A blow by blow of world wind potential

This is pretty cool and would be great for Massachusetts. Except, make sure the turbines are not situated within any view of the Kennedy Compound in Hyannis. Something off New Bedford or Fall River is OK though.

Uh, I don't think the problem is that people don't like 'looking at" industrial wind developments, so much as living with the flicker, noise, additional power lines and general creepy post apocalyptic feeling one gets from being surrounded by giant bladed towers. But hey, why not 'save' the environment by ruining it! Brilliant!

even if we were to cut down our dependance on oil, coal or atomic power it would save our planet

Joe - Wind turbines are a part of the landscape through Denmark, Sweden, and much of Europe. Hardly a "post apocalyptic" environment.

But I imagine you were just complaining for the sake of it.

Joe are you assuming that you house and the road you take to get to it as well as the power and phone lines that feed it are "good" for the enviroment. Not mentioning the offsite coal plant and the machines and labor involved in minning that coal and transporting it to the facility that burns it.

Does Nantucket Sound qualify as a non-urban, non-forested and non-ice covered area where wind farms can be built? It certainly is far enough away from where people are living so that flickering shadows, noise, additional power lines and giant bladed towers wouldn't give anyone a post-apocalytic feeling. So obviously, the reason nothing has been built there is because there are people who live on Cape Cod who don't want to be able to see the towers at all. Building them in the vast open country of the Central Plains would be just fine. Since those people never travel to that area, they would only see the pictures in the National Geographic article.

Wind turbines are the one of greatest forms of man-made pollution that we face in the 21st century. CO2 is unproven. Large wind turbines are absolute immediate pollution, noise, light, shadows cast on people's windows and as the article declairs micro-climate change. They are the man made equivalent of the smoke stacks billowing smoke across the skyline in the 19th and early 20th century. Lets start by putting one next to every historic monument. We can then go from there. Does the Globe have one?

". . . living with the flicker, noise, additional power lines and general creepy post apocalyptic feeling one gets from being surrounded by giant bladed towers."

Given Earth's finite and dwindling resources and the inevitable hostilities and wars necessitated by the competition to acquire them, not building such a thing may lead to just the "post-apocalytic" world you fear. But it will look nothing like a landscape filled with windmills.

Perhaps it is the lesser of two evils.

There are unforeseen consequences to sucking energy out of the wind that I hope they would be accounting for. Let's instead make the better choice and move forward with solar technology - an energy source that keeps on giving, where collection won't harm the environment in ways that wind power collection may.

Wind power works. Better than any other source. And of you find turbines ugly I feel sorry for you. But they are not free and they require a lot of up front investment and ecological cost. They are made of steel, after all, and need to be trucked, and all that copper, whoa boy. But what is the alternative? I guess we could keep giving the terrorists a reach around while they ram us up the pooper.

The state spent 1.9 billion on a renewable energy bond bill last year ! The wind farms are like automobiles they need brakes,oil ,cleaning and turbine replacement at the end of ten years ,
How do these turbines make economic policy? What will our electric bills look like in ten years? How about our property rights if the state takes control of placing 440 foot commercial wind turbines in the state parks next to our homes?

The Cape Wind Power Plant is an ill-thought-out project with a poor buisness plan that bring no advantages to the people of Cape Cod. That is the real reason for local opposition, not NIMBY.

To: Minerals Management Service
Re: Cape Wind Project

I am critical of the Cape Wind project to built an industrial-scale electrical power plant in federal waters of Nantucket Sound. I think it is a bad idea from numerous points of view. Before enumerating them I would like to identify myself: I am a native of Martha’s Vineyard and now live in Falmouth. I am a lifelong environmentalist; long before it became fashionable we were taught at home to separate our trash and recycle, and conserve heat and water, shut doors and wear sweaters and walk or bike to school, and these habits have never left me. I ride my bike around town; last year I put all of six tanks of gas in my car and I hope to reduce that this year. I use compact fluorescent bulbs an hope to get solar panels on my house within the next year. Some people accuse all those who are critical of the Cape Wind project (and other industrial-scale projects) of not caring about the environment. I totally reject such logic. I speak as an environmentalist and native Cape Codder who is critical of the Cape Wind project.

