CapeCodToday Blog Chowder

Maverick, if you want to know the aswear to your questions, look back at all my posts, it's in there somewhere.

I am not insulting you when I say you don't keep your word, I'm just recounting the fact you made a promise & broke it.

You insist the sound will be destroyed by some unknown means brought about by the wind farm, yet you refuse to list the ways it would be destroyed.

You're the one that has to live with not keeping your word when I fulfilled my end of the bagin.

Maverick, have you ever admitted the existence of the Danish windfarm & the fishermen that make their living among the turbines there? Also the complete lack of destruction visited among the waters there. Or the increase in the fish catch. I doubt you have, it would force you to admit the truth of windfarm saftey.

The story that's rattling around in your head is that a wind farm will destroy Nantucket sound.

Are you saying that Jim Gordon tricked 19 agencies over 8 years & bribed his way to permits?

One way to keep the Chinese out of deciding things for America is to be independent, like with energy.

In fact Maverick, you sound like a big tobacco lawyer arguing that unless doctors can find the exact cancer causing ingredient out of 1000's of toxic additives in a cigarette, than you'll yell "YOU'VE GOT NO CASE!" Meanwhile 100's of thousands of people die from them every year.

Are you seriously threatening me to goto the Alliance for 'information' if I don't give it to you?

My God Marerick, that is a trick is beneath my 13 year old daughter. If you're worried about me thinking you'll spread a little more misinformation, don't. You could hardly get any worse.

BUZZ, it will it NOT destroy the natural texture of the current landscape anymore than a fishing or sail boat. It will cause less poisoning of the waters and air.

Most people put clean water and air over the looks of something that can only be seen on VERY clear days, during daylight hours, which if you are lucky you can APPRECIATE the graceful movements of power that doesn't increase cancer rates, or asthma, or birth defects, or mercury levels in fish.

But you're right, energy independence will never work so why try?

Maverick, I played your game last time of providing all the answers you asked for, then you refused to list the ways a wind farm would destroy the Sound.

You did not keep your word, fool me twice.

Are you trying to say if the pollution is generated somewhere else, it doesn't effect us?
The majority of ANY fossil fuel burned in the Northeast will ultimately find it's way out over the Cape due to the air currents and the convection effect be dumped here. This is the major reason Cape Cod's air is twice as dirty as Boston. A wind farm that generates an average of 75% of Cape Cod's power everyday will DISPLACE the toxic emissions of those fuels that end up in our air, water, & land.

So it's OK with you if they coal is burned in Salem MA and 1/2 of that mercury, sulfur, and particulates end up here? You know it this attitude of poisoning someone else's backyard that has America dirty, over the barrel, and dancing to petrol dictatorships tunes.

America's taken enough of a beating at the hands of these thugs, and you want to let them do it more?

How do you live with yourself.

Where are all the wind foes with their precious stories that the sound will be destroyed by wind turbines.

I guess I lost them all by using that 'science' stuff. I thought that when I refuted royalty, all the followers would come out of the windwork to defend the prince.

Alas, they must be pretty busy figuring out their next delay tactic.

Maverick, you state"Cape Cod has one Nantucket Sound. The wind factory will destroy it."

Years ago you promised me you would list the ways the Wind farm would destroy it.
You claimed to be a man of honor, yet you have never given me a list of ways the sound will be destroyed, finally you claimed all your anti-wind friends had explained it so you didn't need to.

Simply give me the list and I will explain each point to you.

If you value your honor, you still have a chance to make good on your word.

By the way, the WF would prevent the pollution from the mix of oil, coal, & natural gas used to produce 75% of the electricity used on Cape Cod every day.

Since we could have permitted this wind farm in 2 years without all the wild lie mongering you and your ilk have spread to Shill for the Osterville mega rich (& Kennedy) we'd have 4 LESS years of poisoning the waters in which you make your living. (& the air)
Amazing that after all this time you still refuse to acknowledge Danish fishermen who have no issue with VERY similar wind turbines.

There's something wonderful in Denmark

Frank, I have a religious belief that the air water & land where I live should not be so polluted.

If your view of what's 'sacred' is implemented, do we clear all boats from view each morning?

Frank, are you recieveing any money from the Alliance to keep us dependant to forien interests? I'm sorry, I meant the Alliance to allegedly protect Nantucket Sound.

Do you recognize the 10 Indian Commandments?

1Remain close to the Great Spirit.
2Show great respect for your fellow beings.
3Give assistance and kindness wherever needed.
4Be truthful and honest at all times.
5Do what you know to be right.
6Look after the well being of mind and body.
7Treat the earth and all that dwell there on with respect.
8Take full responsibility for your actions.
9Dedicate a share of your efforts to the greater good.
10Work together for the benefit of all man kind.

These are words I try to live by. Every line seems to call out to those with a sacred view of Nature that we need to switch from the destructive energy we use to clean energy.
Why would you betray these values?

If the Native Americans have an issue with an obstructed view with clean, energy producing turbines, than they must have a much bigger issue with all the particulates that obscure their view now. It also obstructs people from breathing properly, increases the occurrence of asthma & asthma attacks. It also kills 11 - 14 people every year. It also worsens upper respiratory infections and makes a more fertile ground for flu and N1H1. Now if ever there was an 'evil' plague, this is it.
A windfarm would lessen those obstructions to the skyline, that seems like a sacred practice I can be on board with.

Yes, I must admit I have a religious belief, I believe we can have our power without toxic emissions. What makes their belief more important than mine, and every other breather on the East coast?

Any Native Americans who wish to discuss the spiritual merits of stopping a wind farm can come talk to me about it, lets see who just being paid to have a take on a religious belief.

I mean how else can someone have clearing house pricing explained to them repeatedly over 8 years and still claim the power will be too expensive. Obtuse doesn't begin to explain it.

Again thanks for being there for clean power.

Mavrick, I think I finally figured you out. You are actually for Cape wind and post the most ridiculous claims possible with no research to make the opposition look good, I mean REALLY GOOD.

Opps, sorry to blow your cover, alright back to the uninformed banter.

Maverick, you suck. Also you smell bad. Every thing you say is wrong.

Thanks Maverick, (wink - wink)

I know 6 of those people who signed, I do not believe any of them are lobbyists, 1 of them is in a Union.

I am certain they all believe in deriving our energy from clean sources.

Maverick, you have been so tragically wrong so often, I'm not sure why you think throwing your thoughts out there actually helps the anti-wind cause.

Aren't the native Americans concerned their 'unobstructed view' is filled with particulates & poisons, the water filled with toxins, the living balance disrupted by not allowing the replacement of oil & coal burning energy by clean wind technology.

I believe in the spiritual concepts of being a great steward of the earth. I believe in the patriotic duty of Americans to free themselves from foreign petrol-dictatorships. I believe Cape Cod should be as independent as possible, all of which is achieved by a windfarm.
I am referring to the real world, not the cartoon-Rush Limbaugh world that Maverick lives in.

Long live a clean energy future, death to the lies told about Wind power. (I wish good health to Wind foes, that is why I support a wind farm.)

Very simple, if their 'web-paper' is bundled with some sort of service you would already like to have like direcTV or even showtime or HBO, it will succeed. There are 1000's of brands out there that could be used to piggyback the small cost of a monthly subscription.

Just like DirecTV made their 'basic' package more attractive by adding XM Radio(existing content), the paper will make a deal to be added on to some entertainment package as just another channel, except it is access to a paper that carries news about your local.

The % of people that will pay for what they perceive that can get for free a click or 3 away is pretty low and falling every day.

My prediction is that Murdoch will do it kinda successfully, and others will follow doing it a lot better having learned form his mistakes.

my 2 cents

Behold irrational despiser's of wind turbines, look upon the science or these proposed works, and despair. For it is now out in the open how the environmental benefits by displacement of 75% of the Capes electrical use (in an equivalent amount of power produced by a predominantly fossil fuel portfolio) AS WELL AS THE BEGINNING OF THE MARCH AWAY from FORIEN ENERGY CLIFF. So many simultaneous goals are achieved of better air quality lessening asthma attacks, # of asthma suffers, (growing each year one lives in heavy particulate matter such as is off gassed from burning fossil fuels.) The only benefit to fossil fuels really, is to the shareholders of the coal&oil industries mucking up our air & increasing our health care costs. To the point that their lobbies have sucked up more of our tax dollars than any other legacy fuel cost. Ick! This taxation makes my skin crawl. We may be down to a last hurdle in the FAA. We know it's technically possible to use large Off Shore wind for the far smallest footprint of ALL toxic fumes, it's now down to politics. Let's pray for Wisdom. (& clean air)

I just went to buy my own copy of the Cape Cod times for the headline, and poof, like magic, there is a big sticker stuck over the headline.

Times, you are such poor losers. You've done it so many times, getting an advertiser to buy a sticker for the front page whenever a big, positive headline for the windfarm will run.

I just have to say, in the most intelligent way I possibly can, YOU SUCK!

You have done this so many times, of course that means there have been so many great headlines about the windfarm you've had to print. I guess there is some justice in that!

Lungs and wallets everywhere in the Northeast REJOICE!!!

O.K. Feds, now its your turn to be masters of the obvious and let the turbines start turning.

YEEEEEE-HAWWWWWWWW!

The wind turbines are coming! The wind turbines are COMING!

It is so refreshing to see political representatives actually advocating on behalf of the people the are supposed to represent instead of large corporations that are out to have the law changed so they can make a buck without having to clean up their own mess.

Thank YOU! It's time for people in a position of power to to observe the science of the situation instead of the oft-disproven stories wind foes desperately wish all the regulators, judges, & commissioners would listen to.

These are the people who would be held to task if the Wind Farm were to bring harm to the Cape or ANYONE!

What puzzles me most on a daily basis is this: If half the harm predicted by the wind farm foes (defying research) came true, it still couldn't be 1/10th as bad as the harmful toxic emissions in our air that generating electricity produces.

1 person prematurely dies each month from these emissions Cape Wind could prevent; STILL we haggle over view shed.

What kind of people have that kind of hubris?

As I explain to my 13 year old daughter, "Pride goeth before a fall."

She replied "That's gonna hurt"

I don't think Yao Ming was any part of a Cape Wind supplied graphic.


Voice, you quote
"If you haven't learned by now, going Green will be one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on a world wide scale.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for conservation of resources and protecting our environment....but its obvious to me that our governments agenda is much more than that."

Voice, please, don't confuse sustainability & renewable energy with all out greenwashing. I assure you that restructuring lifestyles to consume a fraction of energy & resources is just fiscal commonsense as well as better for breathing air, drinking water, and eating food.
Now if you're still in the factually challenged camp that follows Rush in the theory Liberals are trying to pull a global warming hoax - scaring us into wind & solar power that won't work, & thus cause the world to fail.

If this is how you think, please leave the conversation to people who understand 7th grade science.

Even if trillions of tons of CO2 are not making the world hotter, it is making the oceans more acidic, eroding reefs. Bad news!

Perhaps it was named for MY-A-SOUND, as in NOT Jim Gordon's Sound.

For all our disagreements, enjoy the sailing!

Not to toot my own horn too loudly, but I believe Barb beat a retreat when I questioned her conscience on helping the very polluters who are BY FAR the most destructive to all life, avian included.

She can post all the oil & coal paid off researcher links & opinions she wants, but a small honest part of her still has to look in the mirror and see who she has allied with. Sure, she can make crazy quotes like "cockroaches cause asthma, not particulates from burning hydrocarbons". She can say it and believe it is true on a certain level to 'get her way', but these distortions will weigh on anyones soul to the point of withdrawing from the debate.

Now Peck, Republican nor Democratic ways are not to blame for the worlds ills. To the point we let pundits & special interests stir up non-issues to eclipse the real issues, is the degree to which our governance become not in our best interests & devolved into graft.

Letting complex rules of business be passed with out debate from intelligent opposing view points, is the degree to which we are all guilty of not paying enough attention.

This just in, YAO MING has been shrunk to just less than 8 inchs tall & has been seen walking around in power cables off the cape & islands.

When Patrick Cassidy was asked to confirm his story, he only remarked "Well, that's the copy the Alliance had given me, when have they ever been wrong?"

And in other news on Cape Cod, Ted Kennedy admits "Wind Farms really ARE good for America, I've been a fool to hold up such a significant change of energy policy based on vanity. I guess I really have been prejudiced against wind power for no good reason."

This just in from China, the ruling party declares their decades long oppression of Tibet a huge mistake, vows to make up for their terrible actions immediately.

Now from Detroit, the big 3 in a joint statement admit "Yes, its true, we've been fighting MPG and emission standards for years because big oil doesn't want to lose such a huge market. And yes, we did conspire with them to kill the electric car. Our bad."

If only the people guilty of terrible wrongs, would admit their corruption instead of dragging the world down with them.

Maverick, I don't know if a blogger has misinformed you,I've only given straight, real life based science and examples.

If your issue is with misinformation of a story written here about the windfarm, or misrepresented information about the windfarm, I'd like to know.

Do I understand your statement that since you believe CCtoday changes the facts and misleads people, that is justification for the times to do so, so you don't mind them lying?

Sounds like the basis of how a rational world unravels.

Justin, you make a lot of great points except you're off on one of them, Wind power will NOT cost more than current power, it can ONLY cost the same unless purchased through a long term contract that HAS THE POSSIBILITY of costing a little more now, but will be a deal in the years to come as it stays at the same rate for 15-20 years.

Anyone who tells you it will cost significantly more is a shill who has fallen for the "Cape Wind will destroy Nantucket sound" claptrap.

Energy producers do not choose what price they sell power at, the market decides that.

This omission of reality should serve as a load klaxon to anyone swayed by Alliance alarmism of higher costs.

Yes, there are programs that cost a fraction more (an earlier poster stated if it were 100% clean energy, $183 per year) some people opt to spend this much more, as renewables are higher quality energy; made in America, not creating a health hazard, and money goes towards thier local town's other renewable energy projects.
Find out how much your town has earned:http://www.masstech.org/cleanenergyorg/BalanceAvailable.pdf

wise pleasant planet. One where I'd love to play frisbee with out such an oppressive symbol of imposed cost, fiscal and health wise.

When I dressed up as 'Smokey', I'd say things that a smokestack would say like,"I've got a right to put particulates in the air, you can't discriminate against ME!", or "Gosh I'll pay my taxes real soon", or "I'm only adding a few thousand each year to your electric bills" or "I sure hope another tanker doesn't spill on its way here again!"

My Daughter (7 @ the time) got mad at me until I took the suit off. She's still as assertive about environmental issues today.

Anyway, ('nuff rambling)

The EPA under new management is stopping MTR for now, we can only hope it is halted forever.

While I'm at it, it is great to see dollars from the stimulus going to improve efficiency- making existing buildings high performance, requiring a fraction if any fuels to run them, that is a path to intrinsic value in these troubled times. These are steps to independence that reduce future risk of war. War is 4 fear of not having enough, remove that and peace can be

I love that particular part of the canal, I know the parking lot area in the shadow of the smokestack.

About 5 years ago I dressed up as 'Smokey' the smoke stack and we marched up to Mirant past that cool little harbor singing about silly things like wanting better air for everyone to breath. I sang 'blow'in in the wind' (w/ windfarm slant) for the first time, and I believed that if people spoke up for their breathing rights that everything was going to get better.

Today it got a whole lot better, 150 mountain top removal permits were put on pause. Everybody does understand they put the by products legally in to streams there for years. Its called slurry. My Dad makes fireworks, to him slurry is a mixture of gunpowder & just enough water to make it soupy so it can be used as a coating on other fireworks.

Imagine it up stream of where your family lived.

MTR is like a scar across the skin of the earth, like someone declared war on nature & living things.

I guess if breathing is everyone's religion, then yeah, I'm a little spiritual.

Coal & oil are a blight on an other

Is there some kind of citizens oversight of the CCC?

Aren't we in the current financial mess we're in because the people charged with managing our monies were allowed to become insulated from accountability?

I guess the only way is to put pressure on whoever appoints these Alliance suck-ups.

Paul Niedzwiecki said "The Commission has not yet appealed the Energy Facilities Siting Board decision." Well maybe Paul can give us an estimate on how much that will cost.

