On the same day Angus King expresses interest in running for Senator Snowe's seat, there is also an article about this 'free' electricity he's offering to the residents (not all tax payers, but voting residents) of Roxbury. It's only the cost of the first 500 kwh, but to some people, that will sound like a windfall. What will it amount to? $20.00 a month?
How unfortunate that due to Angus King's need for upgraded transmissions lines to get his wind power to the New England grid, ALL CMP rate payers must pay more in transmission costs. Every one of us, for years to come....
Knowing Maine citizens as I do—I don’t think the people of Canton will stand for this ‘rule’.
Yes, executive session is acceptable when there is a personnel issue to discuss. But to have to request (in advance and in writing—are you kidding me?) permission to speak at a selectmen’s meeting where town business is being conducted is ludicrous. Such tactics are not something people in a free country will tolerate.
The town board should welcome having the townspeople speak their minds and speak freely. Emotion is okay. Passion should be welcomed! If Canton residents are speaking their minds, you should encourage them, not attempt to squelch or censor or prevent them. Thank goodness there are still people in this country who give a damn about something!
If Canton's leaders are doing what they were elected to do, they don't need to worry about residents exercizing free speech. Do Canton citizens feel they are being respected and listened to? Perhaps citizens should speak MORE, and selectmen should practice LISTENING. I'm sure the Board is comprised of good men and women who may just be inexperienced in dealing with conflict. Trying to avoid it by creating this type of restriction will (and SHOULD) have the opposite effect.
I hope the Canton Board will rethink its decision.
“I applaud the Sun Journal editorial (Feb. 5) for acknowledging the benefits of the $1 billion investment made by wind power development in Maine during the past five years.”
“As a supporter and spokesman for the wind community, I work hard to ensure that the facts I use are solid and backed up by data and analysis. There is too much to lose if even one point is called into question. Opponents, on the other hand, seem emboldened by the power of creating doubt and fear by any means necessary.”
I’ve got to give Mr. Payne credit. He’s got a lot of brass. Even wind developer Angus King is recorded as publicly admitting that the standard and oft-quoted statistic of “$1 billion investment in Maine” is NOT completely factual. It’s a script, for sure, because Mr. King still mentions the 1 billion dollars; knowing the power of suggestion, he still puts that grandiose figure in the minds of his audience--then he chuckles sheepishly and goes on to say that he has to be honest and disclose that the ACTUAL dollar figure funneling into Maine is approximately $380 million, instead. And much of that money has been SPENT here, but it is not what most business people would call an “investment”, with long-term benefits and lucrative returns. And of course, even then there is no mention of how much of the $1 billion is tax-payer subsidized, either--rather than private investment funds. (Think... approx. 2/3!)
Mr. Payne maligns those he calls “opponents”. While distorting the truth as he did in this letter to the editor, Mr. Payne insinuates that people whose opinions differ from his own are the ones twisting the facts. While there is no doubt that opponents of Maine’s current wind energy plan are passionate about this topic, that is not indication of the presence of false statements as much as it is indicative of the great frustration felt by citizens who have done their homework and discovered that the paltry benefits of wind can never outweigh the negative impacts; whether environmental, social, financial or health-related.
Opponents aren’t creating doubt. Opponents are attempting to educate their peers. Citizens aren’t the ones who are becoming fearful—they are the ones who are getting irate. They have sifted through the rhetoric and tag lines about how wind will save the planet from global warming, how it will increase our national security and bring our soldiers home, and how wind will ‘get us off foreign oil’. Many opponents were once strong supporters of wind development—until they had to confront the harsh reality regarding the scope and scale of mountaintop development and they began to see past the propaganda designed to gain support for the failed technology and economics of industrial wind. Like many other Mainers, they accepted the 'spin' that the wind industry produced--until they took a few moments to research the issue.
And THAT fact is what is making the wind industry and lobbyists like Mr. Payne ‘fearful’. They know their free ride and their domination of the topic of energy is coming to an end. That is a frightening prospect.