Here’s why:
1. WRONG SCALE. The concentrated-in-one-place “industrial-scale” model for a power plant is appropriate to the generation of electricity from high-intensity fuels such as oil, coal, and nuclear. To generate power from renewables, which are diffuse, low-intensity power sources available pretty much everywhere in some degree, the industrial-scale model of concentrated generation is intrinsically illogical. One hundred thirty turbines would be stationary for large portions of many days and weeks and months. Meanwhile, wind would be blowing in other areas where no turbines have been placed. As far as I know, so far no serious study has been done of the potential to match or exceed the projected energy output of Cape Wind by scattering turbines among various municipalities who have wind resources (that means most of the towns on the Cape).

2. WRONG PHYSICS. The farther the point of use is from the point of generation, the more current gets lost in transmission. T his is another obvious argument for placing solar panels, wind turbines, etc. as close as possible to the point of end use--not to concentrate in one place a power plant that would distribute energy both near and far. Furthermore, it is my understanding that all of the energy would go off the Cape, and then some of it might come back to us here. How stupid is that?

2. WRONG PLACE. Nantucket Sound has too many other values and uses that would be negatively impacted by the emplacement of 130 gigantic wind turbines. Providing beauty and a healthy, inspiring escape for thousands of city dwellers who live close by is just one such value. The structures would, obviously, be hazards to navigation: ferries, fishing boats, pleasure boats, mercantile vessels. The oil in the turbine structures would be a danger for leaking and spills. No one is sure what the effect would be on wildlife. The towers may well be impediments to radar and other communication technologies. Also, the power plant would offer a big-as-a-barn type of target in a forward, exposed location and thus may represent a considerable security liability. How militarized would Nantucket Sound have to become to protect this installation?

3. WRONG BUSINESS PLAN. Cape Wind stands to reap millions of dollars in subsidies from the state and the federal governments. This is presumably “profit” for Cape Wind’s shareholders and investors, regardless of whether their project actually makes any money. Thus, public monies are transformed into private profits. Who ARE these investors? I should like to see their names. Can I invest in Cape Wind? I doubt it. If genuine profits can be made from generating and selling renewable energy, or if no profits can be made but investors can make their own “profits” merely by holding an interest in this project, then why not let municipalities or a regional authority develop the local resources and let them either make genuine profits from generating and selling energy, or at least bring the subsidies to their own communities or region. I am totally against letting Cape Wind, a private developer, desecrate Nantucket Sound, exploit the area’s wind resources, and scoop up millions and millions in subsidies for its investors. I feel sure that many of the Cape’s residents would be willing to give the idea of wind turbines in Nantucket a hearing if there were local control: if local government or, say, the Cape Light Compact were in charge of the project. Municipalities should be encouraged to form publicly owned utilities and develop their own local renewable resources: solar at the house level; wind at the municipal level; ocean energy (wave, current, tidal etc.) at the regional level. And the state should hurry up and pass the “Lexington” legislation, which makes it easier for municipalities to do just that.

4. NO CONSERVATION INCENTIVES. Cape Wind’s plan has no incentives built in to conserve energy and I have heard at least one local Cape politician say that he has challenged Jim Gorden point-blank on this, and Gordon has no interest in exploring a conservation component to his project. This actually makes Cape Wind less a part of the solution than a part of the problem: clearly, we must not only reduce our use of fossil fuels; we must reduce our total energy use. Renewables will not be able to meet all our needs for a long, long time to come, but a large array of turbines will surely lull many into thinking they can continue to let the good ol’ wasteful energy times roll. It has been established that conserved energy is the best “new energy” source, better even than renewables. Failing to impress the importance of conservation on users-- individuals, businesses, government-- is the wrong route. (As a matter of fact, I have read that the DOD is very interested in the potential of renewables and is keeping a sharp eye on the Cape Wind project, with a view to impounding the energy produced in case of emergency. For this reason, too, it’s not too hard to imagine the full-scale militarization of Nantucket Sound.)
Approval of any and all new power plants, regardless of their size and energy source, must be contingent on the incorporation of conservation goals and incentives built into the plans. Naturally, local authorities and municipalities will be much more effective at crafting such programs and meeting conservation goals than a faceless private developer whose primary responsibility, by law, is to maximize shareholders’ profits, not maximize the public and environmental good by getting users to consume less energy!

