CapeCodToday Blog Chowder

Barbara Hill has no idea what she is talking about. She's been bought by private interests - namely Jim Gordon - but parades herself as a crusader for all humanity. If anyone has made a mockery of the political process, its her.

US Fish and Wildlife has asked for three years of constant bird studies on Nantucket Sound to accurately assess how the powerplant will impact bird populations.

That has not happened.

Ironically, the bird observation platform was put in the Sound during the summer after spring migration and before fall migration. They also missed all the birds that winter in Nantucket Sound, documented at over 1/2 million.

Thanks for playing Manatee.

Obviously, as stated, Steamship is not dumping untreated sewage anywhere in Nantucket Sound.

lmco35- I never knew the Providence Journal was an authority on matters pertaining to Cape Cod and the Islands...wait...isn't that new book about Cape Wind by the editor of that paper...i've yet to see any good press about that piece of propaganda. I hope you haven't wasted $26 on it.

CCToday, you continue to cast stones at a government that is approaching wind energy is a responsible manner.

How are lighthouses involved in a discussion about Cape Wind? That claim is absurd.

realistic

Chuck - It seems possible that Jim Gordon's new "peaker combustion turbine" could work in tandem with his Wind Farm.

When the wind isn't blowing, and he isn't making money in Nantucket Sound, he can just turn on the power in Chealsea! $$$! How nice!

Or is it more realistice that the Canal Plant just won't come offline, and in fact will increase its current operating capacity to be ready to meet demands when the wind just isn't blowing. The Canal plant surely cannot "fire up" in 10 short minutes...so what is the solution?

I love all of this talk about meeting Massachusett's "mandatory renewable energy targets"...

What about the Clean Water Act, or the Clean Air Act? Do you actually think that Massachusetts is in compliance to with either? I cannot believe how foolish most of you (Maverick, Capri, Barbara, Neil excluded) are to think that this "target" is a reason to fast track millions of dollars into Jim Gordon's pocket. Get real.

Oh the huge (and uninformed) manatee! - Audabon has not endoresed Cape Wind.

here is that website - http://www.uic.com.au/nip99.htm

Of Denmark -

"Nuclear power provides an essential part of Denmark's electricity. Its high usage of wind in fact depends primarily on imported Scandinavian hydro power especially to West Denmark, and secondly on both East and West each being part of two major grid systems incorporating a large proportion of nuclear power."

Do me a favor - either acknowledge that your support of Denmark's wind is predicated upon the Nuclear Energy you so detest, or just stop talking about how "wonderful" Denmark is. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Interesting how the same countries that Clean Power Now visits to see offshore wind are also pursing nuclear.

Mr. Kleekamp - I am still waiting...

Charles - Funny how you get published in an out-of-state paper, when everything newsworthy about offshore renewables appeared in todays Cape Cod Times.

"For five years, we have been promoting an ocean zoning policy, a comprehensive plan to protect certain offshore areas from commercial development. While the commercial development of specific areas of federal waters is appropriate for renewable energy projects, the federal government, in consultation with state and local agencies and other stakeholders, should identify key areas that are off limits to development."

And that came from the editorial board.

What is your stance on an "ocean zoning policy"? "Should some areas be off limits?"

So tell me, is anything sacred to you? Or is the entire Earth available for industrial development?

Jack - Cast stones all you want, it is you and your friends at Cape Wind and Clean Power Now who are floundering.

"Fighting the Lost Cause"..."Its really a done deal"...

And to accuse Alliance supporters of misrepresenting the facts! Who are you trying to fool? Are you just realizing that the permitting will drag out into 2008? Is your goal to create apathy towards the project?

In the meantime, I’ll wait for Massachusetts, MMS, the Coast Guard, and all other agencies involved to kill this project before claiming victory.

If the state of Texas is leasing 11,630 offshore acres...that would place this project in state, not federal waters.

Seeing as Wind Energy Systems Technology didn't try to sneak a project in Federal waters, I won't be surprised if it is the first.

Darktest - Your singing was rude and offensive.

If you want to talk about rude, consider your fearless leader Ms. Hill (Or is it Mrs. Hill, i can never tell) stealing signs. What a joke. Who can take you people seriously?