Mr. Payne doesn’t want wind opponents ‘emboldened’ because bold opponents speak up. Bold opponents educate others. Bold opponents don’t let themselves or their neighbors get steamrolled by corporate interests. Our anger at the process and our justified distrust of many wind proponents may make us more vocal than the wind industry would like–but...that’s too bad. As caring individuals, as stewards of our natural resources, and as Americans who believe we have the right to speak out and be heard, we will continue to hold the wind industry’s feet to fire. When they utter statements like “$1 billion investment in Maine”…we will demand to see the proof.
If they spoke the truth more often, they would have no reason to get antsy when “opponents” are “emboldened” to speak.
Finally, Mr. Payne states: "We are quite willing to talk with anyone who has legitimate questions and concerns about impacts..."
I'm curious as to who Mr. Payne considers "legitimate" for I have personally witnessed him snubbing those with the temerity to publicly state a differing opinion from his own. There are no obvious lines of communication open between Maine Renewable Energy Associates and the public--not unless that public tows the windustry's line.
That is unfortunate. This is a critical subject, and one that warrants open dialogue between trustworthy individuals.
Newspaper editors have a lot of power. Readers very often back an editor’s opinion, believing that an editorial board knows the issues inside and out, so they MUST have their facts straight.
As we’ve seen over and over again on the topic of ‘wind’, this simply is not true. The SJ certainly SHOULD be able to separate the wheat from the chaff and they should give this issue the importance it deserves.
One example of a misleading statement in this op-ed: “In Maine, the wind power industry has invested $1 billion in recent years.”
Once the wind industry got caught out making that statement, even wind developer Angus King changed his story. The fact is that the wind power industry has SPENT $1billion. The fact is that a large percentage of that billion has gone overseas to countries like China, Denmark, Germany and Brazil, where the turbines’ parts and piece are manufactured. Add to that, the fact that—due to tax-payer subsidies like cash grants, Production Tax Credits, DOE loan guarantees, TIFs, accelerated depreciation, etc.—much of that ‘investment’ came from our pockets and our children’s pockets...and that “$1 billion investment” begins to be seen in a different light.
I don’t know what is worse; to believe that the SJ editors haven’t ever done any research or given this topic the serious attention to detail it warrants, or to think they are attempting to mislead readers and sway opinion by using the power of the press.
This referendum initiative is about money. Money and wind.
Due to the fact that most people who are asked to sign the petition won't take the time to learn the realities of what would happen if the referendum were to pass, it's probably safe to assume that enough signatures will be gathered to put the question on the ballot. After all, the question sounds very benign. Few people would refuse to sign unless they were already engaged in or well-educated regarding the history of Maine's current energy plan. I do find it curious that they are down to the wire with just 10 days to go, and their goal hasn't been met, yet...
See, I believe in the Maine voter. And I believe they will look at this initiative with an open mind. Mainers are independent thinkers and we know that any time something is MANDATED, there is a real downside that deserves scrutiny.
The referendum's wording is designed to be ambiguous. Maine citizens are researching wind development and finding out that the negative impacts far outweigh its negligible benefits, but don't be fooled. Even though wind isn't singled out, rest assured that this is a referendum designed to benefit one sector--wind development. It is the only 'new' renewable poised and ready to be built in the massive numbers which would satisfy this mandate.
The members of Maine Citizens for Clean Energy are hiding their avarice behind a cloak of green. If Maine citizens wish to pay out of pocket to fund a few corporations selling a low-value product, then they will approve the ballot intiative. But I think we're smarter than that. I think we're beginning to see beyond the feel-good hype and the scare tactics straight to the heart of the matter. WE are handing over our rights to make decisions for ourselves, and are destroying a free market society whenever we pass laws which REQUIRE us to purchase an over-priced, under-producing product.
The wind lobby can spend their millions of dollars (MCCE's CPR shows they've invested over $200,000.00 in this initiative already) to push for this initiative, but I think it will be in vain. Mainers won't be hood-winked by this coalition anymore.
I'm pleased that we have a governor who won't be intimidated into making decisions designed to cost Maine residents and businesses more money unnecessarily.
This story is important for so many reasons, one of which is that DEP (just this week!) approved First Wind's Oakfield wind project--if built, it will be the biggest in Maine, thus far.