And who can forget the lie of the month:"First let me address your contention that the Cape Cod Commission plans to 'stop the Cape Wind Project on Nantucket Sound.' That is not accurate at all."
I doubt even Paul really believes this.

When he said the CCC had "..no choice but to review the project.", yes, right after they voted themselves jurisdiction over the part of the project in Federal waters.

I guess they really do think we are all idiots,or at least too busy to figure out how badly we've lied to.

I'd like to know how many good jobs that $285,637.90 could go towards instead of being one more legal loss.

...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

For the full report:http://www.ocean.udel.edu/Windpower/DE-Qs/IRP-KempLevy-Health.pdf

The Cape Wind health
benefit is summarized in the Army Corps of Engineers EIS as follows:
These calculations indicate the beneficial health effects
from the Cape Wind Project that could be realized every
year in the New England region include a reduction of
approximately 12 premature deaths, 20 cases of bronchitis,
200 emergency room visits, 5,000 asthma attacks, 15,000 restricted activity days, and 35,000 respiratory symptom
days. Cape Wind EIS, Section 5.16.4.3, page 5-270.)

Maverick, I'm running out the door this morning to attend the land and river event at URI, I just didn't have the time to look up the link, I thought someone else might have the link handy.

Chew on this research:For example, solar electricity
is abundant and it is cost-effective in remote locations. But for large-scale power, wind
is far cheaper (e.g., 4¢/kWh for Class 6 wind versus 28¢/kWh for solar photovoltaic,
Hertzog et al., 2001).

I know how alergic you are to research, but consider the truth of these words.

I work in the industry where we sell PV (photovoltaics) ST (solar thermal) Wind and micro hydro.

Large scale wind has the best cost to watt/hour ratio calculated over the life of a project, IF you have a good -great wind resource and you can use the economy of scale, like a fleet of the same taxi's (same parts, same mechanic)

For a home, PV is best because of low to no maintenance and long life span(35-45) years.

Denmark's windfarms are as close an example for wind, technology, community as you can get in the world. As far as subsidy goes, the subsidy to oil & and coal, per watt hour, is higher than that for renewables, & far more constant.

For coal, the government gives away those useless mountains for mountain top removal while relaxing regs for the toxic byproducts to be stored in unstable ponds that already have destroyed small valley towns.

Harvard medical research showed that 12-14 premature deaths would be prevented each year by toxins not put in the air from the wind farm.

Much more from Harvard research, does anyone have that link?

Barbra,

Iso newengland has determined that we can introduce 20% wind power into the local grid BEFORE we experience any problems with the fluxation of wind power. If we were to put in 1 Cape wind per year for 10 years, we would begin to approach 20%.

By the time we close in on that 20%, fuel cell technology should be well up to the task, (see MIT research, Europe tech, California) As well as the electric vehicles that will act as a distributed storage system.

AGAIN Barbra, you bank on technology going backward or standing still, every issue being the worst possible while ignoring the deadly emissions we constantly emit to generate our electricity.

No matter how much I bring up the issue of the toxic manner of our power, you refuse to talk to the issue BECAUSE it dwarfs the tiny impacts of a wind farm.

Your quote"If airplane technology compares, I'll take a train, boat, or a car." Airplane technology is 50 times safer than train, car, or boat. This shows how much you evaluate this on emotion and not on the facts.

How many offshore wind farm oil spills have there ever been?

Barbra, are you trying to state that the sound of turbines 5 miles from Hyannis could be heard on land?

Not by human hearing.

Here's a quote from a guy who lives by the Mass Maritime turbine:I AM a neighbor of the Academy (as well as alumni). I live between a whopping 150 to 200 YARDS from the turbine. If in the house with all the windows open I cannot hear the turbine over any background noise from the house such as the water heater, boiler, TV, radio, or fan. If I go in my backyard to the property line and concentrate to hear and the wind is blowing the right direction I can faintly hear the turbine at MMA."

Barbra, your problem is that you really believe that looking at a turbine, or hearing one is such a terrible thing, that any sane human would be repulsed.

Most people view them as beautiful. That appreciation deepens when they realize it will stabilize power costs, prevent toxins from poisoning humans & animals alike, & START to free us from the highly destructive fuels we currently use, a large % coming from the Middle East. & makes us more independent. What's NOT to love?

I live in Orleans and I hope both canidates realize the potential we have to reduce town energy costs long term by diligent energy audits, conservation and investing in Photovoltaic systems each year for town buildings.

With the rebates the towns qualify for, these systems will pay for them selves in 7 - 12 years, giving 25-35 years of free power. The simple trick to make these installations cost nothing for now, is to match the monthly loan payment to the offset cost of electricity. This extends the payback period a year or 2, but it means that there is no immediate cost and hundreds of thousands of dollars in avoided electrical costs during the life span of the system.

Electrical costs are one of the largest items in the yearly budget & it increases every year. Of course we could have taken care of the issue 2 years ago with the wind in the watershed, but it was a victim of politics beating out science and the majority of Orleans citizens wishes.

my apologies, continued from above...

You better believe Gordon is paying attention to every bit of learning we can distill from the turbines of the past. You'll notice in the article they mostly talk about turbines designed 10 - 15 - 20 years ago. Do you think automotive technology or airplane technology stands still and continues to repeat past mistakes?

We happen to live in a dynamic world where we constantly incorporate innovations into every new design. Life spans are increasing every year, do you think people don't understand this concept? Or are you just counting on apathy? In these times, apathy is dwindling as our energy future become critically important.

Best of all, if the turbines were to ONLY last 15 yrs (unlikely with the level of maintenance already planned) he could at that time purchase new nacelles that would have 15 more years of innovation & capacity, with out all the expense of research, permitting, & delays your ilk impose through back room deals once your phony charges lose in court again. Towers and permitting = 70%

Will you respond or change the subject?

Barbra, lets quantify the harm from wind compared to the harm from what fossil fuels that power will replace.

That someone may hear a swoosh on a daily walk is pretty insignificant to the harm of even a single asthma attack.

Lets also quantify the scenarios we use. You use the worst case scenario in every argument you make. I am taking rational, middle of the road estimates on turbine life span - hinting that performance may be even better.

The reason to go big with 130 LARGE turbines is that is replaces the power of 1000's of smaller turbines. What is cheaper to do maintenance on, 1000's of small cars, or 130 big trucks. The economy of scale is one of the most intelligent ideas to lengthen life span therefore profitability. The long island wind farm didn't make sense, I'm glad they didn't build it, didn't make sense.

From your article on :The Dangers of Wind
Many insurance companies have learned their lessons and are now writing maintenance requirements—requiring wind farmers to replace vulnerable components such as gearboxes every five years—directly into their contracts.

Barbra posted
"Green lobby must be treated as a religion " 5 posts above this one.


Maverick, the average wind speeds offshore are both generally and specifically to CW 2 mph more, giving you twice the power, or power over the long term that is 1/2 as expensive. There is an island in Denmark that has 11 onsore turbines, 10 offshore, the offshore provide 80% of the power making the island more than independent, it exports some power to the mainland.

In Hull, the 3 offshore turbines will provide 90% of the towns power once online. They put them offshore for the accelerated payback.

Let me take this opportunity to debunk the "costs twice as much to build offshore" theory, in that yes, it can cost up to twice as much to put in a single tower far offshore like where CW would be, but the additional power generated over the average lifetime of a wind farm (25-30 years)far surpasses the added cost. The cost of the power also has no ongoing costs of fuel or delivery.

It is simple apples to apples math that shows how offshore wind power is far cheaper OVER TIME.

Tsk Tsk Tsk Barbra, I give you real life example after real life example of wind & other renewables working effectively, safely, and at a cost far lower than your precious fossil fuels, which have been the demise of far more avians than wind EVER WILL!

Truly it is amazing how you, Maverick, & your ilk can ignore these inescapable truths with a simple "Poppycock".

What do you do when you read about these real life examples, pretend they never happened? I notice how you conveniently refuse to speak to Hull or Mass Maritime or Portsmouth.

I know, you have a medical condition that gives you a 'renewable success' blind-spot. Making all working green projects 'invisible' to you sight.

You call it a religion to believe in conservation/sustainability/clean power, I call it asserting every human's inalienable right to breath/drink/eat with out such toxic byproducts that drain the wealth out of our country to make many of America's enemies stronger.

Excuse me for asserting my rights.

I've openly debated your "poppycock" with the real world and you never come back with any facts.

Obtuse!

Hey Maverick,

Wind that works:
Portsmith Abbey, their turbine has been running for 3 years and will pay off in 2 - 3 more years generating at the average it has been.

Mass Maritime, their turbine has been running for 3 years and will pay off in 3-4 more years generating at the average it has been.

Town of Hull:Wind 1, was installed on the harbor in 2001. Hull Municipal Light Plant dedicated a 2nd turbine. Hull Wind 2 is a 1.8 MW Vestas V80, installed on a closed landfill. The two wind turbines supply more than 10% of Hull's energy needs. 3 more offshore turbines will provide 90%.
Electrical prices are stable, unlike the Cape. Hull 1 has paid off, 2 is well on the way.

All of these turbine success stories have been on land where the wind resource is not as great. Also the cost per watt goes down with larger turbines as they are more efficient at generating power.

It would be nice to list Orleans as a success story, but distortions like those presented by the NIMBY's on the Cape prevented science, once again, from letting citizens have the clean power they want.

Thanks a lot

For the 30 million SOS spent, I could have put up 10's of 1,000's of solar panels, maybe we wouldn't have had to build CW.

Well that's not really true. There are thousands of panels already on the cape making each home and business more independent while preventing toxins from being released by burning fossil fuels.

Fun Fact: The 660kW turbine at Mass Maritime is producing over half of all the renewable power on Cape Cod, at a fraction of the price of the hundred or so systems of solar thermal and photovoltaics. Nary a bird impact in a FAR greater flight path than all of Cape Wind would occupy. Barbra, you know birds, you know the highest density of avian flight paths is along the shore line of the East coast, except Cape Cod. Birds follow the Canal, not the outline of the Cape.

We have irrefutable examples in our own back yard of how Wind and solar work, yet you scream about the 'out of context' stats that prove your line of reasoning that science refuses to believe.

Hatred & Bigotry are the only things you have left to convince people.

Demagogue, there, I said it.

Good Day!

Barbra - you got my liar senses tingeling. Here's the double barrels of truth & facts-Stay with me if you can.

dem·a·gogue noun
1. A leader who obtains power by means of impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace.
Fact:every scientific set of criteria set before the wind farm has passed scientific muster. Each line of reasoning the SOS had put before an impartial board has been rejected. You are raiseing the SAME ISSUES as 6-7-8 YEARS AGO! Every time you call foul!

The tests weren't done right! The process was subverted! We did not get due process! We have not had public meetings on the new evidence we have discovered.
Every single round of scientific tests the same claims!

Ironically, you try to hang these Cape Wind, and their ducks are in order.

Barbra, be honest, you've said all these things, I double wind dare you to deny it, I did save all those blogs we had those years ago. The facts are gone for you, why else is SOS solely appealing to the most base of emotions to place vanity over the need for clean , affordable energy.

picture, to which we are no longer bound.

The average of wind and sun each year is a very solid number that varies by only a few percentage points each year. Solar panels are great on a small scale and gives you steady power for 30-40 years AFTER PAYBACK with next to no on-going costs.

Turbines have maintenance costs like a car and when you have a fleet of them the economy of scale brings down your costs even more. Oil & coal have costs that grow logrythimically over time so that the cost will increase on average between 5% - 10% EVERY YEAR.

Wind & Solar costs per watt keep coming down. Oil & coal recieve over 200 billion per year in our tax dollars while poisoning our air/land/water.

Coal will jump in price now that they can no longer put the massive toxic slurry in ponds as Bush allowed a few years ago accelerating mountain top removal.

While I don't see any turbines in the Sound now, we will all see Turbines there as a solution to the dirty energy we've been forced into by truth bending demo-gouges such as yourself.

Real life examples keep proving your distortions wrong.

Ah Barbra, you've come to offer up your distortions:Power Purchase Agreement, a deal happens when you have a commodity & someone agrees to your price. Gordon will offer his power at today's prices (or no one will buy) this MMS 'twice' price is a distortion on many levels. Portsmith Abbey has a 1.5MW turbine that will pay off in 2 more years, that leaves about 20 more years of just maintence costs. What you fail to take into account is the cost of power over time. This real life example (like Hull and many other) is how wind power on a large enough scale is a brilliant investment, not even counting the toxins all creatures are not sickened by.

You can SAY that the cost is twice, but real life examples show you to be wrong. It was only since last year that long term PPAgreements could be made to realize the long term benefits of solar & wind.

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.” This again is the distortion of taking a 1 year snapshot of the energy

Good point burnerman, I've limited reading her posts to every few months now.

I guess I feel bad for the families and friends she has helped tear apart by her & her alliance rabid insistence on wholesale distortions.

It goes like this:Make allusions that since GE bought wind technology from Bush buddy company Enron, that Jim Gordon & CW is corrupt & beneath contempt. Most people shrug it off for what it is; a desperate attempt to make CW look questionable. Then she over blows the bird impacts x 1000's and AFTER a little research most people again she her for what she is.

After a few hundred distortions later a lot of rational people start to have doubts. These all out lies need to be confronted for the propaganda they are. A 2 year review becomes an 8 year ordeal to kill clean power. 12-14 people prematurely die each year from the toxins we would prevent with CW. How ironic would it be if Kennedy and Yearly are part of those losses.

Convinced of their own stories with no basis in reality, we all suffer.

Barbra, pick your 'truth', I'll show it for the lie it is.

Yes, Barbra does leave her baloney bombs laying around here thinking the irrefutable logic of her feelings is beyond reproach.

So, just to be clear, the lawsuits you and your cronies have won is still standing at ZERO, even with the muscle of Kennedy and something like 30 million from alliance donors, the Cape Cod times firmly on your discredited side. Sure am glad Romney had such a big ego he thought he could be the next Bush.

Of course there's Maverick with his convincing"Not-uh"when it comes to CW. The world over, how many planes or boats have hit a wind turbine? Like SOS lawsuits won, ZERO!
Maverick, its going on 3 years now, when will you debate me on what harm the WF will do to the Sound? Where is that honor you claim to have? You did promise! Are you using biodiesel in you boat yet? or are you still polluting the sound you wish to protect?

Yep, Yucca is working great, now just 15,000 more years with our government in charge and it will all be cheap power & safe conditions.

Barbra,

You seem to discard the reality of how power is sold into the market. It has been pointed out several times at this website and you still refuse to acknowledge how it legally works.

1 more time: ISO New England takes bids for how much power they think they'll need every hour of every day. Every hour Cape Wind produces electricity it goes into the bid stack at $0. CW will be paid the going rate JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER POWER PROVIDER. CW gets no special treatment to offset what YOU say are prohibitive costs.

The only other option for CW is to sign a Power Purchase Agreement for a flat rate over 15 -20 years. A Power buyer would have to agree to that deal, CW CANNOT compel them. Would you like to pay 2009 prices for power in 2029? The national average for power cost increase per YEAR is conservatively 5%.

This is the reality of the situation you refuse to get. I'm not surprised as you & your Alliance cronies believe every word of every lawsuit that you've never won.

Please,leave the facts alone, you've beat them up enough already.

Christy, would you be willing give the town of Dennis the right of first refusal? Like with a restricted free agent, what ever deal you get to sell the property, the town will be given a chance to match it , or at least pay fair market value to acquire the property. (were you to ever sell) For open space, land bank, farmers market. Some thing the town can be proud of while being useful.

How about it Christy? It would show people you're not just doing it to sell out.

The wind farm CANNOT increase the cost of electricity. All financial risk is taken by Cape Wind.

These points have been WELL explained 100's of times. The power is either 1. sold into the bidding process at zero dollars knocking the most expensive power off the top of the stack OR 2. Cape Wind works out a Power Purchase Agreement where they sell their power to 75% of Cape Cod for 10 - 15 maybe 20 years at todays prices. Kinda like buying gasoline at 1993 prices with NO spikes in price from oil wars or OPEC jumping the price when they can.

So, voice of reason, you can now support a wind farm, welcome to the reason side of the street.

