Wind farm project dies down with bill: Senator slips in provision

Boston Herald ^ | Thursday, October 7, 2004 | John Strahinich

[Radix]

A provision quietly attached to a Defense Department spending bill earlier this week will take the wind out of a mighty wind-energy project on Cape Cod, project supporters say.

The amendment, filed by U.S. Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, will delay indefinitely a proposed wind farm in Nantucket Sound.

``At a time when Americans are more concerned than ever about our reliance on overseas oil, it seems like a particularly bad time to put the brakes on developing a clean and local source of energy,'' said Mark Rodgers, of Cape Cod Wind Associates, which hopes to build the nation's first offshore wind farm.

The amendment - which prohibits the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from approving offshore wind-energy projects without the OK of Congress - is the latest obstacle thrown in the firm's path. Last week, Pentagon officials decided to put off releasing a massive environmental review of the developer's proposal to build 130 of its 400-plus-foot-high wind turbines in a 24-square mile area off Nantucket Sound.

``An indefinite delay in developing that resource would be a step in the wrong direction,'' said Seth Kaplan, senior attorney with the Conservation Law Foundation.

The controversial proposal has created conflicting alliances of unlikely bedfellows. The Conservation Law Foundation is among 10 environmental groups that have come out in support of the privately developed project.

Joining Warner against the project are U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy [related, bio] (D-Mass.), who also sits on the Armed Services Committee, Congressman William Delahunt [related, bio] (D-Quincy) and Bay State Gov. Mitt Romney [related, bio].

``Gov. Romney agrees that before we start developing the oceans, we need to proceed carefully,'' said Romney communications director Eric Fehrnstrom.

Warner has reportedly vacationed on the Cape for years and has two daughters who are summer residents of Osterville. Kennedy and his family, of course, spend summers at their family compound in Hyannisport.

As the debate has turned vitriolic, some project supporters are quietly accusing Warner and Kennedy of engaging in NIMBY behavior - though Not on My Private Beach may be more accurate.

Fehrnstrom says that's not fair. ``(Warner and Kennedy) wouldn't put a wind farm in the middle of the Grand Canyon or at the foot of Mount Rushmore, either,'' he said. ``Nantucket Sound is also a precious natural resource, and it needs to be protected.''

[LisaS]

This is not true. Unfortunately, people who speak out against wind are labeled heretics.

Wind towers are threatening our most sensitive and historic ridgelines - for no gain. Wind towers simply do not produce electricity on a scale to justify commercial plants.

The winners are the Warren Buffets and the like who take advantage of the tax avoidance policies surrounding wind. Do not be fooled by the "feel-good" nature of wind. This is one case where the behind the scene story is bad for the general people.

[GallopingGhost]

Bottomline, wind energy is one of the most inefficent, ineffective forms of energy and hugely destructive. Kennedy's effort is excellent. The wind companies are being bolstered by plain stupid energy policy.

Inefficient and ineffective I understand, but destructive? How so?

[Mikey_1962]

Its not to protect the birds, but to protect the windmill. Guts sticking to the blades make it less productive..

[cwiz24]

I completely disagree with you.

[Mikey_1962]

Why not build a row of them down the middle of Lake Erie? It is a zone 7 wind area and they would not be seen from the shore (I live on the shores of Erie).

[leprechaun9]

I say cut the electrical cord to Cape Cod and let the New Englanders revert back to the days of our founding fathers, with candle light and cooking with wood stoves!

[Servant of the 9]

This is not true. Unfortunately, people who speak out against wind are labeled heretics.

Wind towers are threatening our most sensitive and historic ridgelines - for no gain. Wind towers simply do not produce electricity on a scale to justify commercial plants.

I'm ordinarily against wind power, but this is a case of liberals being hoist by their own petard.

The only damage a wind tower actually does is aesthetic, and in this case, the people with their views blighted are almost exclusively rich liberals who claim wind power is a good thing.

Let them pay the price for foisting this crap on the rest of us.

So9

[pugdog]

I agree with you. Here in Louisiana there is a company that wants to put windmills along our coast and FORCE the electric companies to purchase that high priced energy.

I say, make it on your own or not at all.

[robertpaulsen]

"The projected long-term savings ... "

Wow. I'm impressed. You're one with the numbers!

So, what are the projected long-term costs to the American taxpayers who are subsidizing these windmills? IIRC, a federal tax credit subsidizes the production of electricity from wind power at the rate of 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour.

The Cape Cod project was what, 420MW? At 100% output, that comes to about $66M per year worth of federal subsidies. Thank heavens the output is more like 30%

The bulk of that 20-year, $800M "savings", therefore, is coming from the rest of us taxpayers. You're welcome.

[q_an_a]

It is doubtful that the President will bring up this "not in my back yard project" to show the sick nature of the left. Kerry and Kennedy want their yachts to be able to move without any inteference by sound energy policy. But just let the folks who drive to work or want to work in Alaska ask for oil drilling and they go wild. The rich don't need an energy policy. </p>

[LisaS]

It all plays into the same argument against wind. My town (in NH) is being threatened by a wind plant that will stretch across 2 miles of ridgeline. We are talking about a power plant with a footprint of 70 acres that, at best, will produce the equivalent of 150,000 barrels of oil per year. The US consumes 20 billion barrels per day! There is simply not enough benefit from wind to justify this impact.

[LisaS]

Oops - that 20 million barrels of oil per day. (Sorry:)

[robertpaulsen]

We just opened our first wind farm in Illinois. 63 wind mills covering 2600 acres.

First impression is one of surrealness. They're prettier than high-tension towers, but just as much an eyesore.

I found this website with some photos.

Here's a photo showing the size.

[azcap]

There will be no need for these windfarms in MA when they complete the 4MW Reactor on Beacon Hill.

[biblewonk]

Did you check awea.org? They have it in the news section.

[biblewonk]

What a mess this project has become. I read that 15 million dollars have already been spent by the developer who started the thing. I'm glad to hear that is one of his many allies against those evil limosine liberals that will stop at nothing to block it. Man it would be nice to see this project happen.

[biblewonk]

Your bottom line is totally wrong.

[bert]

The article did not mention the magnetic fields associated with the wind power generators.

In a marine enviroment, the magnetic flux developed by the generators will penetrate the water surface and will prove harmful to various marine mammels relying on sound for navigation.

The magnetic flux is thought by some to be especially harmful to whales who rely on very low frequency sound that travels for hundreds of miles.

The project should be put on hold until detailed studies on the ecoimpact are completed.

[stuartcr]

Very true, and the upkeep costs, along with associated logisics, would be quite expensive.

[biblewonk]

Flux Capacitors will fix that.