Cape Cod should have the first turbines under construction this fall. The wind in Nantucket Sound is among the best in the US. It blows almost full time, at a steady brisk clip in 35 feet of water. This means the payback on investment will be sure and swift even though off-shore construction is 5 to 10 times on land. Since proposal 13 years ago the units now to be used will produce 3 or 4 times as much energy as first planned.
The fight to build has been bankrolled by one man for 13 years, late March the Bank of Tokoyo Mitsubishi announced they will take over finance to the tune of $2.6 billion. The promoter is a man who became filthy rich building coal fired power plants. One day he flipped, time to right the wrongs, and wind could make money too. He lives in Cape Cod. Well, so do a couple hundred of the richest and best connected families in the world. Millions have been spent on both sides with everyone from Ted Kennedy to Romney, a Koch, Melons, and lots of people who make money off damn near everything you do live there in estates worth hundreds of millions, and many of them hired firms and people to fight and speak for them and to bog up the courts with objections.
*It would spoil the view they said. Well they will be miles out to sea, barely visible on a clear day, like looking at a domino on the far side of a big table. Many days there is enough haze or fog to hide them all together. If it spoils the view it would only be for the rich. There are virtually no locations in the area for the public to get to the waters edge. The few swimming beaches are private and all have a gate keepers filter of around $75,000 to join.
*It would ruin a national marine sanctuary and harm fish populations. This is false, it has no such designation. Fish populations have increased in Europe around wind farms since large ships and drag net fishing is impossible among the turbines. In fact it would create a marine sanctuary, though not designated.
*It will kill birds. Not as many as buildings, farm/yard chemicals, cats. Ever have a bird fly into your window? Cats kill around a billion a year, billion. Turbines kill on average 2 a year.
*Ruin sailing. Well of the hundreds of square miles of Sound to sail in surely they can steer around the few sq. miles of turbines.
*It's in state waters. No, it's in federal waters. Even after Gov. Romney sent out boats hunting for low tide rocks, which they found, then extended the state line a couple miles, which the wind developer corrected by shifting a half dozen turbine locations.
*Move it and we will drop our opposition. The wealthy who fought this for 13 years in court, the halls of Washington and the state house more than once suggested it go to some blue collar towns with public beaches and they would stay quiet. For the developer, it was about wind quality, and he picked the best place on the east coast, anything else would be a step down.
Some of the highest energy prices in the nation are in surrounding area? As much as 19 cents kWh, 10 cents above average. The utilities rely on coal, and even some burn oil. Relief in pollution and downward pressure on prices will benefit the area. But, not coal, oil, or the ego's of billionaires.
There are other wind farms in the planning now, after 13 years of court and legislative battles, Cape Wind has cleared the way, they should go up with little trouble.
Typical NIMBY complaints. If wind turbines were being built off-shore in some Jersey swamp, no wealthy assholes would be all puckered up about it. But since they might see it from their verandas, Mimosas in hand (sniff sniff), and because it just might make them tack into the wind a bit while playing on their sail boats, why, it's an ecological eyesore!
ReplyDeleteExactly what they wanted put it where the poor can see it. As it is, few poor if any will ever see it since there are few places for the working stiffs to even get to the waters edge, and walking the shore line in that area is illegal, property rights extend into the water.
Delete