Hurricanes rip through the North sea where Denmark has wind farms, doesn't know them down.

Finding 1 nut job alleged environmentalist who makes a greedy statement is called reductionism. Ira Ehrenpreis doesn't speak for me or any enviomentalist I know. When Rush sez Feminists are ugly women trying to get laid, is he speaking for all conservatives?

Excuse me, but my body can tell the difference between HFCS and less refined sugars. The tobacco companies had studies for years showing how little the impact of smoking was, I never believed them either.

Have you seen the documentary 'King Corn'? There are more problems w/HFCS than just the health benefits, the process would be far too expensive to be competitive if not for the lavish subsidies that come from our tax dollars. (Kinda like oil)

Tell me, if HFCS is so great, why do we need a Corn Refiners Association to tell us how great it is?

Barbra, I noticed you didn't speak at any of the public hearings this last go-around. I had thought you might've dedicated yourself to some of the other 100 or so avian threats that present a far greater risk to birds that don't have mitigation programs like Cape Wind.

Maybe the Alliance muzzled you because all the research shows how completely over-blown you mortality figures have been all along.

I'm sure it hurts to see the parade of legal decisions go the way of Cape Wind, showing even your rich buddies can't hold up rational process much longer.

Please keep posting here though, in this day of high oil prices, we need something to laugh at.

Are there any Cape Wind bashers out there still trying to claim there has been some sort of legal flim-flam job pulled by Jim Gordon?

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?

My car is a diesel that runs on veggie oil, we are in the process of putting panels on the house for both electric and hot water.

I don't have any objection to oil profits, I take exception to the destruction it wreaks during extraction, processing, transportation, and when burnt at the final destination.

There exist many ways to derive oils from plants and if the oil subsidies were reduced to the same % that renewables get, they would cost the same or less than fossil fuels.

You seem to be stuck in the thinking that renewables are some gimmick that will fade away and we'll drill our way to a better future.

Let me ask you, would you rather build a house that generates $2,000 a month in energy bills (steadily increasing) or for the same price a house that (on average) has no energy bills?

Small wind isn't a very good deal (see the MTC reports, English data logging), bigger wind like hull resulted in no rate increases while every other town in America has gone up BIG in their rates.

Now, what was that story you were telling again?

Everyone tells a story to support their view. When two stories are at such odds as the pro-wind story vs. the anti-wind story, somebody's playing fast and loose with the truth.

Round and round the research has gone, and look at who the facts support once the dust has cleared? Why it just happens to be the side I've been on the whole way.

Is there anyone one out there still clinging to the fairy tale that off-shore wind power has anywhere near the harmful impacts as all the other energy forms out there?

If anyone still has the will to run that fiction around, well you're only embarrassing yourself.

Go take a nice drink of oil and count the lives lost and destroyed by it's exploitation.

Me, I'm taking a nice deep breath, and looking to a better future!

No No NO NO!

It was an atomic blast that melted the ice he was trapped in. It made him atomic as well, and caused the tyrannosaurus to grow and mutate into the monster know as Godzilla.

At another level, The monster he became was a metaphor for how the atomic bomb was a symbol of America's great power of irresponsible technology wreaking unforeseen consequences on an (mostly) unsuspecting world.

Get it straight!

capecrusader: I've been in many different meetings to try to find locations for on shore wind, the maze of regulations is on par with what Cape Wind is going through. I believe the National sea shore IS an excellent site, but every project that's even in SIGHT of it, is immediately shot down. The Feds have complete controll of anything even in SIGHT of the National sea shore. (View shed)

With on land wind, the same wind speed is less energy than offshore wind because of turbulence. (unless completely flat) It diffuses the energy of the wind and increases wear and tear over time so that the life time of the turbine is greatly reduced. If you've ever seen the Falmouth academy turbine in medium winds turn back and fourth and slow down due to all the land obstacles, you get the idea. It was poorly sited.

The best option is large scale, near-offshore wind. With the new laws coming out this July, towns can start developing it (Hopefully w/o the irrational rancor that sprang up around Cape Wind)

Complementing CIRenew’s wave energy forum held last January and our tidal energy forum scheduled for August 2, CIRenew encourages you to learn about another emerging/experimental-stage offshore renewable energy technology – deepwater wind turbines – at this upcoming event organized by the Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce.

06/12/2008 – Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce Breakfast Forum: Blue H Deepwater Offshore Wind Project

7:30-9:30 am, Cape Codder Resort & Spa, Route 132 Hyannis

The keynote speaker for this Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce Breakfast Forum will be a representative from Blue H USA, a company that has submitted a lease application for the installation of the “first floating deepwater wind energy unit in the United States.” This initial turbine will serve as a test platform for their conceptual 420 MW deep water offshore wind farm project in waters south of Martha’s Vineyard.

Cost is free; the general public is invited to attend.

To RSVP, call 508-362-3225, ext. 518 or 528.

To back up Shecky above, I install solar panels, but I understand that the best way to generate utility scale electricity is a large scale windfarm. I also install small scale wind turbines, and everyone in the industry also understands that the cost per kilowatt is much lower when using the economy of scale employed by the Cape Wind project. If you had a turbine the same size on land or in the water, the offshore one will produce twice the power (more wind resource).

So, do we want to pay twice as much for land based wind? ...or half as much for offshore wind?

The MTC released a report last month showing that small small wind rarely pays for it's self due to tower costs, poor siting (not up high enough), and maintenance costs. The 5kW and 10kW machines we put up are JUST big enough to beat the curve, anything smaller doesn't have a very good chance.

Most opponents of a windfarm made an emotional decision long ago that it is bad, & refuse to be swayed by facts.

Of course, I've been so blind! Developing our wind resource has nothing to do with the price of gasoline or heating oil. All I have to do is close my eyes and believe REAL hard that there is no relation. If the WF were built 5 years ago and the Cape had electric prices locked in then, it would make no difference now. Sure, there might be a few more windfarms going up because they saw us do it but no big difference. India and China might they could use the power of the wind and start following our example, but that wouldn't make a big difference. Seeing the example of how wind doesn't destroy fishing or planes or boats or view sheds or birds or whales might might cause people to see the distortions of the SOS'ers were way off, but that wouldn't make a big difference. Sure business' might start to out do each other to see who could use the least electricity or put the most solar panels on thier buildings, but that would make a big difference.

But, put all those little differences together...

Christy, how about letting us know how much those swift turbines are saving you on electric bills.
The federal tax credits for wind have been voted down, so please stop saying there is public money for the windfarm. It presently is not true.

oysterking,I guess you don't believe the research, but formed an emotional opinion long ago and only agree with those views against the Windfarm.

If you wish to throw any of your beliefs out there, I'd be glad to show you the real truth.

Peter, there are two ways power from the WF can be sold, clearing house style,(like every other Power plant) where bids are put in on projected power required for each hour of the day. Wherever that cut off point is, the price at that level is payed to all the suppliers, no matter what they bid at. Wind goes in as a $0 bid, putting downward on the entire process. Only the most expensive (or dirtiest) get left out, i.e. oil.

If we can marshal the political will to have the Cape light compact sign a long term deal with CW, we will lock in today's prices on 75% of our electricity for 15-20 years.

As to why Jim Gordon hesitated on an answer, I cannot say. The FEIR is not intended to assess the financial impact, only environmental.
If a permit is granted, then Jim gets the chance to see if investors agree with his research & business plan, that's the way the process works for EVERYONE.
Will it be viable? Unless you have a 100% reliable crystal ball, who can say. Jim has played by the rules, paid his dues, now he gets his chance.

sorry, typo, 2nd to last sentence should read:Only someone with a predetermined view, or an Alliance member would say NO.

Peter, in response:
the WF being insignifigant in the scope of power,it will only be the largest source of Green power yet. Only to be surpassed by the British one due to come online soon.

Fleets should be diesel with local made biodiesel

energy conservation:

If you send me your e-mail, I'll send you my conservation guidelines for a town, just a page long.

Electric fleets are great, but they are only a fraction better than gasoline, UNLESS the electricity is generated from a clean source, c'mon, you must have heard this by now.

Peter, you often say the predictions for WF output are years old, yet you can look at the wind data everyday on CW's website to see the production, it's there, it's real. Would a WF with a billion upfront cost, and only fractional upkeep be a good bet in today's rising energy market? Only someone with a predetermined view, or an Alliance member would say so.

Conservation is ESSENTIAL, but so is raising our green energy capacity over 1%. That's right, less than 1%.

I believe a Wind Farm in Nantucket Sound would be a disaster to the island. Just in the way over development of the land has ruined the island, so would a windfarm.

You've got to be kidding? The only over development in the sound is the excessive dragging that has scoured the sea bed. The towers would reduce that slightly by stopping the largest 'draggers' from their rape of the sound.

Everything in that poster is a hoax. Danger to sea life? How about the mercury the WF would prevent? Jim Gordon making money on clean energy, proven for the FOURTH TIME to have minor to no negative impact on the sound? How un-American is making money that improves the environment while making us less dependant on imported energy? Why do I bother trying to point out the bleeding obvious to wind bigots?

see you at the public hearing fro a dose of the truth.

I'm truly stunned there haven't been a bevy of Wind haters screaming about how UNFAIR this process has been.

CALLING OUT TO THE FACTLESS, I'm losing faith in all of you!

When I looked down the endless list of impacts investigated, we must remember that the many were absurd, yet had to be researched (mostly @ Jim Gordon's expense, & on all of our time) due to the disproportionate amount of 'pull' the ultra-rich wield on Cape Cod.

We must be vigilant to head the next slew of lies over renewable energy off at the pass again.

capecrusader, 2 million was an off hand comment I made without doing all the math first. You also claimed I may be right in that the turbines are a 'bit low' but there's nothing to be done about these zoning laws.
I can only say to that: put up a renewable energy more appropriate to the site. Wishful thinking may be fine for restoring tinkerbell to health, but it is a poor substitute for excuses about why a poor decision was made to deal with the real issue of dirty energy that keeps escalating in cost.

We don't put solar panels on the North side of a building, or turbines where the wind is poor.
Poor examples only give fuel to criticism.
Towers minimally should be 60 ft above all trees/buildings, with a 100ft as optimal.
If we could see the real kilowatt hours the swift turbines are producing each month, that would be the true barometer.

links to Swift turbine reviews: http://www.bettergeneration.co.uk/wind-turbine-models/the-swift-rooftop-wind-energy-system.html
scroll to end for comments.

Mr. Christy, I would love for your turbines to work & payback in 5 years, even 10 or 15 years would be acceptable. Working with people who put up a lot their own money, payback is important.

As we know, they can't be properly sited because of fall zone. I'm not blaming you, it's just an unavoidable fact of our zoning laws. (Which don't seem to apply to phone & power poles)

I admire you for trying to be part of the solution, but your solution presents a poor example of real production.

I sit in on a renewable energy committee in Orleans, one member commented "Why don't we do what Christy does?"

2 1.65MW turbines =3.3MW = 2,200 your turbines. 2198 more: poles, parts to go wrong, inverters, connections to the grid. Do you get it why your example is a poor one?

Can you state for us how much % of your monthly bill the turbines are producing?
You would probably be much better served in reliability & production with photovoltaics. No moving parts, will last 70 - 90 years.

Is the order to take them down real? I was away for the holidays.

I install wind turbines & I do not believe that such small generators, placed so low would produce anywhere near 30% of his store's electricity.

Mostly he did it so he can look like he's doing something and present an 'alternative' to the wind farm.

he would need over 2 million of them, properly sited (his are to low) to equal the 130 proposed for Nantucket sound.

Why are you so surprised Christy left the Republican party? Bush left it long ago with financial irresponsibility, massive government, and empire building. Selling our long term future to the Chinese was an un-Republican move as well.

No relation to the Eastham Freeman's.

I am a renewable energy installer. I know the people that did the design work.

I know the terrible position the use of destructive fossil fuels has had on our community, Cape, country world.

If we do not curb our destructive appetites we are sure to hand over a world to our children to expensive, dirty & destructive to live in with any comfort.

Excuse me if the intentions of the Freeman do not match the end results of a community icon shut down over fear of people trying to reduce their footprint.

My friend was at the meeting they presented the designs at & they were no objections then.

Lets face it, the Cape is filled w/ wind bigotry which few admit to, and many embrace. If the Freeman's REALLY wanted the hostel to continue operations they took the one course that made sure it wouldn't.

There is a growing number of people who see the coming storm & are working to prevent it. They best way is to make our communities energy independent.

Rant Part 2:

Barbra & Donna seem to claim a greater love for birds than the rest of us combined, yet throw every stone imagined against the most effective means of generating power without greenhouse gases. You know, THE climate change that most threatens endangered species habitat. Nope, gotta hate the wind for the hand full of birds that may impact.

Oh Neil, believing how turbines are sure to stem the flow of tourists, when it has never been seen on this earth, only imagined in warped imaginations that hate turbines w/all their hearts.

So we are left with real life examples of offshore wind working around the world, growing fast while America spends billions on Atomic power, 'clean' coal, ethanol,& oil wars.

Excuse me while I stand on the side of sensible American made energy with wind & sun while you all continue to throw whatever you can at the wall to see what sticks.

I want to live in an emission free, energy independent country, don't you?

Let's be honest about this debate, you have the wind bigots;Donna,Neil,Barbra,& Maverick. They paint a picture of windturbine devastation to fish, birds, Nantucket Sound, Cape Cod, but mostly our esthetics's. They look so bad how could anyone stand to be anywhere near one?

Their only real weapon is the doubts they sow from seeing what sticks on the wall. People wonder "Wow, there might be something to that."

The real story is we live an energy hungry lifestyle, building energy hungry houses, w/most of us driving energy hungry cars. The fossil fuels used to power 99% of this lifestyle are destructive to air, land, water, health, & resulting oil wars have cheapened our country to the point our dollar is worth less than a Canadian one.
Maverick cannot accept wind's non-eco-impact being a wind bigot. He can however burn fossil fuels in the sound, poisoning the fish he regards as a life giving resource. Can you try biodiesel if you care for the Sound?

Maverick, Maverick with his lies so bright
swears he's give us the facts-AIRTIGHT!
But when it comes time to present his case,
just a deafening silence as he loses face.

Maverick, please present your facts on the Windfarm's destruction of Nantucket Sound, or please be quiet.

I don't mind you making the destruction statement, just back it up with something, ANYTHING!

Man of honor? Or just empty words.

The debate awaits...

So the alliance lawyer thinks God doesn't want a windfarm in 'his' backyard? (N.I.G.B.Y) I've heard a lot of people say some pretty ridiculous things they claim God is saying, this ranks up there.

So in essence, God is saying"Continue to spend all of your hard earned money on oil wars because I don't like the look of wind turbines in Nantucket Sound. Your current method of polluting fuels is just fine. Opps, wait, I just remembered, there are no dinosaurs because the world is only 6-10 thousand years old. You silly humans, is there no end to your self-deception? (or alliance deception)

Maverick, due to breaking your promise to provide me with evidence of Nantucket Sound's destruction from the wind farm, I am now calling you a liar unless you come clean with the facts!
You have not lived up to your word, how can you continue to be a man of honor?

God told me he wants turbines in Horseshoe Shoals because of the sacred symbol it represents; electricity w/o war, pollution, or CO2. Amen!

I suppose if we remove all the distinctions, it would get a little vanilla.

SelectBoard is a gender neutral form of Selectmen.

I too was there as discussion went round & round last night. I am happy to say that the Orleans turbines live to spin another day.

I believe we could see success with enough cooperation & reassurances from both sides. With additional state financing & management aid, this long process can yield an actual working project. (Instead of all the theoretical ones we've been hearing about)

Though the discussion process, the SelectBoard commended the work of the Orleans Board of Water Commissioners. In coming to understand how scary such a new process can be, I believe they have valid concerns about the process. I also believe there are enough people at the right places, not to mention overwhelming public support to make local wind viable.
No one thinks this is a done deal, the commissioners may even turn down the request. I would be truly saddened if this invitation by so many hopeful people who want to see renewables work were turned down.
The fight is over, let the cooperation begin.