One of the criteria a wind developer is supposed to meet before receiving a permit is proof of financial capacity. And yet, in the BDN article about DEP's permit approval, First Wind's Alec Jarvis said, "The project's financing is not yet assembled."
Huh?
It appears this company has a bit of a cash flow problem, and yet Maine regulatory agencies are approving their projects. I guess I'll go read the Oakfield permit and see what kind of decommissioning fund DEP required. It would be too bad to have the townspeople of Oakfield on the hook for a multi-million dollar bill if FW (or its Oakfield-specific subsidiary, Evergreen Wind LLC)goes belly up.
The wind energy plan needs some serious scrutiny. This recommendation from PUC staff is a great start and bringing common sense back to the table--and ethics, too. Unfortunately, the cynical side of me wonders what 'incentives' and 'tangible benefits' and 'mitigation' tactics will be put on the table for PUC's commissioners, prior to that Jan. 31st vote.
Thank goodness Ms. Schalit and Mr. Christie aren't afraid to ask some pointed questions and do some honest reporting.
Perhaps wind developers Angus King and Rob Gardiner, whose new wind project in Roxbury is already the subject of news stories about NOISE, would willingly purchase a top-of-the-line sound meter for the DEP.
It's the least they can do.
Here is a small bit of what Angus King has told US about his proposed Highland Wind project. These are direct quotes. Does any of this sound familiar to the people of Roxbury?
"The third thing is--- how close are the neighbors? That's a big factor and one of the great things about the Highland site is that-- there are 2 camps....summer cottages on the side of one of the mountains that are about 1/2 mile from the nearest turbine. Other than those, NOBODY is within a mile or a mile and a half of the turbines,... except for those two camps, the closest people to Highland at 6,000 feet. The people at Mars Hill are 1,000 feet. That's the difference--- a huge difference! The issue about sound. It's just like a truck going by on 201. If they're 100 yards away, they're louder than hell. If they're a mile away-- you're not gonna hear them. That's how sound works. It's a question of distance. The simplest way to think of it that I've come up with... if someone builds a turbine today in Seattle, Washington, I think we'd agree that no one in Skowhegan would be bothered by it. If we put one right by where the basketball courts are-- you'd hear it. So that means the only question is-- what's the right distance between Seattle and the basketball courts? And the answer is, based on Mars Hill and wind projects around the world is-- about 1/2 mile. Depending upon the wind, topography.... 2-3,000 feet, you're not gonna hear them.
"And by the way, what you hear from these things.... somebody wrote in about "The roar of the turbines" Come on! There's no noise at all from the machine. The machinery, the gears and stuff are all enclosed in this sound-proof box. You could stand from here to that wall and not hear that.
"There's not a sound issue, there's not a health issue, there's not a bird issue, there's not a wildlife issue-- if you want to see the effects of wind turbines on wildlife... on animals... go to... google image...put in 'wind turbines cows' and you'll see hundreds of pictures of wind turbines and cows sitting around underneath them... completely unconcerned, doing whatever it is cows do..... No issues of wetlands.... we're not 'removing' anything-- we're MOVING...when you build a road, as I say, when you build roads, you cut out the high spots and fill in the low--we're moving alot of earth, but nothing's being taken away from the mountains..."
Did anyone video-record Mr. King and Mr. Gardiner as they made their sales pitches for Record Hill Wind? If so... hold them to their words.
This isn't a new story. It's a sad repetition of an ancient one.
Smooth-talking salesman comes to town with a miracle cure for what ails us...
Need cheaper taxes? They can do that!
Cheaper electricity? They've got that covered, too.
The 'tangible benefits', however, simply cannot mitigate that which has been lost... and what WILL BE lost in community after community if Maine citizens don't sit up and pay attention to common sense and economics and science.
Angus King and Rob Gardiner aren't out to save the planet--or even Roxbury. Their goal in life is not to 'get us off foreign oil' or 'bring American soldiers home'. The wind development in Roxbury was not a work of sacrifice on their part. Maine's 'foreign oil'?? It is imported from Canada and Mexico. American soldiers are not at risk from our friendly neighbors to the north and south.