It is unimaginable to me that Cape Wind supporters actually think CCC doesn't have a real say in whether this project gets built or not. Did you read the Commissions statement? Maybe Chris is the one who has trouble reading.

CAPE WIND ACED??? HA! You'll live to see the death of this project.

Chris - As Secratary of Clean Power Now, you should be well aware of the jurisdiction of the Cape Cod Commission. The success or failure of Cape Wind depends upon this agency, and yet you spent two minutes insulting them. What a shame.

Incorrect. There is currently no economic incentive to pursue other sites as there is no existing legislation for the permitting of Offshore Wind, we are currently in that process.

Maybe Mr. Vinick and Ms. Nickerson should blog and give us all of the answers!

are Chuck, darktest,and lmc035 the same Cape Wind supporters who embarassed themselves at the CCC public hearing?

It was about "Adequacy" in case Chris Simpson didn't hear his own message.

Jack - correct, work was done four years ago, but somehow none of those sites seemed profitable enough for Cape Wind. I guess that is a good reason to only sell the Horseshoe Shoal site to the public...

As Jim Gordon has offered all Massachusetts tax payers a false choice for offshore renewables in one Cape Wind, I do not see how you can fault the Alliance for doing the work that should be done by an unyielding Cape Wind.

capri - it is obvious that CCToday has create quite the insulated community on this website regarding Cape Wind. I suspect that it will only be through "comments" that anti-Cape Wind views will make their way to this site.

Might I ask why opinions against Cape Wind need to come from them to be acceptable? I enjoyed "Against the Wind" and I don't think either of them wrote that blog.

CCToday- Your initial comment sparked my attention because I was under the (false) assumption that CCT was not interested in hosting an anti-Cape Wind Blog.

I remember "Against the Wind" but haven't seen anything like it since. Is there really a place for a blog of this nature on CCT?

Charles Vinick and Sue Nickerson speak with the media on a regular basis about the views of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound. Funny enough, their comments are discussed at CapeCodToday and are "subject to the scrutiny and rebuttlal" by those in favor of the Cape Wind project.

If you really want an Alliance Blog on CapeCodToday, you should invite some of the supporters who "do daily here."

Well said by Charles Vinick. I'm surprised that Cape Cod Today even included him on their website!

The Alliance has been instrumental in making sure that the public has not turned a blind eye to the countless negatives to placing 130 turbines and a transformer station in Nantucket Sound. I'm happy someone is looking out for public interests.

Cape Wind, for all of its "merits" is at most a symbolic step toward offshore renewable energy in the United States. The project will not stop or curb any global warming events, including sea-level rise. That is not to say society and Cape Codders shouldn't care about posterity and act on behalf of nataure. It just means that the first place to start saving is Nantucket Sound from industrial development.

Chuck-

Lest you forget that even if Cape Wind is build, the Canal Plant isnt going to get shut down, lets not confuse the viewing audience. As Neil Good nicely points out, wind power is simply unreliable.

Instead of another peaker, lets install some CFL's in Massachusetts. I distinctly remember Charles Vinick telling an audience this summer that Massachusetts residents can negate the same emissions as Cape Wind if every household installs THREE CFL's. Thats a good place to start.

Jack- No, i think I got it right the first time.

Read this, its comes from the EPA's website: Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. EPA has this goal for all communities and persons across this Nation. It will be achieved when everyone enjoys the same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards and equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, learn, and work."

Check the census date - over half of Chelsea's population is minority - and therefore the community should be considered for EJ status.

Thats not to mention the location of the peaking plant next to an elementry school.

Jack, the connection between Cape Wind and Chelsea is the bottom line. Fortunately for Jim Gordon, he is benefactor of both projects.

I'm happy to hear that you do not support environmental justice projects. We can stick to CapeWind from now on...

Where did my third post go? Did I violate the commenting policy?

oh the huge manatee - try saying something productive for a change. You bore me.

I agree Neil.

I love how all the Cape Wind supporters on this site act as if their view is the only "Environmental" stance on this issue. Don't be so self rigthous, to caring about the connection between community and place is also a tenet of Environmentalism. Maybe you all missed that class...