This just in, Jim Gordon has confirmed plans to have Nantucket sound, not just horseshoe shoals, transported to china. In an amazing turn of events, he claims "Less regulation & no end to pretty Avian carnage, & their little fisherman friends TOO!" A 73 year long parade of ultra oil tankers will be used in a Herculean 'bucket brigade' to empty the sound of all ability to Sustain life, including marauding meteorological towers.

Scientists scoffed at such plans, pointing out the simple fact water will just 'rush back in'. Gordon was said to only look at shocked reporters with a sinister gleam in his eye.

When the alliance was reached for comment, Audra Parker of recent 'Daily Show' fame stated:"Our best minds are working on it, and Mr. Good believes Cape Wind has acquired alien technology to form an energy bubble, allowing $ in, but impenetrable to water & peer reviewed science. Mr Vinnick denied Alliance experiments with similar technology, only murmuring “2 out of 3 ain't bad.”

Gabrielfackre, You've talked about doing something BIG for nearly 40 yrs as every environmental front has taken a BEATING! So now when the largest step towards clean, renewable energy is sitting right in front of us (delayed nearly 200 times based on propaganda from the alliance) you balk.
My religion sez "All places are sacred", you say "I like wind power, just not in these sacred waters" I'm not sure how anything can be more sacred than getting off the fossil fuel time-bomb of emissions, climate change, escalating prices & changing our war/oil policy. I can send you a DVD of a quaint place in Denmark where the windsfarms have been producing clean power with NONE of the tragic effects predicted by the alliance.
If there is a reason you don't like the windfarm, it is an easily explained lie I'd be happy to reveal to you. 19 agencies, 6+ yrs, there are no unturned stones in the debate, just 1/2 truths the alliance uses to invoke emotional responses, difficult to talk sense to.

gabrielfackre, I think you paint w/too broad a brush when you say 'You don't get it'. Your quote was stirring, but as I'll explain has little to so with 'violating' the sound.
Back when this all started, the rich folks group (the alliance) hired a consulting group to come up with all the negatives around the project. Except for less than half not liking the view, there were no drawbacks. That firm was dumped & they found another to find some angle, a PR group! The alliance created the myth about so MANY bad things, that even though NONE are true, the echoes are still reverberating around this discussion, like the 'no money to remove turbines' lie. Peer reviewed science (The kind the pro WF people use) shows no damage to fishing, whales, birds, tourism, property vales w/ significant positives of better air & water, more stable energy prices, health care cost savings, local jobs, the hope for more clean-energy independent communities.

Hey, Maverick, I'm still waiting for your reasons on how a Windfarm will destroy the Sound & Cape Cod. A promise is a promise, I'm beginning to question your honor.

gabrielfackre, I do not accuse you of being part of the alliance, merely poisoned by their lies. Have you checked into the 'no money to remove turbines lie?' I thank you for your years of community service to spread the word of climate change awareness. Still, there's talking about fixing a problem & actuality doing something about it. (Again I'm not saying you do nothing) I merely state that deep water wind power is at BEST 10 years away, more likely 20.
The best guide line is reality, where no one has made a single watt of deep water electricity that isn't x20 more expensive than existing shallow water windfarms. It is for the moment a big red herring to stop THIS Windfarm. The Alliance works tirelessly to present non-issues & 1/2 lies as valid reasons not to actually produce large scale CLEAN energy now. Developers don't propose money losing schemes & law makers have crammed enough down taxpayers throats. Watch 'Who killed the electric car' for more info on renewable sabotage.

The windfarm cannot be granted a permit without a bond being in place to remove it at the end of its useful life.

The 'No money to remove turbines' lie is one of many propogated by the alliance over the years. If there is some other Windfarm 'negative' that sticks in anyone's craw, it is most likey a well promoted lie by wind foes as well.
Go ahead, ask me about any concern anyone has about the Windfarm & I can give you an honest answer.

I have a question, which 'not for profit' energy projects do you support? The charity we give the canal plant? The uninsurable nuke plants? Maybe clean/liquid coal? Ah yes, ethanol. All much better choices than emission free wind.

Deep water wind will come when giant platforms can be floated out past the horizon & hydorgen fuels cells can store the energy. Hydrogen, still billions of $ & 10 - 20 years away.

Wind works now with the smallest eco footprint.

Windhugger unite, because we're RIGHT!
A women's right to vote wasn't this hard was it?

Are we asking carbon producing fuels to construct unprofitable networks of energy? No. Are we asking emisson emitting energy sorces to to use some profits to clean up the mess they are making, barely, but most of cleanup ends up being tax dollars. Strangely enough, wheel barrows of tax money is going to prop up oil, coal, & natural gas to the tune of 200 billion per year & climbing. It was a mere 17 billion a yr in the early nineties.
Weren't concerned people in the church uniting to oppose the pollutants that caused birth defects because of an unborn's rights to gestate contaminant free?
Bottomline:This windfarm has become the bellweather for large scale wind energy in the real world of finance. A defeat here signals a defeat of this kind of renewable thinking & investers will not soon return knowing the 'powers that be' closed off this path.
The ethical bottom line: America rejects clean wind power out of fear of image. Air breathers suffer. Where's the deep water proposals?

margaretr1692, I am upset about the view too! I wish they would build them closer so I can see their graceful movements and a symbol of American made energy taht says to the terrorists, we won't pay your blood money anymore.

I hope you are upset about the hundreds of truly ugly power & phone poles that blight our landscape and do not have proper fall zones.

Hmmm.. perhaps all this grousing about views is rather silly when we have so many massive issues to discuss.

Buzz where would Nantucket Sound go? If you mean the fish, I believe overfishing made them go away. Just how can we lose a Sound? Sure, it's a nice, antiwind catch-phrase, but capturing the energy of the wind will not make the Sound go anywhere. At the end of their useful life the monopoles can be removed like they were never there.
You seem to be making an emotionally charged, straw man argument that is designed to stir a visceral response, but it doesn't really say anything of substance.
For the record, could you please explain where the Sound would go, where it can't come back from?

barbara, its amazing how impervious you are to facts & reason. The litany of quarter truths you still cling to as they've been pummeled over & over by peer reviewed research is quite remarkable.

How's this for environmentalism? Do SOMETHING beside whine about the unfairness of the 19 agencies not accepting your version of the facts. You may wish to count the razor intellect of the Cape Cod Commission as being on your side, but that sounds desperate.
Barbra, either you are completely right & all accountable agencies are wrong (or bribed), or you’re just SO wrong about your theories you figure might as well go down with the ship.

There’s been nothing new in you often disproved rants in some time, perhaps you've just automated generic responses to any posts that contain the word 'windfarm' or 'truth'.
Altamont Pass was a terrible, poorly researched mess that has not been repeated in scale since due to superior research & technology.
The fear act is wearing thin.
PEACE

When I 1st heard that the CLC co-op had been stopped I figured that it was either: yet another attempt to derail keeping the savings of the windfarm generated electricity on the Cape by windfarm opponents OR Barnstable officals wanting a bigger slice of the pie in money or power.

From reading the documents & bylaws you provided they seem mostly harmless except for the 80% vote you pointed out, as well as the general feel that control would be vested in a tight little exclusive group.
Perhaps a 2-3 year 'shake down' period where bylaws can be changed with 2/3 vote until there is a feeling that all the bugs are worked out.
I also believe that 1 rep from each village be ELECTED (perhaps w/an alternate) to attend ALL co-op meetings w/the intent to keep business transparent & represent the people of the Cape & Island better.

All too often these days a good idea will be seized by corruption & the common folk miss out.
Thank you Chris for examining this issue.

Hey David, this is Carl B. Freeman; we played some Ultimate a few years ago on the Harwich track fields.

I was wondering if you would like to be drawn into the windfarm debate, or at least make a comment on it from a naturalist point of view.

ULTIMATE!!!

I think this is how you want it:
1. 2
2. 1
3. 2
4. 0
5. 0
6. 0
7. 1
8. 1
9. 1
10. 2
11. 1

or
1.- 10. = 10
11. = 1
Average score = 1 (poorly)

I can't say I've monitored every move of theirs over the years, still I've never heard praise for the CCC while I have heard a lot of complaining about what they do, don't do, & seem to be clueless about.

Excellent review of the CCC's progress (or lack thereof) Peter, I commend you on your community activism & encourage you to continue to hold public figures and intuitions’ feet to the fire.

Bobcat, what exactly would the windfarm take from the sound again? Are you now defining what is O.K. to discuss on this forum? You state “I have said over and over that the rich NIMBY argument is not only inappropriate, but overused.”
Just because there are middle class people just as wrong about the windfarm impacts as the rich people doesn't make discussing their hand in the misinformation game any less valid. I'm sorry, perhaps you're going to invoke middle class privilege to bar anyone from answering those questions.
Answer this; if we don't build a renewable energy supply now, what kind of parents are we to hand our children a fossil fuel based economy that will collapse in 30-50 yrs? I'll tell you, BAD parents.
Go Windfarm, go clean, renewable energy future! Down with the Alliance lies that have been disproven at every turn when those claims are submitted to accountable offices!
Ask me, I'll set you straight!

I think the reference to rich people leading the anti-windfarm crusade BEHIND the average Joe, is that the money has paid for a whole lot of bogus research that has misled your average Joe about the impacts of a windfarm.
Any average Joe who still is against the windfarm, I'll fill you in on how 'the environmental impacts of the wind farm "pale in comparison" to the benefits of reducing emission(s).'
I'm not trying to be some angry punk talking down to people, I've just researched the REAL impacts & they paint a much different picture than the words of the allaince.
Go ahead, ask anything!

The Dept. of Energy's research shows there is enough wind energy along the East coast to power the East coast. The sooner we see that the real life examples of offshore wind do NOT have the destructive effects so many are screaming about and realize that fossil fuels have the destructive effects we ALL know about, the sooner construction will begin on these clean energy projects that will produce the local jobs Peter is screaming about.
Each time the flawed arguments against wind are debunked by peer reviewed research, it is the fondest wish of us that breath & pay for energy that the wind haters will leave their twisted logic in the garbage where it belongs so we can build the energy future that isn't tied so heavily to the failing & ever increasing costs of the fossil fuel future.
Thank you for the A+ teacher, unless there is some flaw in my reasoning you'd like to point out? In the tragic words of Goerge W. Bush "Bring it on!"

A: About 3/4 of the production of the canal plant will be backed off. Hopefully we can fast track the next set of artificial reefs (opps.. I mean windfarm) & shut it down completely.

15 cents per house hold is divided among all of NEW ENGLAND. If we can get a co-op like the cape light compact was trying to do (until it was torpedoed by Barnstable political hacks) to buy the power from CW we can keep the savings here on the cape and save much $ per month, AND Jim Gordon has stated many times he wants to arrange a 10 or 15 year flat rate so our prices won't shoot up as fossil fuels dry up & wars flare up.
Al Gore should set a better example, it still doesn't invalidate his message or the fact we are using a fuel that is destroying our community, country, & world.
6 mpg is good? Peter, you are not on Bizarro world anymore. Around here 6 mpg is BAD. Are you trying to suck up to the Bush Admin. & be their expert on efficency standards?
Excuse me if I TRY to save the world

So Peter, let me break down your reasoning once again, you say some people rail against asthma causing particulates that would be lessened by a wind farm, then drive an SUV, & therefore Jim Gordon is greedy, lying & the WF makes no sense. Sorry, I don't follow you on this one. My girlfriend spoke out on asthma at a public hearing & drove away in her minivan that gets better than 34 mpg, I drove away in a Saturn wagon @ 40mpg. (Cept now I run biodiesel in a '80 mercedes) Are you mad @ all the people who buy SUV's with our taxpayer subsudies saying they'll use them for work & don't? That really irks me too. I believe everyone who lied about their SUV use should have to pay back our tax dollars.
Peter, for some one as intelligent & community oriented as yourself, your arguments seem weak.
WF = better airquality, despite idiots who drive guzzlers alone.
I do conserve energy in every way possible. (my daughter benind me agrees) I'll try my way of setting a good example.

The WF certainly looks like it’s taking a victory lap, but the alliance still has the power to sue endlessly. The twisted logic is still intact with millions to back it up.
Yes, we all get a little snicker when one after another of the wild theories is blown out of the water, only to be the centerpiece of a slightly altered new line of reasoning explaining some tragic flaw or completely unexpected angle everyone one in the 6 +year history of the battle never thought of.
Yes, we wish the SOS'ers will pack up their carnival of tall tales & go do some real environmental work like advocating biodiesel or better net metering laws. They could even throw some weight behind land based wind to show that their tag line of "..we're not against wind power, just not in those sacred waters." Isn’t just bull.
I do feel sorry for the whole crew when every time they try to peddle their twisted reasoning to an entity w/accountability they are rejected.
Happy Energy Independence Day!

Peter, my aim is not to be rude but to expose the 'pack of lies' windfarm foes constantly refer to. Do you not believe fine particulates coming out of the stack or the canal plant cause & aggravate asthma attacks as well as upper respiratory illness? I suppose you know better than Harvard medical research?
Peter, can I like you & show disdain for what you call facts? It seems I directly refute every point you make against the WF & you move on to the next absurd argument on the list.
I've made it my job to refute the propaganda thrown about on this board about the WF. If you don't like me shooting down your assertions than please use real information and not the tripe asserted by the SOS on their website.
The bottom line is that the 19 agencies who have endlessly been processing WF data have ALL rejected the wild theories put fourth by you & your SOS buddies. I know the blogs are the last places to spread the misinformation but I'll be here calling you on it.

Peter, I'd love to see what sort of formula you use to come up with this '15 cents' per household savings. Perhaps you'd like to add in the cost in suffering from asthma more severely. Maybe a few extra bucks when a refinery making heating oil for us is leaking into someone else's back yard. What say we tack on some pennies for the lost view of a mountain that is given away for fossil fuels at almost no cost. Maybe consider the costs of being a war country on our kids minds & international credibility?
The cost of NOT pursuing renewables is the cost of our souls. The fossil fuel extraction, transportation, processing, & use presents health, environmental, & peace damaging effects, Renewables DON'T.
I suppose you skimmed down that '15 cents' by not counting business energy costs & dividing the energy costs across all of New England when people on the Cape are dong their best to form a co-op to keep the savings on the Cape & Islands.
Happy Energy Independence Day!!!!

O.K. Peter, you are not against A windfarm, but you debate how little effect it will have. You say only the location bothers you BECAUSE Jim Gordon wants to cause a stir, stoke his own ego, be the big cheese! Can you cite your source on that? (ESP?) Oh, & you want a few direct answers.
Fishing: Fishing minimally impacted at construction time, opponents own funded research shows a return to normal levels in 2-4 months. The experience of Denmark shows fishing levels go up w/monopoles as reefs. (Less mercury from backing off the canal plant too)
Boating: Never, in the history of the world has a boat struck an offshore wind turbine. The Coastguard (6 yrs later) STILL states "No restrictions to commercial or recreational use"
Birds: Denmark's example shows minimal to NO bird collisions. Audubon endorses the windfarm as addressing the larger issues of extinction.
Peter you've heard all the answers, you just don't like the picture it paints.

Peter, I respect much of your writing off the windfarm subject (The C C Commission should actually solve cape problems & not just prevent McDonalds from moving in.) I worked 3rd camera w/ you in recording Ross Gelbspan & George Woodwell. I know you're an intelligent, community dedicated person. What I don't understand is the objection to the location? You were around when the the 17 other location around the cape & islands were investigated, TWICE, right? From a purely scientific view, horseshoe shoals is optimum. Excuse me if I believe view issues are absurd, the larger issues of turning our countries absolute addiction to oil & its byproducts in a different direction.
Can you deny CW would be the largest single step in energy independence? Or it will lead to many more windfarms? Or it will help our local economy?
The view of a single preventable illness or asthma attack trumps the view issues of a windfarm MANY times over. It is pure hubris to think differently.

Peter, where do you suppose they get the money to buy big enough weapons to kill each other & have it spill over to bystanders?

Again, oil. We have technology aplenty to stop the value of oil rising as it has, BUT big oil funded resistance to renewables retards the growth of the renewable industry at every turn.
Do you have a problem w/oil companies making the largest profits ever known to man while enhancing the dependence to a foreign supply.
Federal fossil fuel subsidies have grown from 15 billion per yr in the 90's to nearly 200 billion per yr today.