Wind energy is a scam. It is hard to admit that--especially when I used to be in favor of it. But that was before I began to study the facts pertaining to this issue, and before I dealt with wind developers first-hand.
I encourage Roxbury residents to protest (loudly) the reduction in your quality of life. If you are lucky, you will not suffer the debilitating health effects of high and low frequency noises and infrasound. If you do, please give serious consideration to speaking out. For far too long, the wind lobby has bought off--or intimidated--its victims.
No more. We can't allow this to go on any longer.
For more information about how you can get involved, please contact me at roomtomove@tds.net.
Experts: Yep. I agree. Experts are a dime a dozen—and will usually say whatever they need to, in order to earn their dime.
And that’s why I urged you to do independent research. I don’t want you to believe me. I am a vocal opponent of Maine’s current wind energy plan. That may make me appear to be biased, even though I don’t stand to gain financially if wind developments are delayed or derailed. But neither should citizens look to the wind industry or its avid supporters for the facts. The wind lobby has an agenda—and that includes amassing as much money from tax-payer subsidies as possible and by taking advantage of government mandates which MAKE rate-payers purchase electricity which is more expensive-- simply because those “in authority” decided wind was benign, beneficial and ‘green’.
Sound: I can’t tell you, sir, how many times people have said the exact same things you have. Heck… I’ve been to several wind facilities and I could echo your words, myself. Many people say “I stood right under them and they didn’t bother me at all!” or “I was just a couple hundred feet from a wind turbine and it wasn’t that bad!” But there is far more to this story than most people think, and if you read the studies at those links I provided, you’ll begin to understand. Wind turbines of such massive size emit high and low frequency noises, as well as INFRASOUND. Infrasound is noise which the human ear cannot hear, but which the human body reacts to, nonetheless. I personally know people right here in Maine who have abandoned their dream homes because they were suffering very negative health effects once the nearby wind turbines came online. I know others who don’t have the option of moving, and have built bedrooms in their cellars where the whole family sleeps just to get away from the turbines’ adverse impacts. Please, if you have time, read the McPherson Study. Two experts who were contracted to study a wind turbine became unexpected victims. Their story is compelling. If you really want the scoop, contact the scientists who authored the study. You can contact them from the link provided. I can also connect you with the author of Wind Turbine Syndrome if your interest is sincere. These are real people with no stake in the game who have gone out on a limb to publish information which they know the wind industry will condemn. That is because they were convinced by data, rather than rhetoric, and truly believe what they say.
Bird and bats: Ooh, that’s a hot button topic. Many people are firm believers that wind developers under-report kills. Conventional wisdom says that scavengers dispose of many of the kills—especially during the night-time hours-- and other people swear that project owners hire people to remove carcasses on a regular basis. But we want proof and not hearsay, don’t we? We want real numbers. Something we can hang our hats on.
To start, I urge you to look up the Journal for Nature Conservation’s article titled “Adverse Impacts of Wind Power Generation on Collision Behaviour of Birds, and Anti-predator Behaviour of Squirrels” by Ryunosuke Kikuchi. I also suggest you contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for their ‘take’ on this issue. This Agency is finally beginning to give the topic some serious attention, and they also encourage citizens to weigh in with their opinions.
As I said, though… don’t take my word for anything. There are hundreds of studies and reports available, and to make an unbiased and informed opinion, you must research this without depending on people who seem to be “pro” or “anti” industrial wind. I’m confident that if you look at this issue objectively, you will find that your perspective will change.
Best of luck to you.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
P.S. As far as “NIMBYism” being a problem, I don’t see it that way, at all. It is inherent in all living creatures to protect their homes and their families. Who else will look out for us, if we don’t protect our own loved ones, neighborhoods and communities? The government won’t protect us. Corporations surely won’t. No, I see NIMBY’s not as selfish elitists whose only concern is about a view (which is how we’ve been labeled)—but as individuals who’ve felt threatened to the point where they’ve finally taken the time to investigate the threat and decide upon an appropriate response or course of action. We aren’t backyard-specific, either. We say “Not In MAINE’S Back Yard”!
