Posted on 02/22/2005 2:40:03 PM PST by DTogo
A report released yesterday by opponents of the proposed wind farm in Nantucket Sound claims that nearly 80 percent of the 130 turbines would be in water deep enough to be vulnerable to a strike by a tanker. The result, the group says, could be a spill severely affecting the Nantucket Sound ecosystem.
The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound commissioned an oil-spill assessment in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Cape Wind Energy Project that was released last November. The oil-spill assessment was conducted by Lighthouse Technical Consultants and The McGowan Group.
The public and other interested parties, such as the Alliance, have until Thursday to submit a response to the DEIS. The Army Corps is then required to investigate all claims and determine if further research is needed before issuing the final Environmental Impact Statement. Alliance assistant executive director Audra Parker said the group expects an approximately 800-page report will be submitted Thursday to the Army Corps that will include their questions on air quality impacts, aesthetics, economics, wildlife and other issues.
The portion of the report released yesterday dealt with oil spill impacts and said that the Corps failed to assess the worst-case scenario in terms of oil spills, as required by law. The report said that the most probable scenario involved the MV Great Gull, which carries up to 1.3 million gallons of fuel oil and petroleum products to Nantucket, striking one or more of the turbines. They estimate that such a collision would rupture two cargo tanks on the vessel, spilling 380,000 gallons of fuel into the sound.
(Excerpt) Read more at capecodonline.com ...
Greenies vs. greenies.
Since Kennedy is opposed, why doesn't he just declare all water near where his famous submarine expedition occurred a national landmark that can't be "despoiled" by the kinds of "new energy sources" he and his ilk are always screaming about?
Wind power is for you and me, you know, the great unwashed little people. How can we meer peasants expect our lords to submit to wind power themselves.
Just think, even on days with no wind these things could be powered by the gas bag Teddy Kennedy.
These skitzophrenic environazis must be stopped. They're a danger to our energy security.
The followers of the religion of Deep Ecology are only interested in alternative energy when they think it's either impractical or impossible. When someone actually does it, they immediately begin backpedaling. That's because they don't really want clean energy. They want NO energy. Theirs is a true holy war against the Industrial Revolution.
Give him another drink and he'll forget what land he's marking!
this situation would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.
Well, crap! We had better cut off tanker traffic into Houston. There are lots of offshore oil platforms they have to dodge in the Gulf of Mexico.
Considering the large quantity of these giant pinwheels that would have to be erected to generate any significant amount of electricity, the increased hazard to navigation is a legitimate issue.
Good one! :)
We need an area ships pilot to give us the facts on traffic in the area. Any out there?
Man it sure is fun watching greenies turn greener at the inplementation of their wet dreams.
Rosenberg said shoals around most towers protect them. With depths of three to six feet, Rosenberg said a large ship would go aground before reaching any of the turbines.
Sounds convincing to me... While it has been almost 30 years since I was last on a sailboat in that area, I remember clearly that we needed to navigate carefully just to avoid the shoals. An oil tanker would clearly be more at risk from the shoals than from the wind farm.
Thank you for the postcard, how was your "drive" there? ;^)
I'm a big proponent of cost-effective renewable energy and reasonable conservation, including wind energy and increasing CAFE standards in US vehicles. I don't buy into excuses on the Right (my Right, too) of "it's pie in the sky and not economically viable/feasible" or excuses from the Left of "bird/fish kills, etc." I'll argue the best to prove such excuses are nothing more than that, excuses.
I like to keep the FR audience abreast of these issues and welcome constructive criticism/dialogue on the subject so that we can someday take away this environmental issue from the Left and make it our own: Republicans for Renewables or Conservatives for Conservation.
And anything to take cheap shots at Sens. Kerry/Chappaquiddick are ALWAYS welcome! ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.