Our tax dollars paying the largest corporate welfare ever.

Do you want to be energy independent in America? Do you want to use your tax dollars to help erode our health & quality of life?

Go watch 'who killed the electric car' & 'Crude awakenings' & then tell me how much we need to change.

I'm happy to debate any of the bogus reasons you may give for opposing a windfarm, just bring facts.

Peter, all wars are fought over land & resources. Religion is but a pretext. If you were to peruse the 'family jewels' just released by the CIA you'd see that over the years covert American (& British) forces have been mucking about with middleeast governments to 'secure' oil supplies in the interest of national security for years.
If America found a way to become energy independent, the reasons to fight oil wars goes away.
Saying “it isn't so” doesn't make it less true.
The real reason for our dirty tactics is oil. If we reduce or remove that need for oil, the wars will die down, or at least the money to finance the extremists will mostly dry up.
All I can say Peter is that you are dead wrong about the effect of energy independence on world peace & peace @ home.
Before reacting w/some knee jerk line of reasoning, please think about the hard, cold facts of the real reasons for war. Did we invade Iraq for WMD's (or liberation, or Mideast harmony ...) or oil?

Peter, let me get this straight, you believe the real issue is Jim Gordon making money? Because he would be generating renewable energy? The largest amount of renewable energy ever generated in America? You are upset that someone would fight the forces in oposition to a windfarm to lower toxic emissions locally?
Are you are saying that clean, renewable energy should not be profitable?

Are you telling me you believe the often disproved propaganda SOS & windstop puts out about Gordon owning the sound, or it's damage to fishing, or the (snicker) raydar interference?
There is good capitalism & bad capitalism, Good capitalism doesn't damage the enviroment & in the best case improves the enviromnet.
Peter, if you have a piece of factual, peer reviewed science that really shows a windfarm negative, do please bring it to light.
BTW, if you read the CW book, Wendy (in GREAT detail) outlines exactly the wealth of Jim Gordon, & how he came to it by cleaning up heavy emissions.

Not a rationalization for violence, ever, still on many occasions America & Western powers have tried to overthrow Islamic countries, even succeeding for brief times (see Iran) mostly over oil.

If positions were reversed, wouldn't you feel a need to strike out at those who you feel have been plotting your down fall?

If Iran had trained angry Americans during the 60's to cause unrest & weaken our standing police force to the point where they could install some whack job like David Keresh as their 'favorable trading partner' wouldn't you feel the need to rebel & even use force to throw off the yoke of a madman? In deposing Keresh, would we say, O.K., everything is fine now? I'd probably join the army hoping to strike at the enemy that dared subvert my nation.

What we have sown, we are now reaping.
"Peace cannot be kept through force, it can only be achieved through understanding" "Flames fanned with hatred use no discretion on who they burn"

Renewables help stop the violence cycle

Mav, there you go again spreading a myth that a windfarm will destroy the sound, where is the real world example? Every time wind foes present a theory of offshore wind destruction NO ONE w/a shred of common sense will accept it as research because it doesn't bear out. Even when WF safety is proven yet again (see the latest PAVEPAWS report) you bring up your bogus points again claiming just a bit more research & people will see the truth.
The truth they are seeing is all you ever ask for are delays.
Neil, you claim there has been a plot to set up wind to be fantastically profitable?! At our expense? The fact you don't see the scam put on by big oil or ethanol (Even Peter sees) shows everyone how obtuse you are on the subject. Gordon must take on the cost of building a WF on his own receiving a FEDERAL tax credit anyone CAN GET for producing clean energy.
True, CW is only a drop in the bucket, but it is the biggest drop & there's not much else out there.
STOP FEAR MONGERING

One more time, the researched, peer reviewed science points to the safety of the windfarm. All the wishing for dangerous situations, AGAIN, only exists in the minds of those prejudiced against the wind farm on the principle 'we don't like it so it must be bad'.

A mile from the safe zone is to close? Not even if the ICBM came from horseshoe shoals itself.

What must it be like to be in a SOS planning meeting when they figure out what to say now. “Alright, the latest report shows the windfarm a mile from the safety zone, how can we spin this in our favor? Yes, Neil, you have your hand up” “We can claim there's a secret alien research base under the sound, area 53, & the aliens are allergic to clean renewable energy” “Uhhh... right, let's just say a mile is too close and call for yet another round of research. O.K., everyone to their SUV's.”

I bet I'm not too far off.

Once upon a time I actually researched you links you provided, now I just visit them on 'crackpot.com'.

BTW, I have purchased a diesel Mercedes-Benz and I will be running it on biodiesel.

Enjoy your savior, liquid coal.

We desperately need every watt of clean power we can get. How apathetic have we become when we can't decide between a cleaner environment or the sight of wind or tide turbines?

6 years & counting to decide to build wind turbines when their history across the world is of such success many find it hard to believe the truth.

I am outraged every day my government delays energy independence laws and tries to prop up hoaxes such as 'clean coal'

Elected officials who determine our policies are unequivocally owned by large corporate interests that seek profit at all of our health & well being. If a judge were to hear a case about Exxon, & it were discovered he owned large shares of it, she would have to recuse themselves from any judgment involving Exxon. When it comes to the Senate & Congress, well.. when did it become a 1st amendment right to bribe officials?
Recieve any amount, but over 2,000 & you must recuse yourself from any law to do with the donor. No quid-pro-quo.

I love the Cape enough to hope less particulates will fall from the sky, less mercury (& other toxins) will soil our land & water. I would hope that keeping emissions out of our food and bodies would top the list of priorities.

So, how much toxicity is just right? I'd opt for none, but just like I'd like honest politician's, I'll settle for what I can get.

A clean environment tops my list of important actions. We can locally generate energy, emission free (heat & electric), we come a lot closer to not just energy independence, but our mind set of being free from dependent thinking.

Are we victims of our energy or will we use energy generation to set us truly free. Literally & figuratively.

I have this strange belief that all places are sacred. We bring our imprint to local areas of what we feel means the most to us, it does not give us the right' to degrade other places as 'not as good'
fact:renewable energy is almost always much 'cleaner' than Nstar's

No one project will stop global warming, CW would make the largest difference so far, only outdone by the 200 turbine project proposed by england. The one off of Texas will help too. There is enough wind off each ocean coast to power nearly all America.
You bet the fossil fuel companies are scared, especially with the world wanting cleaner energy.
You bet its being fought by big oil, coal, probably even natural gas interests. You bet they don't want their share of world energy markets to shrink. You bet they'll prop up a bunch of faulty, non-peer reviewed science research to make renewables look like a bad idea.
The more wind farms producing clean energy with a fraction of the environmental damage of oil & coal (as they are) the harder it is to keep the industry from changing.
I look forward to 15-20 yrs when deep water is viable & nimby money dries up. We need clean energy NOW & THEN.
What is not factual in her book? No one seems able to pin it down.

Good luck!

Mav, if you & Solon can't be civil, why include me? If you're dumping in the sound, he's right, if you don't, he's wrong, that simple.

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.

P.S. I've been working w/ people involved in habitat for humanity & other affordable housing projects, trying to incorporate renewable & green building practices into their work under the theory that there's no sense building home's using fossil fuels who's prices are constantly rising w/ no end in sight. It is starting to catch on.
Hurray for renewables!

(sorry for the spill over)

Who's felt the cost of living creeping up on us? It is called the costs of goods & services. Anyone saying no will be among those rich enough to not have to worry about the rise of those expenses. These costs are choking small business, & presenting poverty line family units with the tough choices. Being poor or rich, it still seems to me it is of great importance to live ethically.

I see a world were the many aggressively rich corporations whose goods & services come at environmental costs. This increasing profit margin is often at the cost of where the poor live, statistically more toxic residue of mining, manufacturing, transport & use is generated in poorer areas.

Hey, there are ethical business' out there, but usually with lesser profit margins & less clout.
Local, renewable, sustainable, clean energy starts to lift away the layers of grime on our poorer communities, while lessening the costs. $ has more value the closer to home it stays. Best of 2 worlds.

Peter, for an example of damage to aquaculture, look at Denmark. The water life has recovered VERY well from the minimally invasive digging around Horn's Rev & Nystead. What means more to you, real life example or the imagined evils of people opposed to CW no matter what science is presented?

Just because you WANT there to be something wrong, doesn't make it true.

Real life buddy, real life.

Peter, what facts do you present to say we would NOT get 79% of our electricity from a wind farm, cuz you say so?

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?

It's so sad to see childish behavior of grown men & women bringing down a blog with childish insults like 'lap dog' & 'Toady ass'.

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?

good night, I'll respond to donna tomarrow.

Neil states "Somewhere in the early chapters, the authors report the average wind speed on Nantucket Sound increases in the summer..." It doesn't say that in the book.

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!

Mav, when have you ever needed 'permission' to respond? Give a fact per post. Double post if you need the room, you often do.

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!

To David G. Tuerck.

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.

Hey Mav, please state your facts on how the sound will be destroyed by CW otherwise please stop dischaging your waste here.

maverick, you don't understand. I wouldn't be locked up with all those criminal, they'd all be locked up with ME!

Facts! Anytime would be nice!

A GBH employee (since departed) tried to stage a head to head debate w/CW and opposition with fact checking, it was squelched by David Koch on thier board from running on TV to just being viewed live, in-house.
More examples of the kind of railroading that goes on routinely on behalf of opposition.

Clean Power Now held an event last summer called wind jam. When they tried to pay to put a poster in the mall advertising "what a wind farm would do for us" the woman handling the transaction said sure, only at the last moment a higher up nixed it saying "We do not agree with the windfarm"

Rich power at work on our ability to talk about the factual merits of a windfarm.

Neil, I think Solon E. has learned in that time, like an any man of the sea can see today, storms are growing & that is not a good sign. After seeing the windfarm in Denmark & seeing BIG jumps in oil prices & seeing the evidence across the mid east of oil wars Solon E. also said 'We can do this (referring to the Horns Rev wind farm) or we can always trust our friends in Saudi Arabia' (referring to the Bush family & our country's oil policy)
The fuel for any war is to feed the needs for that war.

Most w/vision see in-sustainability with our oil dependence besides the inherent pollutions sure to follow in the wake of extracting, refining, transporting, and the use of. That's often an ugly scar across nature, repeated millions of times a day. Wind & solar could free us from such dependent chains and make this a clean world not hurtling so fast towards extreme climate heck.
If opposition leaders are unwilling to honestly debate actual merits vs phantom ills, be quiet.

Maverick, you said you'd love to fill me in on all the facts of how a WF would destroy the sound (& the Cape too), have you forgotten? I know you wouldn't go back on your word for you are an honorable man. Please don't use the excuse that WB deleted your 'facts' (dog ate my homework) or it's too big, you can put a fact in each post, simple as that. Now, please come clean with the destruction info or stop posting it here.
Patiently waiting for your response.

Niel what part of 'having more wind power to back off dirty fossil fuels' do you not get? Wanting Windfarms does not mean all fossil fuel plants will be shut down today.
Some day yes. We'll find ways to store electricity (hydrogen is just 1) for peak use and find other clean renewables to provide complimentary generation.
So much of your nay saying seems centered on 'renewables are unreliable & always will be' I know they are reliable and are RAPIDLY getting better, it just doesn't help your logic to admit it.

Neil, I have little problem w/natural gas power plants except the prices are rising all the time on the fuel. Jim Gordon's company has built many gas fired power plants in the NE area to help the environment.(yes he made $ too)
'traditional power stations essential' does not have to mean fossil fuels, especially oil or coal. Solar and wind pre-date fossil fuels by a few billion years, so I guess you can call them traditional with fossil fuels being the upstarts.

As we lift the repressive regulations on locally generated renewable energy, we make our generation more distributed as well as more robust.

I'd like to see huge weights lifted into the air during low use/high winds, and then harness the gravity stored energy during peak use. Kinda like a co-co clock on a huge scale. They use a similar principle w/ nuke plants by pumping water up hill, harnessing falling hydro power at peak use.
Niel is accurate only when limiting his perspective to dirty fossil fuels.

I wonder how long it will be until T. Kennedy's finger prints are revealed in this bit of back-door dealing. He probably knows enough this time put put more lackeys between him and this bill for plausible deny-ability.
I surly hope the same forces of the environment will rise up again to expose this end run like last time.

We all knew it was coming. The only way to kill wind power is to hold it to impossibly high standards that fossil fuels never have been.
They really put the 'mockery' in democracy.

Jim Gordon has agreed to have the WF shut down during mass migrations in the spring & fall. I know this as fact, will you remember it past this post?

I have no master but the truth.

Neil, it amazes me at how often you trot out that old line of reasoning. Kind of like how climate change mockers wait until the coldest day in winter to talk about what a joke global warming is.

Did you know there was more than enough sunlight over a square mile of cape cod to power it for a year? That's right! If we are so resistant to using all that power pouring down on us nearly every day for free.. well I guess we deserve the consequences of excessive emissions. Sunlight is a nearly perfect compliment to wind power. Shines when the wind is calm for the most part. I don't see how energy generation capacity with the WF added would make the grid less robust? I would HOPE we'd develop large scale solar concentrators or other clean renewables to complement wind power. Truly, I wish some clean source would be found to avoid this silly assault on the facts launched by the self appointed ruling class to save their view.
Niel IS a lap dog for the big lie.

A true warrior knows the horrors of war and prepares a world that will have less need for war than the generation before.

Me, I was an MP. Did you know that in the armed forces that any officer has the power to arrest like an MP? Basic at Ft McClellen in Alabama.

I like to ask Viet Vets, 'Why were we there?'

Did we beat back the communists? ...or were we there to feed the appetite of war?

Captain, was it a good war, or did a lot of big time arms companies get bigger?

Every soldier has to ask themselves if they are on the principled side in a war, if there is one.

My spiritual principles come before loyalty to any declaration of war. for country or religion. I consider a cleaner environment for my child & the love of my life paramount. My clean world can peacefully coexist with your world of Nantucket Sound if only you can get past your prejudice and see the real world as it would exist.
Lay down that burden or let the vitriolic fly.
Peace.

Off topic, did you hear about the guy who went from America to Europe on a solar powered boat, small battery pack, no sail, no fossil fuels were burnt or dumped.
Mav, will you deny that Denmarks example is representative of what real life is like when monopoles meet sea life. The real question comes down to: Are there such fundamental differences between the sea & bird life that the models of Nystead & Horns Rev would not apply in parallel & rational ways. Peer reviewed science (not tobacco style propaganda) shows that there is a logical correlation with the sound & we can expect variations to be small & MANAGEABLE!
Remember when the met tower first went up, all the alliance could say was 'we don't want to know how strong the wind blows, we have already made up our minds that this project is the DESTRUCTION OF THE SOUND!'

Your story has not changed in 6 years, even as the evidence pours in of the merits of CW & the lack of aquatic impact. What do you know we don't?

“The fear is that with resistance to all offshore wind farms from big energy, there is a new Chernobyl being created today from atomic & fossil fuel fallout.” says Carl B. Freeman, National voice for breathing, drinking, & energy independence.

Have you read the CW book? What in there do you find untrue?

You quote the Audubon, the same one that you blame for taking bribes, the same one that sees the rapid climate change as far & away the most pressing issue to bird species survival & said "We challenge opponents of the wind farm to find a better way to slow climate change"
If we go by Neil's blizzard of mis-information the wind farm won't do squat, but when we look at peer reviewed science we see it as a huge step towards CO2, air & quality of life goals. No one ever replies when I ask if they'd like less mercury in the water or energy independence. Maverick, where's the facts about the destruction of Nantucket Sound? You said you'd love to. You've gone strangely quiet.

There were 130 windmills on Cape Cod, doesn't that make them historic? The ones left are often preserved for historical reasons.

This statement by the 'National trust' is all about opinion, where is the fact in it?

If all other factors checked out for minimal environmental impacts, should we deny it alone on supposed visual impacts?

This thread is all about the suppression of factual debate around the wind farm merits & how the rich are trying to buy influence to keep the debate not on the facts but on artificially emotional issues. (like it will DESTROY the SOUND!)

I often ask you direct questions you dare not answer because they get to the heart of the issue.