I appreciate that you want facts. That's incredibly important in this debate. The following is taken from the official agreement made between Trans-Canada and the AMC, NRCM and Maine Audubon:
“As a result of extensive field studies and its ongoing consultation with Maine Audubon, NRCM, and the AMC, TransCanada has agreed to include the following additional measures to protect mountain and other environmental resources in the State:
“Contribute $500,000 toward the permanent conservation of approximately 750 acres of ecologically significant high elevation habitat and important backcountry recreation lands in Maine’s Mahoosuc Mountain range, as part of the Grafton Notch-Stowe Mountain acquisition.”
Other environmental groups have been compromised. Maine Audubon lists as "corporate sponsors" wind developers First Wind ($10,000.00) and Patriot Renewables ($1,000.00) as well as Reed & Reed, a major contractor which has been involved in the building of the current wind facilities in Maine. See this link for your proof: http://lynx.maineaudubon.org/sslpage.aspx?pid=372
Wind developers are famous for their 'sponsorship' and charitable donations. There is evidence of their payoffs and bribes in communities where wind developments have been built in Maine. The Arnold Trail, which runs adjacent to the Kibby wind project, was the catalyst for Trans-Canada 'donating' $100,000.00 to the Arnold Expedition Historical Society. That organization chose NOT to oppose T-C's Kibby project, and yet-- they were intervenors for the Highland Wind project. Why did they take a different position on that one?
Regarding wind turbines noise and the adverse health effects caused, please read "Wind Turbine Syndrome" by Dr. Nina Pierpont, or the report released by Carl V. Philips, PhD, or the recently released McPherson Study, conducted and written by two respected acousticians and noise control specialists here in Maine. That can be found at this link: http://randacoustics.com/wind-turbine-sound/the-bruce-mcpherson-ilfn-study/
What I find most disturbing is the fact that on October 19th First Wind hosted a fundraiser breakfast ($1000/plate) for Sen. Olympia Snowe at Charlie Palmer Steakhouse in Washington. When people like the Senator are poised to vote whether or not to extend cash grants and Production Tax Credits (the lifeblood of the wind industry) and a wind developer is throwing large amounts of money at them, Maine citizens are at a huge disadvantage. And I believe such donations compromise a candidate's ability to make common-sense and ethical decisions that are in the best interests of their constituents. I hope I'm wrong, but the fact of the matter is that the wind industry is 'courting' those who can help them, and participating in state-sanctioned bribery with those who can cause them problems.
THE FACTS ARE OUT THERE and easy to find, Bob. I agree that 'creepy' and 'ugly' are opinions, not facts (although I agree that they are 'ugly'!) but 'dangerous' may very well stand as fact. I encourage you to research electro-magnetic fields and the health impacts attributed to being in close proximity to high-voltage transmission lines.
The whole topic is really quite fascinating and I hope you'll dive in and do independent research, and then take an active role in this issue.
Thank you Sally, for having the courage to stand up to--and question--powerful corporations and organizations.
I'm disappointed but not suprised that NRCM hasn't responded to your letters. Last year I asked Dylan Voorhees if we could meet and discuss mountaintop wind development and he adamantly declared "No!" He expressed the fact that he knew all he needed to know, and a frank exchange of ideas appeared to threaten him. I'd never witnessed a professional with such a closed mind or an unwilligness to admit that the position the NRCM had taken might be the wrong one. I don't know if egos are getting in the way of common sense within the NRCM, or if they simple can't see beyond the so-called 'green' cloak they've enveloped themselves in.
I continue to hold out hope that some within that organization will begin to stand up for the natural resources of Maine as well as its citizens before it is too late.
It is ironic that NRCM has thrown so much into its efforts to stop the Plum Creek development around Moosehead Lake. It's as if development in the form of homes and resorts is 'dirty' and unacceptable, but 'wind' is touted as 'clean'. Would NRCM oppose putting 2,000 or more 400-500 foot tall wind turbines all around the 'Jewell of Maine'? Their "Ballad of Moosehead Lake" scorns Plum Creek for wanting "money, money, money". Make no mistake-- money is what the wind energy plan is all about, too. The wind industry stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars--much of it from tax-payer subsidies and mandates--from building high-impact, low value wind developments.
