by 2 percent
from 2000 to 2006, during which time wind energy grew from producing 178 MW to 3,000 MW.
In contrast, CO2 emissions from the electric sector
increased by 25 percent from 1990-2000, before wind energy became a major part of Texas’ generation mix. Based on the results of recent stud-
ies by ERCOT and GE, adding 11,600 MW of wind energy in Texas would reduce CO2 emissions by
22 million tons per year, sulfur dioxide emissions
by 18,000 tons per year, and nitrogen oxide emissions by 8,000 tons per year.

Peck...no interest in being in your or anyone else's league. The Cape Wind sham is an extension of everything that has put this country in the trash heap.

You and your significant other act like the saviors of the earth. You are both in it for money and Nantucket Sound be damned. Did you work for AIG in your past?

By the way--
This report is slanted (against wind power) like a cathedral roof!
I'll have to go find my own
sources, I guess.

Page 22
T. Boone Pickens says we should replace natural gas with wind
for generating electricity. The Sierra Club sees wind and other renewable energy sources as replacements for coal.
Page 23
Additionally, unlike conventional-power generators, wind-energy providers do not have to pay ERCOT for
generation-schedule deviations.
The result of this is that non-wind generators, and primarily customers, must bear the cost of ERCOT’s
deploying regulation and other reserves when there are
large deviations from their schedules.
Page 25
The financial handouts available to wind developers are so generous that, in Texas, many wind-energy produc-
ers “will offer wind power at no cost or even pay to have their electricity moved on the grid, a response common-
ly referred to as ‘negative pricing.’ Wind providers have an incentive to sell power even at negative prices be-
cause they still receive the federal production tax (PTC)
credit and renewable energy credits.

The Alliance-- Yes.
Barb has'nt smashed me YET.
So i'll be good to her.

Why can't I go up against A GUY??
I don't want to fight a lady!!!