Oil & coal influence is all through the alliance main supporters, do you deny this? All wind investors are watching to see if these interests are powerful enough to derail large scale efforts at clean energy. My child SHOULD inherit an energy independent country, not this mess we have now! Facts please!

I talked to my friend today about his Solar Thermal system. His system heats water in panels during the day, circulating the hot water to an insulated storage tank, cold domestic water enters 3/4' copper tubing with street pressure, the tank is 120F and the water comes out of the 100' of tubing 120F. Easily hot enough to shower in (guilt free). This source is shared w/radiant floor heating to run fluid through tubing that 'radiates' it throughout the house. Last month he used 6 therms of gas for backup water heat, $30 was his largest bill in the dead of winter. 3 people, apprx 1600 sq feet. up. It'll paid for itself in 4yrs, not counting the labor we did ourselves.
Your gas burning system keeps costing you, forever.
I'm gonna double check w/ him tomorrow to make sure I got all the numbers straight. If any figure is off, I'll post a correction tomarrow.

Now, will detail your facts about sound destruction? You said you'd be happy to.

Maverick, thank you for your service to our country. Here is the cut & paste of my earlier statement: Carl B. Freeman writes:

I believe cape wind will be built. If a massive amount of dredging is needed, I am against the building of the 12 turbines. I don't think it will be an issue to build the 12. I don't think CW would NOT build the other 118 just because of the 12.

We will see.

* additional note, they may just work on those 12 during high tide, seems easy enough.

When less oil is used in producing electricity, it decreases demand. Slightly yes but it IS downward pressure instead of Up-ward pressure. This is why its important to build wind farms to significantly displace oil made electricity. You say the bulk is imported from 'friendly nations', what about the rest? Isn't the direction of importing NO oil a great one for national security if not prices? The less a resource is in demand, the less it will cost.

Now, your facts about sound destruction?

Neil, I don't have any on hand at the moment. I'll ask around & see what I can come up with. I do see various home owners around who comment that their systems are working up to expectations.

I do hear of poor projects that are an embarrassment to the industry, but those are fewer every year as the industry & regulations weeds out the fly by night operations.

Tell me Neil, when is you heating system going to pay for it self?

Mav, I ask you to never again use an implied threat, like the one that was deleted yesterday. I will continue to speak openly about the truth of the wind farm. I am sorry you side with the bullies trying to cow those who wish to support the facts about wind energy.

You may not understand, but what you are doing is terrorism, using fear to oppress those you disagree with.

I will not bow to fear on this subject ever. This is a discussion of ideas and facts, that is all I challenge you on. I've heard you're a pretty nice guy.

I am not going to give out the names & address' on this web site of peoples house's we've converted to photovoltaic, solar thermal, & installed wind turbines at.

If someone would like to reveal to you they've had thier system done, that is up to them. Are you eager to go throw rocks at the panels, then come back and say, "look, they don't work"

Maverick, I've detailed my view on dredging several times, look back on my comments.

Banning probably has something to due with personal attacks I'd guess.

Still waiting for facts on destruction of Nantucket sound.

Maverick, unless you can actually come up w/ facts (More than the 'gut feeling' you've had up till now) that is borne out by the real world, or even some peer reviewed research, I suggest you stop embarrassing yourself by mentioning it to the thinking members of this board of how the windfarm "Will destroy the sound" I'm sure most readers are unimpressed with you ability to parrot this condition that exists no where in the world but in the hopes of alliance members who feel cheated that the WF got a rating boost from the buzzards bay oil spill.

Assumed destruction of the sound is tripe, anyone not on the 'hate the windfarm' bandwagon knows it. Many on the bandwagon know it too, they're just paid to act like DESTRUCTION is ASSURED!
Which group do you fall in Mav?

Neil blizzards us w/mis-information, you're stuck on 'destruction of the SOUND' in the same way the bird girls are stuck on 'destruction of the BIRDS!'

Take 2 tablets of truth & call me in the morning

The book scares a lot of toadies and influence peddlers, so glad I'm not beholden to that kind of elitism. It seems so strange to a Minnesotan that a place seemingly made a seat of royalty by JFK, could so completely disregard the principles he represented to the country. His own family betraying core principles they seemed to expound. 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what the corporate masters want to tell you how you should feel about clean energy generation when their own backyard is one of the dirtiest places to breath in America. This is not screaming hyperbole, its cold hard reality.
The WF could shift the sticky world of energy generation from a troubled dirty supply to a clean, non-inflationary wind power, to account for 85% of electrical east coast generation in a generation.

We could be that great of a people if we start now, or we could, though inaction sentence our children to an ever dirtier world.
GBH, where is your moral compass?

Does anyone want to post some thing about the book they feel is misrepresented? I am reading it now and I find it very honest.

Horn's rev research, Nystead, audibon society (3 years), Army corp of engineers, Harvard medical research school, do you need more?

Fishermen in Denmark report no reduction of fishing stocks, opposition groups in Denmark before the building of the windfarms have disbanded.

Goerge Woodwell would be glad to supply you with reams of data supporting a Nantucket sound wind farm.

You can consult Charles Kleeclamp on clean air data.

Need more?

Maverick, every time there is a chance at public debate the alliance just shouts their propaganda with NO science to back it up. They refuse direct debate knowing their stands are designed to incite emotional responses.

Walter Cronkite finally saw through it saying "He had been used."

Everyday people are asking the tough questions you and the alliance don't have real answers to.

We have real life examples that answer the real life issues, you just choose to ignor them.

Maverick, would you be willing to co-author a blog with point by point discussion of the scientific merits and risks of the wind farm? I seemed to have missed the science part of your talking points.

I have called into wcai and talked to the station manager on air asking why there is no fact checking on the statements made by either side in this important issue. He replied "Mark Rodgers can take care of himself." and quickly cut me off.

Maverick states:
"Many opponents are willing to see if there might be some benefit to a wind farm somewhere in the Cape area. But not at the risk of destroying Nantucket Sound, a national treasure, in the process."

You claim over & over how the wind farm is the sound's destroyer, yet you will not detail the facts to support your claim. I looked for you at the Deval Patrick town meeting to discuss your facts with you, but you could not be found.

Unless you have some facts, I am calling your statement a lie.

Please respond.

Neil, large scale renewable energy is almost always a good idea, where as large scale fossil fuel is almost always a bad idea.

Not every clean generation plan works out exactly as hoped, but the damage done by one oil spill or nuke plant leak surpasses ALL the damage done by all failed renewables put together.

Being a part of the renewable energy industry, we hate to see poorly sited or planned projects that give the impression of unreliable technology, it casts a shadow on all the stuff that IS working out there. Every project our company has done is working well to beyond expectations.

Don't think that big oil & coal aren't trying to discredit or sabotage renewables, they see the writing on the wall. The blue water project off Delaware that was just approved faced a massive smear campaign from your beloved coal industry. Strangely enough they parrot almost all the same distortions posted on the alliance website.

What are you doing to clean up your act Neil?

capri, I'm not sure what circles you travel in, but my group of friends have been talking conservation for years. Perhaps this illustrates how focused you are on external forces instead of your own habits.

Cambridge, MA is implementing a 15% reduction in eletrical use over the next 5 years. The flex bus runs on propane (clean). Try google-ing 'conservation MA' and see what you get.

I personally believe the cape should aim for 25% over 5 years. In concert with the WF the cape will be 100% eletrically independant & we'll be able to shut down the canal plant & all the damage it does to our health & environment.

There is conservation info all around us. "There are none so blind as those who CHOOSE NOT TO SEE."

If you like, I'll come over to your house & instruct you in the ways of conservation so we never have to hear this whine again.

Perhaps the biggest thing you can do is start being part of the soultion instead of leading the witch hunt on renewable soultions.

There are plenty of people saying we need to conserve, perhaps you've been to busy venting your wrath on CW to listen.

As a renewable energy installer I can tell you that most homes lack the proper insulation & vapor barrier, we encourage people to fix these before installing a Solar Thermal system for heating & hot water. In the same way, we caution people that if your have massive eletrical use, photovoltaic panels are a mere band-aid. The most efficient TV is the one that is turned off. Put all those 'stand by' eletronics on power strips & turn them off when not in use to stop 'phantom load'. Call Cape & Islands Self Reliance for more tips.

The wind haters remind me of the evolution debate, demanding 'intelligent design' get equal time to evolution theroy. Just because you WANT something to be true is no replacement for verifiable facts and research. Parables are great for teaching ethics, but the world is NOT 10,000 yrs old.

Save your outrage for the oil wars.

Cape Wind, under Section 388, is also exempt from undergoing the competitive bidding process...(I've read section 388, it does not prohibit ANYONE from proposing another wind farm for Nantucket sound. Big lie support)
...that will apply to all other offshore alternative energy developers. Thus, if approved, Cape Wind it will have acquired development rights... (“No restrictions to personal or commercial use”, only 'right to use' for turbines, big lie)
...in the ecologically fragile area of the OCS (made ever so more fragile by massive dragging & over fishing), without having to compete with any other company for those rights.(They cannot compete for rights they cannot have, big lie)
Section 388 exempts Cape Wind from submitting any documents previously submitted to any federal agency (I believe all documents have been passed onto the MMS from the ACOE, they asked if they could use my blow'in in the wind song)

Stunned as always the big lie goes on & the c#u^^p$ who believe it

Neil, good to see you spreading the bad word about wind, knowing your past history with the truth it makes my heart feel good that such a distinguished spokesman is leading the charge.

Maverick, nice to see things haven't changed in your support of the big lie. Have the fishermen out on the shoals come up with real numbers of how much they fish there yet?

Donna and Barbra are still tilting at turbines instead of at cats that destroy 100 times as many birds as wind power.

Really, if not for CCtoday, where would you all get together to agree with each other?

While meet to debate your own version of the facts, I'm out there installing renewables that work. Let me know how the nay-saying works out for you.

Niel, did you watch frontline last night & the documentary on how the global warming neigh-sayers are taking their playbook straight from tobacco's dis-information campaign's?
Recognize anything?

Oil spills are only 1 more symptom of poor environmental practices that supporters of the wind farm & environmentalists reducing oil use have been pushing for.

It is amazing how you rant against anyone trying to reduce or eliminate oil dependence.

Niel do you receive money from oil sources or the alliance? If you do it brings a quote to mind.

It is impossible to convince a man that something is true when his salary depends on his not believing it.

Strange how oil can inflate its price when turmoil erupts in the oil rich regions. That would make oil a sure win bet if someone had control of how much turmoil was going on there. Nice to bleed other technologies to death by having gov. subsidies help prop up your profitability. Now, renewable sustainables want a fair shake.

That's right, we have a leader that has the back bone to support good enviomental practices, and you feel the need to criticize him on a minor point, I guess that's what you do in every debate , big picture, who cares? Minor details, THE SKY IS FALLING!

I suppose if you had a child bring home her picture from school, you'd criticize her coloring scheme.

I would love for Deval to drive a hybrid or even better, a biodiesel car to set a good example. It would give biodiesel the shot in the arm it needs to be more accepted. Yet I can still see the large scale good this man is doing for our state, unlike Mitt and his empty enviromental words.

Grow up Monponsett and do some good for the world.

I believe cape wind will be built. If a massive amount of dredging is needed, I am against the building of the 12 turbines. I don't think it will be an issue to build the 12. I don't think CW would NOT build the other 118 just because of the 12.

We will see.

I believe this non-issue is just the last in the opposition's long line of non-issues.

Neil, if all goes to plan, I'll be off grid in 2 years. My friends are investing in a biodiesel processing plant, I just helped install a small wind turbine at Race Point Light house off P-town to go with existing solar panels & a biodiesel backup generator.
I've joined my church's efforts @ what many church's are doing, called the green sanctuaries.
Yes Niel, I've admitted that one of my statements is only 99.99% accurate, if your complaints are such a broken record of sophomoric accusations, well, I guess I'm a little disappointed.
Guess you'll go off & find some website to cut & paste studies on how trying to do carbon neutral life style changes is all a trick by junk scientists to make us viciously recycle more and destroy the American way of life.

Argue hard enough for your faults and they are yours, work hard enough for your dreams and they can become real.

I'm sorry if living a renewable/sustainable/clean life is perturbing you. Sad, very sad.

Neil, it just came to me, are you a petrol bigot? I mean are you the kind of person that believes in the intrinsic value of oil derived culture being better than clean renewables. Furthermore, do you assert your right to oppress clean renewable energy on the basis that your superior energy form need give up some of its market share despite overwhelming evidence of fossil fuel based actions having disastrous present & long term consequences?

Are you this person?

I mean I heard there were still people who believed in their heart the Iraq war was a good war for the right reasons, (not oil of course) but I never imagined there would be one on Cape Cod.

Bet you could take gold in the denial Olympics. I mean if all this is true, the oil elitism-bigotry stuff.

Neil, just let me tell you, environmentalists of the world are starting 12 step programs to get off oil dependency, you can cry hypocrite only so long before you're the last one in the smelly side of the pool.

neil, do you blame the gun that killed VT students or the killer, or the flawed background check?

I blame the killer. Without him, those people are still alive. Burning fossil fuels not only kills, but creates sickness, disease, & war in it's wake.

Again, if you fell off a building, was it gravity that killed you, was it the building, or was it carelessness. Getting electrocuted while working with any equipment is not having enough information, or being safe enough. I agree that a wind turbine falling on someone is a case of wind power danger, so yes, in extraordinary cases you can say wind power has a risk.

Use of fossil fuels, in the manner prescribed, has killed millions. When you say wind power is dangerous, you travel far into the absurd.

Capri, if you had read my posts at the start of this debate, I have stated that if massive dredging is required, I don't believe those 12 should or will be built. I believe they'll find a way w/o dredging.

We will see.

Niel, I am attacking the false information you bring to this debate. I am sorry you believe it.

I try to use my sarcastic humor to point out the absurdities that you present under the guise of 'truth'. If that is attack, bring better facts to the table.

If global warming were'nt even an issue here, (as you claim) a wind farm has researched other benefits in cleaner air, local jobs, more fish, an aid to navigation, prevention of larger dragging, energy independence, savings on health care, stabilizing electric rates, etc..

You claim none of these are true, didn't you even oppose a MET tower going up to collect data? This speaks of supreme denial. You oppose every step, every finding because: You decided before the research was in it was a bad idea.
“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation” Herbert Spencer

Examples of observed climatic changes

* Increase in global average surface temperature of about 1°F in the 20th century
* Decrease of snow cover and sea ice extent and the retreat of mountain glaciers in the latter half of the 20th century
* Rise in global average sea level and the increase in ocean water temperatures
* Likely increase in average precipitation over the middle and high latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere, and over tropical land areas
* Increase in the frequency of extreme precipitation events in some regions of the world

Examples of observed physical and ecological changes

* Thawing of permafrost
* Lengthening of the growing season in middle and high latitudes
* Poleward and upward shift of plant and animal ranges
* Decline of some plant and animal species
* Earlier flowering of trees, emergence of insects, & egg-laying in birds

-Union of concerned scientists

Yes neil, I can cut & paste as well, unlike you, this information is credible.

If we export food we can use 20% more resources per person?

Uhh.. sure, you've beat me completely with that rationalization.

I love America enough to make sacrifices to help make it a cleaner, more efficient place.

Locally generated energy is the best thing for America to be self sufficient, unless you perfer being so oil dependant that every mideast hiccop squeezes a few more dollars out of our pockets every day.

Things to hate: the rush to war and the couple of trillion it'll cost my grandkids, subsudies to buy SUV's that will not be used in a business, frozen in time MPG standards, the 4.5 billion in taxpayer money to develop eletric cars and fuel cell technology that American car makers killed, all the methods many coperations use to cut costs but increase pollution, Presidents and their lackies who lie so often as if truth were an inconvience, unsustainable forien energy with .20 on the dollar return as opposed to local energy with a 2.60 return in economic activity.

neil, I know that one of the worst thing environmentalists want to do is tell rampant consumers how to live. You know America is 5% of the population, uses 25% of the world resources, I'm sure you've heard that often, but it is true. Now China & India are trying to catch up as fast as they can. The consumer rate is racing upwards.

The reality is zero emission mass transit can be built, it is slowed down greatly by attitudes like yours of how all the 'greenies' are chicken littles.