I truly hope the NRCM will stop playing favorites. Wind won't save the planet, but it stands to destroy Maine as we know it. I urge NRCM leadership to respond to Sally and other citizens who are still looking to them for advocacy of our natural resources--both human and wild.
No, Ms. Cox.. these projects did NOT go online without a sound! Residents in both regions have been fighting these wind developments for years.
You do your readers a disservice by reporting only one (biased) side of this story. I urge you to contact locals in Roxbury and Woodstock for their true impressions. There is far more to this story than meets the eye.
Dan, I agree that home rule is very important. While the state and federal governments have roles to play, over the years they have stepped far outside the boundaries set for them in the Constitution.
However, it is also important to be involved at the basic level in town government, too. As you saw in the SJ story last week, Patriot Renewables donated $10,000.00 to Eleven Circles, which is co-owned by the daughter-in-law of one of your selectmen. And PR wants to build a wind turbine project in your town. While I am sure Eleven Circles is a worthy organization, payments like that--made to a close family member of a person in authority in your town, raise alot of questions about ethics. PR has no business bribing its way into towns with donations to libraries, snowmobile clubs and fuel assistance funds--but the State of Maine has sanctioned such payoffs.
Shame on us. It's time we all took a more active role in the direction and future of our communities.
It would be refreshing to see reporters interview private-sector energy and economics experts for their perspectives, instead of relying on the pro-wind players on the State’s Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee. The current policy of getting the opinions of the same people--huge supporters of the wind lobby--for these stories is guaranteed to keep the people of Maine from obtaining factual data and unbiased information.
Fitts and Bartlett were on former Governor Baldacci’s fabled Wind Power Task Force, the cabal responsible for pushing through the policies supporting the current expensive and unnecessary built-out of industrial wind facilities on our mountains. Hinck is married to the wind industry’s preeminent attorney, Juliet Browne, who (along with others in her firm) represents Trans-Canada, First Wind and Highland Wind. In my opinion, these gentlemen can no longer be considered objective.
In speaking to attempts to purchase Canadian hydro in the past, the article states “But those efforts hit a series of roadblocks, including concern from Maine's wind power lobby that Canada's cheap, heavily subsidized electricity would halt a state initiative to become a regional provider of renewable energy.”
So, Canada is subsidizing “cheap” hydro power. OUR our policy makers decided we would subsidize wind—the least reliable, most heavily subsidized (per megawatt) energy source there is.
What is ironic is that one of the strongest arguments used to kill legislation allowing Quebec Hydro to build a transmission corridor through Maine was that such unsightly transmission would have a negative impact on Maine’s fabled “Quality of Place”.
The Expedited Wind Permitting Law effectively removed “scenic impact” as an acceptable reason to oppose wind development, though--and we are now watching the construction of the 450 mile long MPRP, and the 39 mile long Wyman Station-to-Benton transmission upgrade. And this is just the beginning. Maine rate-payers are footing the bill for this transmission—even though the electricity is not needed in Maine and is destined for the New England grid.
“"Hydro-Quebec is interested in making profits," he (Fitts) said.”
Trust me on this. Wind developers are making profits. And you and I are picking up the tab at the federal, state, and sometimes even at the local levels (if TIFs are granted). Of course Hydro-Quebec is interested in making profits. Perhaps if Maine negotiates some less-expensive electricity, our own small and large businesses will be more likely to make profits, too.
Our elected State Representatives and Senators would do well to look out for the Maine people as a whole, and not for their own favored special interest groups. Rather than attempting to thwart this Administration’s attempts to negotiate a good deal for Maine with our neighbors to the north, they should be asking “What can we do to help?”
I was disturbed by the venom spewed by Mr. Rooks regarding the LePage Administration. Surely he doesn’t believe an economy which has been corrupted and broken for decades can be repaired in ten short months?
Rooks said: “(Y)ou’d expect LePage to embrace any and all private sector job prospects, but he hasn’t. He’s developed an odd and unsettling bias against “green” jobs, beginning with the wind turbines that have produced Maine’s one undeniable recent success story in industrial development.”