Thus, there are numerous reasons to be cautious about giving the green light to Cape Wind and other similar projects. When it comes to renewables, I feel that the watchwords must be: Decentralize. Encourage local control and renewables projects. Mandate conservation.

I thank the Minerals Management Service for this opportunity to express my views.

Joe has a point, the problems with wind power are greater than simple aesthetics . When you examine the 'real' benefits vs the significant environmental costs to create turbines, those who are really winning are the developers themselves. This is a race for dollars, a modern day gold rush, predicated on assuaging upper middle class guilt for all that conspicuous consumption. As Joe aptly put, 'developments' (let's face it, these are not farms in any sense), forever alter areas that have been, or should be, set aside to remind us of our essential nature. Fearmongering (i.e. HarryBosch suggesting that environmental devastation and war are the only alternatives) moves the conversation backwards.

The future is small scale, local solar, biomass etc. Wind

Joe,
No doubt you are one of those "green" hypocrites, wanting the magical answer but not willing to man up. The state of Maine is full of them. whined an cried about the paper companies for years. They all left, took their jobs and guess what else? They are selling tens of thousands of acres of timber lands they owned to developers. Good work green coalition. Best one I heard yet...Can't put windmills on Mars Hill (project) because they will kill the bats. Last I new a bat could not only fly practically blind, but pick mosquitoes out of thin air doing it. I'm sick of big talkers and slackers like you

Ok class, altogether now.. "The wind is caused by the sun."

Yes, that's right.. the sun causes all weather patterns on Earth. The wind is "made" fresh every day. We can't possibly abuse it. A high pressure area will flow to a low pressure area regardless of whether it has to move through a turbine.

Oh Michael Mac is getting on the green energy gravy train. How nice.

When I had a prestigious named postdoc in his department, the men of equal rank had health insurance for themselves and their wives paid for out of their grants.

When I discovered this, I asked for health insurance for myself only. Michael Mac, in his capacity as department chair, said (and I quote) "You can get health insurance through your husband!"

Except I couldn't -- he was only employed part-time. Nice guy, Michael Mac. I hope he drowns in his fucking gravy train.

Yo, I'm in 9th grade and I am building wind turbines for my school to make a difference. Me and a group of friends are trying to connect it to the grid. We live in Leander,TX but, I hope I go to harvard, Stanford or MIT

Can any one direct me to a resource to find wind prospecting data? I have some clients in Maryland and Pennsylvannia that want to know if their property is suitable for a wind project.

Thanks

Think globally but act locally; the two turbines in Hull, Mass and the single turbine at the Mass Maritime Academy have produced a total of 23,000,000 Kw so far. This resulted in 2 to 4 million dollars of retail electrity locally and saved the equivilent of 13,600 barrels of imported oil. With our coastline, small closeby islands and hilly terrain west of Rt 128there is a foundation for turbine installations and resulting additional of employment within the state. Obviously we need a balanced approach but I would ask for installations on the harbors islands
since the power can flow directly into the greater boston region and not upset the wealthy vineyard views.

It is not the like and dis-like of people, but staying for a longer time in this world with comfort and happiness. It is so by having a better renewable source of energy like wind, solar energy and.... Therefore in my opinion the world become take action inorder to support developing countries who didn't build the non renewable energy sources to save the world from extinction.