But neil, how do you explain in the crackpot journals how temp's are going up at the same rate of human CO2 production. All the reports trying to disprove this are ripped to shreds by peer reviewed science, you know like when you must have facts to back up a theory.

Range can be easily augmented with recharging stations with wind/solar power. Yes it requires infrastructure, but what travel doesn't?

Join with me to advocate for biodiesel in Cape School buses? Much, much cleaner emissions for kids.

Global warming has taken the place of Communism as an absurdity that "liberals" will defend to the death regardless of the evidence showing its folly. Evidence never has mattered to real Leftists

Niel, you steered me to this crap? (greenie watch website)

I know you make a habit of quoting some of the more believable crackpot websites out there, but there was less evidence than a Rush Limbaugh show there.

No wonder your grasp on reality is so tenuous.

Tell me again how biodiesel, wind, & solar power can't make our communities cleaner, stronger, and more independent?

Go watch 'who killed the electric car' and tell me how full of lies it is.

Maverick states "...allow Cape Wind to decimate Nantucket Sound..."

Mr. Maverick, a liar is someone who knowingly makes an untrue statement.

You allude to the destruction of the sound but your version of how that would happen is 0-19 with agencies that are required to be ACCURATE.

Every line of reasoning you've used has been shot full of holes, so much so, this illusion of a dredging issue is all you have left.

Again, where in the real world is a Windfarm destroying the shallows it inhabits?

The SOS can agree with it self as much as it wants, the fractional damage of windfarms when measured with other utility scale power production still makes it the cleanest power around.

I cannot call you a liar if you believe this mythical destruction of the sound, I can only call you wrong, and I will tell it to you face, as I tell it to all the alliance.

I'll continue to call you on this fiction every time you bring it up.

That's right Neil, there's no global warming or climate change, the ice sheets are not shrinking, we didn't just have the warmest winter on record, clean renewable energy is a farce, oil & coal aren't destroying the health of our communities.

I see now the entirety of how we've all been fooled. The science/research cartel has got us right where it wants us, foolishly trying to cut emissions and generate our energy locally instead of paying higher & higher rates to fund unstable countries trying to kill us.

I am so glad we have an honest government that fought climate change hysteria for so long, they are truly a voice of reason. Now if Bush can only convince our pesky population that if we only kill a million more terrorists we'll have lasting peace. We're probably only a trillion $ short of our goal.

Neil, superman isn't going to burn off all the CO2 with his heat vision, though it would be nice if went back in time to urge us to build up renewables in the 70's.

maverick, if by honest, do you mean that 'No dredging will be necessary' must be spoken by Jim Gordon alone? ...or is it O.K. if his company puts out an official statement saying the same thing.

Such a tempest in a Tea-shoal.

If CW really must dredge and is trying to cover it up, you should be jumping with joy. They would finally trip up and not be able to go forward.

I would think this conspiracy is just what you've been waiting for. Now, you could spend all day blogging, or break into CW's offices and get the real poop.

Darn! I just gave away the perfect plan. Uhhh, wait, forget I said anything.

Nice day huh?

Niel, 20 years ago California put some great laws on the books to curb energy use & require it from clean, renewable sources.

Now they lead America in renewable technology and are a model for getting off fossil fuels.

There have been a few failures, but they are dwarfed by the success of the overall policy. Tougher laws has made better companies in CA.

Niel, you sound like someone that would have found a storm in every silver lining, nay saying every reform.

I think you'll see tomorrow how much people of this country want to get off fossil fuels & live more responsibly.

It'll become an ever lonelier life pimping for the oil companies as you do, but hey, YOU gotta live with yourself, we only have to read you.

Maverick, very cagey diverting away from the heart of the issues so you needn't lie directly.

Any time you'd like to directly discuss the issues at hand, just let me know. I hope to have lower electric rates, but no CW jobs are lined up for me, just cleaner air.

Maverick, congratulations on SOS maneuver 3a. Take current talking point (the discussion is about 12 turbines locations in question) Blow it out of all proportion (I have never observed a 24 sq. mile marina. Have you?) and let the accusations begin.

How does the possibility of dredging near 12 turbines turn into dredging 24 sq miles?

Please explain.

I understand maneuver 3a does give you nearly endless talking points, just none in the real world.

Q: Why do SOS'ers continue down irrefutably disproven lines of reasoning over & over again?

A: They don't have any facts to back up their statements.

Is the issue about dredging 24 sq miles of horseshoe shoals? YES or NO?

Good point lmc035@gmail, correction; It will reduce tankers around cape waters.

I commend Jack on presenting the dredging point. This Windfarm has to pass muster on all counts to go forward.

The process has shown so far that the mostly baseless claims of SOS have fallen on deaf ears, due to a lack of credibility.

If massive dredging is needed, I cannot see that happening. I also believe there are ways around possible problems and CW would not invest the millions it has so far, and overlook this detail.

Again, I see CW's statements over 6 yrs have checked out with state & local agencies THAT CHECK FACTS. Put me down as someone who believes the statement "no dredging will be needed", & has disdain for anyone touting the non-argument 'Jim Gordon has not personally said that'.

Imagine the MMS saying "This wind farm proposal would go through, except Jim Gordon did not personally repeat a previously made official statement."

Happy Friday the 13th, my lucky day!

Mr. Maverick, Do you still assert a WF is the destruction of Nantucket sound?

I commend you on your calm, measured response to my anger. I let my anger get the best of me because I am so fed up with assumptions that a WF is the destruction of Nantucket sound.

If you truly believe this, you are not a liar, you merely are ignoring the fact that existing windfarms in the world are not damaging the shallows they reside in, in fact WF's displace pollution, helping the local environment. What prevents you from seeing this? Which WF is destroying its waters? What proof do you have that is based in fact or real life example. I eagerly await a WF to prevent the damage being done by draggers.

Please, speak to less mercury, 130 new reefs, moorings in an emergency, warnings of shallows, less oil tankers traveling through the sound, lower local electric prices.

I apologize for saying "liar"in my rage. Will you debate me rationally on real benefits?

P.S. I never said you're a dragger.

maverick, you got one little flaw in your theory of harm to the sound.

It is the ultimate insult to the facts before us to even insinuate that WF construction (Barring massive dredging.) would ever do a fraction of the damage dragging does. You're a sports fisherman right? You know this right? Most fishermen with a clue do know this.

If you are still thinking IN ALL HONESTY that the WF will damage the sound, your senses have left you. If you persist I'll have to call you a liar yet again.

Once again, the straight poop, monopile driving, insignificantly harmful to life in the sound. Continued dragging VERY BAD for life in the sound.

You'll stand by & watch your buddy drag the bottom barren, but oh my god, a wind farm to increase fish stocks? Over my dead body. Oh yeah, it displaces mercury from the waters near where you fish, how dare they. Warnings of shallows, what's this crap.
How did your moral compass get so busted?

Capri "..pointing to draggers, which has nothing to do with the issue, is an attempt to deflect, as always."

FACT: dragging is the only fishing the WF would limit. Didn't SOS bring the draggers into the issue?

I know facts outside of SOS's well worn 'story' don't register w/you. This is not defection, I merely point out the marriages of convenience SOS uses.

Cape Wind has been dead on with it's information to organizations that actually check their facts.

Again, if large scale dredging is needed, I don't believe CW should or will build those turbines in question. I say this because I don't believe in wholesale disruption of Nantucket sound, like dragging, or the thousands of boats dumping their diesel & oil in the water (solution: biodiesel, sail boat)

1 of every 10,000 human caused bird deaths is from turbines(mostly older, poorly sited turbines), undeterred by facts you continue to tilt at turbines believing they are the problem.

All we are saying, is give wind a chance!

Hmmm, Cape wind's record on factual statements, around 100%. The Alliance...close to zero. When CW says it won't be a problem, forgive me for believing them & not SOS.

If massive dredging would be needed, Cape Wind may have to do without those 12 turbines.

Maybe they are counting on ocean level rise from global warming so it won't be an issue.

I believe that the exact locations are not set in stone, and there is latitude to nudge locations to avoid dredging within the defined borders.

I believe massive dredging is an environmental mistake, but not nearly the mistake that constant fish dragging of the area is. This is one of those glaring points the Alliance seems mute even w/their concern for the environment... or should I say they have concern for any environmental issue they can misrepresent into ammo against Cape Wind.

You don't want to alienate you fishing allies, even if thier dragging causes more damage than a WF ever would. Glad I'm not in the same ethical bind.

Anyone heard from Niel good?

Maybe he's moved to Texas to fight wind there.

Niel, you are more than welcome to come back here and admit how wrong you've been. You may have to talk out of the side of your mouth for awhile seeing as it will be so full of crow. I'm sure talking out of the side of your mouth isn't too different for you though.

neil, honestly, we'll miss your comedy.

Well I'm here 'shoot'n it up' again

sheesh! When I deconstruct all the SOS's well rehashed truth twists and fact freestyle contortions, well I guess I can see from your POV how that might be a little messy. Good thing for us all on how the facts have checked out and the 6 yr fabrication-athon is circling the drain. If you have a gripe, it's with the real world, not me.

State process underway (finally). MMS will now creak along, w/ yet another round of public comment periods that the SOS seems to think we don't & haven't had. Guess they'll require a decommissioning process, & bird data. How dare they lay out what the SOS calls an unworkable ocean zoning process!

Real cape issues: 1)Burning biodiesel in all the cape buses, just think of all missing filth & smell, might even catch on.

2)LED bulbs using 1/10th of the E of CFL's.

3)Proper insulation to achieve vapor barriers cuz the cape houses are leaking like sieve's.

Will start blog soon on cape conservation

TYS

This latest white house has shown, more than any in my lifetime, that money helps to write the laws to favor those with money. Every time that happens, the people who do the living, working, & dying in our communities are shorted a little bit more.

As the wealth concentrates into the upper 1% more & more we slide deeper into plantation working condtions.

Of course the highly skilled worker has a place, but the security of higher education is far less than it has been.

We live in a world where we can only afford items made in china, burn coal, and require 2 adults in a household to afford to raise a child.

As the common man goes, so goes the world!

Index the minimum wage to the cost of living at least!

So, we have 2 possible realities here, that the entire process is rigged, blackmailed, fixed, & otherwise crooked, resulting in all of the SOS pleas falling on bribed ears OR the process to gage the severity of environmental impacts has been on the up & up (as noted by Ian Bowles, an expert on environmental impacts) and finally ready to move on to the scrutiny phase.

With the degree of detail these studies have covered, I can see why SOS is very nervous.

Anyone have a link to the alliance news conference?

I just hope the alliance doesn't try to kidnap Ian Bowles & have him read a statement that he was actually wrong & more research is needed.

Again I say, if you don't have the facts on your side, stalling for more time is the only option, only now, the time for delays is up & frivolous law suits are your only hope. Too bad the MMS is going to be pretty impervious to them.

I wonder what SOS employees will do? I hear Satan is looking for a few good liars!

Niel, I'm not the one saying coal power is superior to wind power.

Niel I again challenge youto find any one of my statements to be untrue with FACTS.

neil, again you embarrass yourself, clean coal, as any expert not on big coal's payroll will tell you is at best 10 yrs away, more likely 20 or 30.

Wind power works now, even run by private company's. MA is building a CC development site to hedge their bet.

Oh wait, you believe that wind increases CO2, is the reason for their tax burden, & made lego's move out of Denmark.

Neil, how can anyone take you seriously when you take these absurd stands?

The 1st rule of research: seek the facts or causes of phenomena apart from subjective states.

I am not sure what research on clean coal you are siting as to its success, but it is dead wrong.

Anyone can write something on the net (as we are), but very few have solid research to back it up.

Capri: as you well know, 1 of every 10,000 human caused bird impacts is from a wind turbine.

Why aren't you out there stopping mirrored buildings being built?

How would a WF decrease quality of human life? (Facts only please)

I am very curious now, exactly what in my song was offensive?

Can you be specific?

Neil, that was interesting about Malta, but what does it have to do with an offshore windfarm?

I see the statement "When considering such impacts, and in view of the fact that such a wind farm would only generate 1.06 per cent of electricity consumption in 2010..."

Seems to me, 98 more wind farms and they're 100% energy independent, or a few big offshore ones, where it makes more sense.

This sort of statement defines you, you search the internet for 'facts' to support your view, but all you really do is find people who agree with you, and present it as 'fact'

I am not familiar with the Malta research, but I can tell you properly sited wind generators will pay for them selfs far before the end of the turbines useful life. Most projects die from delaying tactics. Irrational fears generated by lies & distortions manufactured by you & your ilk.

You should be more careful w/your freedom of speech.

Vermont survey indicates that noise, wildlife impacts,& visual impacts are potential prospective problems for wind,British polls make it clear that in practice, negative concerns about wind plants are not borne out. (The Vermont survey also suggests this possibility,note that the highest
vote for any item as a "big disadvantage" was 25%, while 78% voted for its nonpolluting nature as a "big advantage." Suggesting a predisposition) Typical findings from the U.K.:The number of those concerned about noise dropped from 86%
immediately after construction to 20% a year later (Cornwall).
80% of those responding felt that it was a tourist attraction (Cornwall).
92% of respondents were not bothered by the visual impact of the local wind plant (Cemmaes).
23% of those responding could see the wind farm from their homes. Of
those, 22% (or 5% of all respondents) were concerned, while 61% were
"not at all concerned" (Kirkby Moor).
81% believed the wind farm "has caused little harm

Mam, I spoke form the heart, and I spoke truth, how again is that rude?

Was it my singing or reminding others not to cat call? Was that rude?

True rudeness is trotting out the same old lies again and again hoping to cause enough fear to scare off CW.

We are lucky to have Jim Gordon who is dedicated to wind power and will not wilt against propaganda such as you keep pouring out over & over again.

Believe me, if I had wished to be rude, you would know it.

Good DAY!!!

Darktest is in fact I, Carl B. Freeman.

We are the same. I have never tried to hide it, if i'm not up against the word count, I sign my name at the end of a blog.

I am a massage therapist, install solar systems & residentaial wind, work w/kids at church, mentor kids

If assuring the CCC that I feel the FEIR has had enough time & is complete, than yes, I embarassed my self.

If I show the contradictions of alliance stands while 'fluid' application of the truth is a terrible barrier to better health on the cape, I consider myself ashamed.

But since all of my statements come from my heart that the path of wind throws off the terrible shackles of fossil fuels & helps people lead better lives, I know I am living in accordance to my core beliefs.

Please, you can all drop your phoney do-goody talk that stopping a wind farm helps Cape Cod, or anyone for that matter.

I want me & my family to breath better air, your mega house of cards lies be darned!

Sorry, maybe I'm a little slow, I still can't see how this wording prevents anyone else from submitting a bid to build a windfarm in Nantucket sound.

What it sounds like to my non-lawyer ears is that the energy policy cannot retroactively impose new legal process on alternate energy projects that are already underway, i.e. those with met. towers and/or proposals to a public authority. (including the long island project)

Under your interpretation are you saying you want others to submit bids to build windfarms in Nantucket sound? I'm with you there.

Maybe you can bid to build a windfarm and use it as a test case if you feel the process is unfair. That would mean letting the real world scrutinize your words. Are you ready for that?

Wind haters all seem to see only the worst case, when wind is the safest energy in the world. Case in point pilgrim Nuke plant leaking.

CW's mineral oil can't leak when experts say the shallows prevent large ships from reaching the platform.

O.K. Neil, I've read it about 10 times now, I still don't see where on this page says: "There shall be no competitive bidding for rights to erect a wind farm in Nantucket sound."

Maybe you can explain it to me so I can understand, or at least let me borrow your decoder ring.

It says CW need not resubmit documents, even though they've been resubmitted to the MMS.

Neil, please present facts that actually back up what you say.

Has anyone else submitted a bid to build a windfarm in Nantucket sound and been denied?

Please, stick to facts.

neil, good to see you at the CCC hearings last night. Your quote above from — Angela Kelly, is part of Country Guardian's Manifesto. The first line reads:

"Country Guardian believes that investing in commercial wind power according to the Government's policy to reduce CO 2 emissions is misguided, ineffective and neither environmentally nor socially benign."