The corporate wind lobby couldn’t have said it better. Such rhetoric is straight from the wind industry’s playbook. These “private sector jobs” Rooks speaks of are supported by public money and only exist because of it. Our hard-earned dollars are being spent to subsidize an industry which admits it cannot stand on its own. “Success story”? By what standards? Every single wind development in Maine has faced serious opposition at the outset, or has become embroiled in litigation once the project went online.
Perhaps the Governor recognizes that it is not economically feasible to encourage an industry that cannot support itself and isn’t competitive. Perhaps he understands that lowering the cost of electricity is one of the most helpful initiatives in our repertoire if we want to entice businesses to Maine which CAN stand on their own two feet. Maybe he even believes that science and economics should drive our energy policy, and not politics or corporate pressure. I encourage Mr. Rooks to ASK Governor LePage these questions instead of assuming he can read his mind.
There were sufficient assumptions and false conclusions in Mr. Rooks’ column to warrant scrutiny. Mr. Rooks--while sounding as if he’s got the inside track on this issue—didn’t do his homework before spouting the wind lobby’s vitriol.
As one of many examples; Rooks stated “In November, LURC, now including several LePage appointees, voted to deny First Wind’s Bowers Mountain project in Washington County – even though the project was completely within the expedited permitting zone. Bowers is the last leg of a series of already approved windfarms in the area, with two on Stetson Mountain and one on Rollins Mountain, all within the industrial forest.
Print space doesn’t allow me to address every misleading or downright incorrect word in these sentences but I’ll point out a couple.
LURC did not vote to deny First Wind’s Bowers Mountain project in November. In October, LURC Commissioners took a straw vote, directing staff to draw up a ‘deny’ decision document to be presented for a vote at their upcoming December 7th meeting. And incidentally, the Bowers project straddles Washington AND Piscatiaquis Counties.
Mr. Rooks implied that the reason LURC ‘voted to deny’ was due to the fact that the Commission “now includ(ed) several LePage appointees”. How incredibly misleading. The fact is that the only member to express an inclination to approve the Bowers project was Commissioner Hammond—the solitary LePage appointee included in that straw vote! The other two LePage appointees who came on board this autumn showed great integrity. Commissioner Dunphy recused himself, stating he didn’t feel he should vote when he hadn’t been a part of the process prior to the October meeting. Commissioner Carle commented that he wouldn’t cast a preliminary vote, and he would only vote at the December meeting if he felt he’d been able to study the record sufficiently to give him confidence that he was up to speed on the project.
Mr. Rooks’ column was full of similarly deceptive comments or instances where the “rest of the story” was conveniently omitted.
It is this type of propaganda--fed to the public for years—which has set Maine on a path of high-cost electricity, environmental damage and intimidation tactics when the public has had the audacity to oppose these developments.
If newspapers would insist on printing facts instead of rhetoric and reconstituted fiction, they would be doing this state a great service and they would make progress in restoring the reputation of “journalism” in Maine.
Maine’s greatest asset is our “Quality of Place”. Our natural resources and our pristine environment are what bring people to our state from around the world. Maine’s tourism brings in BILLIONS of dollars to this state—to every sector. And these billions of dollars are not subsidized by American tax-payers. Tourists rent motel rooms, stay in B&B’s or stop in at L.L. Bean for camping supplies and then rent a campsite in one of our state parks—one of which is Mt. Blue. While here, they fill up their cars with gas and buy soda and pizza and beer at our convenience stores. They go sight-seeing and purchase souvenirs in our gift shops, or collectibles in our antique stores. They eat in our restaurants. Buy fresh vegetables at our farm stands. Visit our sugar shacks and purchase maple syrup. They ski at Sugarloaf and Saddleback, which employ hundreds of Mainers. And while they are driving around enjoying the wonders of this state, they often see “For Sale” signs on our real estate. And they think, “Wow… maybe WE could own a piece of this heaven!” And often, they do exactly that. They buy a year-round or vacation home--which spurs the real estate market; helping brokers, attorneys, appraisers, bankers, building inspectors, mortgage companies, surveyors and home owners.
