Just 10mw?

Klaus:

Best case scenario, assuming that your research as usual is detailed and 10mw is the best we could hope for if this project is EVER constructed, (in the wrong location):

10 mv Cape Wind Best Case Scenario at the price of:

Proceeding without the benefit to the public of the determination IN ADVANCE of the areas offshore that are unsuitable for industrial development; no competitive bid or highest and best price paid to the public for the use and occupany that we will indeed be displace from; a developer land grab; no siting provisions; illegal spot zoning; a precedent setting project; untested technology in harsh at times inaccessible marine conditions; navigational hazards to major transportation and commercial routes; no comprehensive ocean policy to govern the OCS; DOD confirmed radar interference by wind towers with risk inherrent; no exit strategy for a failed mission; predicted mortality of up to 6,600 birds annually; a taking of marine mammals by harassment; adverse effects on marine life that extends to seals, whales; finfish some endangered; a threat to heritage trades-and the aboriginal fishing rights of a sovereign nation; safety of search and rescue operations compromised; adverse visual impact to historic districts and NHLs; violation of State Sanctuary, etc.,

AND, WE are offering generous tax benefits and subsidies of $1 billion dollars to a private developer in exchange for all of this?

Does Cape Wind, in your opinion, make any sense from an economic or environmental standpoint when you consider the trade-offs?

If all goes WELL??? Consider that the developer has never built one turbine, even on land, and that this is experimental technology, in a site selected by a developer, on a scale the same size as Manhattan Island, N.Y.

It strikes me as more of a freight train off the tracks than a solution to Global Warming, global conflict, our energy needs, that would be invisible if you listen to this projects proponents.

Pardon my soap-box style, but Cape Wind would be the worst Boondoggle that we've ever seen in the U.S. It certainly has more warning labels than the Big Dig ever had. If permitted, this project would be Bigger and Badder than the Big Dig.

I don't know what project is taking place -- I'll have to read some of your other pieces.

Barbara S.:

The project under discussion is the Cape Wind application to construct 130 440' wind turbines in Nantucket Sound along with a 10 story 40,000 gallon electrical service platform. This project would span an area the size of Manhattan Island. While, this area is under current and conflicting use by fishermen, recreational, and commericial users.

This place is often referred to as the birthplace of our American Heritage as an amphibious resource through which early travelers, like Thornwald and the Vikings, and Gosnold have passed.

I'm fighting against this project because it is a raw deal for the Cape and Islands' residents, and state residents for that matter.

I'm not a NIMBY, as I live in Central Massachusetts, but still see this project as one with the potential to destroy a place that should be a candidate for the National Trust's program, Heritage Tourism. There are over 16 historic sites, and at least two, if not three, NHL's that would be adversely effected by Cape Wind according to our State SPO.

Flawed policy has allowed the developer to select this site under conflicting use as an aboriginal fishing grounds by a sovereign Nation, the Wampanoags.

Navigators who currently traverse this triangular body of water that exists between Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Island state that this project poses a "significant hazard to safe navigation." These navigators are responsible for the safe passage of nearly 3 million people annually.

The citizens of the Cape and Islands,' who strongly object to this project, have had their voices marginalized for over 5 years as proponents deem them to be NIMBYs.

While, the word "NIMBY" reflects more on the speaker than on the target and/or audience. NIMBY term usage implies that the speaker/writer is unable to formulate a valid argument in favor of any given project. In one word, the term "NIMBY" can be defined as "obfuscation." There are many valid and legitimate objections that include adverse impact to aesthetic value that projects, like Cape Wind, generate. In the context of Cape Wind, and of law, the National Environmental Policy Act NEPA, specifically, citizens' right to aesthetic value is assured and protected.

Thank you for your interest and inquiry.

I've noticed as I start to talk to folks about the wind power company I've started to deal with (see my recent articles) my topic is overshadowed by false information. In fact, when I first told my parents all they kept throwing back at me was false inforamtion they had gotten from the Cape Wind project. Luckily my brother's girlfriend (who is geting her master's and PhD in wind power projects) was able to correct all of the myths my father was saying. Large scale projects like this one has really scarred MA residents and helped them to form wrong ideas about wind power as a whole. It's unfortunate, and I did not realize the information that is getting passed around is often wrong. It is nice to read the updated information on CW here on Gather though...I have not been paying as much attention to the topic as I should.