So what they're saying is: Wind power is bad no matter what, so let's band together and fight it.

Sure, there is power in people joining groups with a cause, but they look pretty silly when reality sharply disagrees with their stance.

Over & over neil, you point to like minded people who share your ire against wind power, all the while in Denmark it quietly produces 20% of their power with no real negatives. The reality again is, they are doubling both big windfarms.

It must be tough putting fourth these ideas every day when the proving ground of the real world disproves them all the time.

barbaradurkin writes:

Does policy at Cape Cod Today provide you with a "special exemption" like the Energy bill provided exclusively to Cape Wind? (referring to Chuck K's posts)

Barbara, you raise an intesresting issue, you (and other wind-haters) claim that Cape Wind was given a "special exemption" by the new energy bill. Could you paste the part of the energy bill here that outlines this special treatment? Maybe a link to where this information is.

Truly I would like to see what has been referenced so often.

Maybe you can include a 'decoding' narrative so we normal people can understand it.

capri: "The Army Corp has been replaced by the MMS. A rose is a rose by any other name." to justify Audra Parker using the 'need more time' quote on npr.

So, what you're saying is: no matter who is permitting the project, no matter how long the process has gone on, 'we need more time.'

I guess if I believed in the 'terrible' consequences of wind power & had nothing of substance to show real damages, stalling by any other name would still be the best ploy.

Wind resouce could offset real, health damaging emissions. Every 30 days we delay offsetting these poisons (prove me wrong, please) another person dies a premature death. (Harvard medical research) as well as birth defects (United Way) # of Asthma suffers and severity of attacks (American lung society) etc.

The entirety of negative claims made by your ilk have not materialzed in any thing less than the tiniest fraction of the real damage from oil, coal, & thier method of extraction.

renewables=long term stability!

The stock market's value short term value is predicated far more on opionion than actual value, where as over the long haul you'll have a far better view on the real value of goods & services.

Did anyone catch 'the Point' on npr for windfarm debate? Audra Parker revealed the true nature of the Alliance by repeating a quote from state agencies pleading for more time to consider the project. It was then revealed the quote was a few years out of date, she left out that the quote was directed @ the Army corp. of Engineers.

So very typical of wind oposition misrepresenting what ever is in reach, spinning it thier way when the facts just don't line up to thier world view.

Like, complaining that the decommissioning process is flawed because regulatory steps are in the wrong order, a different order than how other construction projects are bonded.

The Alliance, faced with a good report, can only stall for time hoping for another desperate back room deal.

I'm listening!

Aren't the causes of global warming secondary to actually doing something about it? I believe we should embrace soultions that also chart us in a direction of less harmful emissions, less chance of oil spills, more independance from unstable oil producing countries & less health care costs.

Simple math, if this wind farm displaces 1,000,000 tons of co2 each year with little to no enviromental damage, then lets get it going! If this windfarm works, it opens the doors for wind powering a vast majority of the East coast in 20 years.

If we can shut down oil and coal plants and just have gas fired and other renewables to fill in the valleys of wind, we have a much better America to live in.

An America that leads the world away from wholesale greenhouse gas production is a reality within our grasp.

The temperature is rising, all fault aside, CO2 makes it worse, ergo, lets produce less of it.

-Carl B. Freeman

Where would a properly sited windfarm be? Are there VALID concerns of the process being used here? I suppose since the windfarm has passed every test even with a Gov. opposed to its every step (for 6 years)& 8 million used to stall & derail it, I would say there must be some real value to it.

The real research will be released soon, then all those opposed to it can complain about how poor this 18 agency, 6 year process has been.

Sacrifice any thing for the cause, maybe even the truth.

Breathers for the windfarm!

-Carl B. Freeman

A tremendous effort has been put into saying how horrible the picture Cape Wind would create for beachgoers, but that only obscures the real issue here.

Regardless of where a person stands- 5 or 500 miles away- a private, for profit power plant, that creates toxic emissions, just does not belong in Sandwich on Cape Cod canal, & a wind farm could be just the thing to shut it down & stop the traffic of UGLY tankers coming here to fuel it.

If you really think that clean energy production that improves our air, water, & soil by displacing fossil fuels being burned is a bad thing, you've been the victim of a con job.

Then again, oil & coal have such a bright future, maybe we should 'stay the course'.

There are 2 futures here, one where we start the sometimes painful transition to renewables on a large scale now, or leave it for our children. If left to the next generation, the scale of the task is an ever increasing cliff.

Me, I'd like to breath some better air.

Neil, I must admit your reservoir of oil research is vast, perhaps a little too vast.

If I fell off a building, should the headline read 'Man killed by skyscraper!'?

20 people have been stupid or clumsy enough to fall from or (gulp) under a turbine in 30 years? My gosh! The only thing worse would be, oh I don't know, a million times that! Dead from oil and it's dire consequences in just the last 30 years! Cancer-Asthma-immune disfunction-war

So, maybe you're right, lets all hitch our wagons to the oil juggernaut as it pulls us merrily along for another 30 years getting more expensive all the time. Eek! From what you've told me we can't sneeze with out something made from oil. Also tough to fight a war without oil.

Since all phases of manufacture including shipping are 'dependant' on oil, goods will baloon in price. Non or less-oil goods will have a better long term yield, like windfarms, like Solar panels, Like clean-renewable-sustainables

Divert oil subsidy to alternatives

Oil is a 100% natural poison, when mixed with seawater the damage is naturally devastating.

Back in the 30's in America, there were several promising uses for oil derived from hemp, at the same time Dow was developing it's new chemical processes from petrolium (crude oil). Dow used it's lobby power to have the hemp plant made illeagal, so today, instead of using products that are based on a renewable source of oil that is non-toxic, we have wide spread use of crude oil based products.

Neil, would you have been one of those people crying out to stamp out hemp oil, viva la crude?

If oils for plastics, asphalt, rubber were developed using plants instead of drilling for the far more toxic oil, this world would be a far better place.

Yes, we were all raised in the petrol world, that doesn't mean must stay there. You seem to act as if there's no hope to change for the better so why try.

If fact, I would say that people like you are the reason why it IS so hard to go green.

It is always a good time to promote windpower. It doesn't pollute, don't you get it? The average wind resource only changes between 2% -4% per year.

"The irreparable ecological damage" Do you really have any reports of ACTUAL ecological damage from wind farms? Please bring these facts to light.

I can show you reports of where ever coal & oil is burned, cancer, asthma, and birth defects go up. Quality of life goes down.

Oil is one of the main reasons wars are fought and children are recruited to be soldiers.

Oil rich countries often foster slavery, repression of women, religious intolerance, terrorism, etc.

Oil placed George bush in power.

Oil causes wholesale, prolonged, ecological damage.

If that isn't evil, I'm not sure what is, oh wait, it might be a wind turbine squeaking 6 miles away.

Consuming nearly unlimited power is not a devine right!

Next weekend I hope to have my veggie oil volvo on the road. We have the tech for hybrid cars that won't need ANY oil.

neil sez "I believe every day more people learn that wind ‘power’ is a total sham designed to benefit only the developers and turbine manufacturers."

Neil, I'm sorry that all the reputable research shows you're sliding into the absurd.

When the tobacco companies were trying to smokescreen us about health & smoking, they had to cover up peer reviewed reports showing death & disease, it was tough, but they managed it for awhile. Are you trying to tell me people are dying from wind power? Are you saying wind farm developers are taking all the money for themselves so they can bring down our standard of living?

I can let you in on the truth that oil & coal are responable for death and disease, as well as whole sale destruction of the enviroment.

Any evidence of windfarm owners being terrible people that are poor stewards of the enviroment? If so I'd like to see that.

Do you say that making money generating power with no emmissions is inheriantly evil?

I WILL say that about oil & coal.

You're still not in the realm of fact, "could", "might", "possible", suggests that someone agrees with you, but they do not have hard-enough evidence that would stop development, whereas we have a moutain of evidence showing consumer demand increasing, cancer and a host of other health risks that ARE happening and can be prevented by displacing fossils fuels.

I know wind haters start from the fact that Jim Gordon is evil, greedy, & will destroy Nantucket sound if possible.

But, suppose all the research & results around wind energy IS real and would have all the thoughly researched benifits.

If this were true would you support it?

Are you the kind of people that believed that smoking cigerettes wasn't a health risk until it had been proven for the 20th time?

Are you still on the fence about global warming?

Do you believe that Bush flawlessly pulled off the 9/11 attacks?

Do you believe all the regulating agencies have been bought off?

I'll like to hear what you believe.

Do any of these reports show noise 5 miles away? That's the closest point of this wind farm. In all the thousands of land based turbines, I'm sure there is one squeaking somewhere.

Neil, have you ever heard of reductum ad absurdum? You find the one absurd but real circumstance that fits your line of reasoning and base your case it on it.

Like your ceo of windpower who's against it, I went to DONG's website, they are many different energy companies that merged a few years ago.

I googled Anders Eldrup and he just finished presenting an award to school children for promoting a windfarm.

Now what's funny is Jim Gordon is an energy co. CEO and you believe nothing he says, yet Anders Eldrup has a quote that you agree with and BOOM, he cannot tell a lie.

Perhaps Anders Eldrup sees that coal is much more profitable over the long haul and does not wish to see it eclisped by wind power. Noise can develop, and noise can be fixed. I think Jim would, or at least be forced to.

I suppose if you repeat this enough times you feel it will come true.

'A tourist/commercial and fishing/recreational use/public safety/historic and archaeological integrity/quiet public enjoyment/avian and marine life- decimating Cape Wind.'

Again, I am calling for some facts to back this up and you still have not posted any, just how you feel about it.

'tourist' No where on earth has there been an off shore windfarm & tourism has gone down FACT!

commercial and fishing: No where on earth have any commercial or fishing boats run into a wind turbine or reported fishing stocks decrease. FACT!

There has never been an incident of a wind turbine harming ANYONE! EVER! FACT!

The coast guard has stated (not Jim Gordon) It would be an aid to navigation, and stood behind it for 6 years.

archaeological integrity: ?

quiet public enjoyment: At the base of a wind turbine, you can barley hear the woosh.! FACT!

Please, post any research to dispute these facts.

sorry for the duoble post, i stand corrected.

I mis-read the rules and shall play by them for now on.

Deepest apologies.

Wind power is not always producing, true, still we have over 98% of our power generation spread out over many fossil fuels burning stations, if we ever got near to the point where it is a problem, I consider that signifigant progress.

I would love to see whole neighborhoods construct a BIG turbine for thier local use (far less loss in transmission) and solar thermal collectors for thier heating needs.

Energy independant communities are a great building block towards sustainable, renewable, INDEPENDANT energy. With enough action like this we wouldn't need a wind farm, but like I said, and can prove, we're still so dependant on fossil fuel energy we'd have to go a VERY long way before there's a ghost of a problem with the reliabillity of wind.

So many are eager to continue this addiction to fossil fuels and the clearly documented damage, and unwilling to even try a power source that has yet to kill anyone.

Facts anyone? No?

How about we stop exporting american energy jobs?

So, because some people THINK that wind power is not the way of the future, it ISN'T?

I thought I was calling for facts to be brought to bear, and some one thinks wind is bad and poof, it is?!?!?

I guess I can't refute that someone thinks coal is the way of the future, I believe that wind offers a far better future. Coal is cheap on the surface, but nothing creates more sulfer, mercury, toxic emissions, and fine particulates that induce asthma, cancer and a host of other expensive health problems, and the highest levels of CO2.

So in a very real way the hidden costs of coal make it expensive in human, bird, fish, & animal misery. I think we've all seen too much multi-billion $ clean ups of highly contaminated areas that never really clean it all up.

I'll show you plenty of people in the coal producing states who'll say the same thing, doesn't change the fact that wind power is superior in every way.

Sorry, only intended to leave a quick note, but just thinking about how far behind we are from where we should be on the path to emission free energy generation just boils my blood.

If you pile enough red herrings on top of each other, some people swear they begin to smell.

Each and every theroy put fourth by the wind haters has been dismanteled by clear thought and facts from CPN and other rational thinking beings. ALL of them!

The time spent trying to rework them in a new form hoping they'll get traction this time ... Grrrrrrr.

The first PR group hired by the alliance to discredit the windfarm came back with the findings that the view was the only issue, and only to less than half the people.

So when reality doen't fit how you want it to be, keep throwing crud against the wall hoping the ruckus will give the political maneuverers time to delay the process until an underhanded way can be found to derail it, like giving an anti-wind in-the-pocket-of-the-cape-rich Govenor a no explanation veto.

Grrrrrr!

Me, I just want to breath some better air and not pay so much for eletricity today and tomarrow.

Have you ever wondered why the alliance will not debate CPN head to head?
They know that the VERIFIABLE facts would show thier sham claims for what they are.

Any spokesperson for the alliance clearly tries to play on fear and emotions from thier slanted logic.

Pictures showing turbine many times larger than they would look like. Lying about how much space they would take up in the sound. lying about how much cape codders would save on eletrical bills. Misrepresenting bird kill numbers.

It honestly stuns all of in the renewable energy field that this constant assault on the truth goes on and on.

When we can only offer the facts and wind haters can offer any fantasy they can concieve of, well, I hope you feel differently if you see some person having a perfectly preventable asthma attack because the bogus claims you make delays the windfarm another year.

MS. Durkin, my post points out that to truly believe that wind power does not work is to accept these truths:

Jim Gordon has bribed, or blackmailed army corp of engineers, Denmarks power agencies, the vast majority of Denmarks population, the MMS, Audibon, Copenhagen's harbor master, the conservation law fund, Deval Patrick, etc... (list edited for space considerations)

The point is, if you believe Jim Gordon has really done all this just to erect a windfarm that can't or won't work, then your belief system and abilly to discern the facts is so severly imparied you should really remove your self from the discussion.

I've been nice, but the wholesale facbication of mistruths and out right lies by the wind haters is just too much to believe.

If you were my daughter, I'd send you to your room until you could figure out what you need to apologize for. Fact is you'd never come back.

How about this, respond with FACTS that can be proven. Next you'll tell me there's no global warming and coal plants are a good idea.

FACTS: Denmark is 20% powered by wind, if the power crosses an imaginary line we call a border, it is still power.

In 6+ years of review the wind farm has passed every test it has been put to despite well funded slander and political heavy handedness.

The alliance is guilty in court of lying

The majority of Cape Codders are for a it.

It would provide 75% of the cape & islands eletrical needs.

It would reduce the number of oil tankers traveling through the sound.

It would save 53+ million per year in health care costs (harvard medical)

It would pave the way to more windfarms and LESS fossil fuel emissions or radioactive waste.

Every offshore windfarm shows, it would slightly increase tourism and property values would continue to rise.

Despite every bit of math or research presented to wind haters, they are still wind haters who minds will not be changed by the facts.

Know who you are and what you've become.

Let me get this straight, half the posters here believe that Jim Gordon and Denmark are schemeing to fool Cape Cod into building a windfarm that won't work to rob us of hard earned money and pose a hazard to ships that are too big to actually reach the turbines because they are in shallow, pristine water?

Jim Gordon is clever enough to trick people into building it, but there's no way it will work? He wants $, $, $ yet his return on his investment would be much higer else where. The math doesn't add up, yet Denmark is 20% wind powered and doubling both of thier largest wind farms?

Oh yeah, the army corp. is in on the crime too with 99% good reposts on windfarm benifits. Opps I forgot Audibon been bought off too. In fact the MSS has also been tricked or blackmailed since the rumors is that thier enviromental report revals high marks as well.

That Jim Gordon is one tricky fella, we have no chance against a super genius meglomaniac.

Well fellow cape codders, I guess its just Jim Gordon running things from on high now.

My name is Zolgon from 250 years in your future. I must warn all of you now that this windfarm starts a chain reaction that leads to windpower providing 90% of all world electical needs in another 67 years.

Great right? WRONG! This leads to a stable atmosphere that makes Earth a prime target for a race called the Alliance-ens who think just a little to much of Earth's clean air and perfect climate. Any more CO2 and they said they would have ignored Earth altogether.

Please! Please! Stop this wind farm for the sake of the Earth.

Your friend Zolgon!

I have to get back to having a life, I suggest the rest of you do too.