It is a wondrous, self-supporting industry. This symbiotic relationship is founded on our natural resources. We have the market cornered for nature-based tourism, east of the Mississippi. We have the only remaining dark night sky. No light pollution. We have segments of the Appalachian Trail (and other trails) where one can actually still view wilderness without development. We can actually hear snow falling. We can hear snow falling! That is a gift. Mainers benefit from this special place and these rare qualities, and it is essential to our soul. We give up many things to live in the country, and we give it up willingly—because the trade-off is worth it. More than worth it.
Industrial wind’s paltry benefits do not come close to offsetting the enormous negative environmental, health and financial impacts these developments will cause. Our energy policy has to change at the state level, and funding policies have to change at the federal level. In the meantime, BEP has the opportunity to do what so many Mainers are already doing. People like those 100+ folks who stood up to speak at the Dixfield 'meeting' (because a public hearing was denied) and who drove from all across Maine on a rainy winter night just to make their voices heard.
In May 2011, Department of Conservation Commissioner William Beardsley stated that his Department “would not be the recipient of any tangible benefits from wind power projects”. And yet, the Saddleback Ridge Wind permit refers to a $60,000.00 payment from the applicant to Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL), and an email from the Assistant Deputy Director stating “DOC would be happy to accept any contributions from the developer for land protection efforts in this area.”
It is evident that there are discrepancies between State policies and the actions of State agencies. These 'tangible benefits' are nothing more than state-sanctioned bribes... a policy promoted and supported by the Baldacci administration. It is hoped that the current administration and the Commissioner of the Dept. of Conservation will hold the state (and wind developers) to higher moral standards.
There isn't much chance any of the wind lobby or its supporters will take you up on your offer of a debate, though. We've seen, time and time again, that when they come up against people armed with scientific and economic facts rather than rhetoric, they have no defense. All one needs to say to them is "Prove it!" when they make their sales pitches... and watch them stumble and stammer and change the topic.
No, the good people of Maine will have to do independent research on the topic of indstrial wind. We need to be proactive, instead of swallowing the line the corporate wind industry has been feeding us to gain our support. Once they know the facts, they see this folly for what it is. Only then will they stand up, step forward, and demand an accounting.
Thank you for your courage, integrity and tenacity.
One hopes that King and Gardiner are paying for our state troopers to escort each of these transports, and that the Maine tax-payer isn't footing the bill. One also hopes there are no serious crimes requiring the expertise of our troopers, who have been relegated to the role of traffic cops.
Of course, whether King and Gardiner shell out for state services or not, once they get their 1603 cash grant of 30% of the project's value, tax payers will be paying for it, anyway. Our money is just doled out in a more circuitous route.
What exactly is 'impressive' about these wind turbines? Yes, they are huge. Gigantic. Colossal and completely out of place in our rural state or atop out mountain ridges. They're more than twice as tall as Maine's tallest skyscraper.
These turbines have been 'sold' to Mainers using arguments alluding to global warming--as if this almost-useless generation system, abandoned 100 years ago for good cause-- will save the earth. Folks have been assured that wind turbines will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and directly offset the use of coal and oil (but ask them to prove it and listen to how their arguments change to how wind has added 300-350 construction jobs to Maine's economy!) Most Mainers aren't that naive, and we've done our research. The wind energy plan for Maine will cause far more negative impacts than the paltry benefits produced by these turbines powered by undependable, intermittent and eratic wind.
How many American stimulus dollars are being shipped overseas to Denmark (and other countries) for this one project of King's?
The Siemens turbines proposed by Angus King for this project weigh 304 tons. More than 6,600 tons of steel must be smelted and forged to build the 22 turbines proposed for that 50-megawatt wind project, which will actually produce about 12 megawatts at the 25 percent capacity factor achieved by land-based wind turbines in Maine.
To make that steel would require about 3,000 tons of “coking” coal and 9,000 tons of iron ore. Steel production requires the use of coke, which is a byproduct of pulverized bituminous coal. Coke production is a major source of pollution in the production of steel. Air emissions such as coke-oven gases, naphthalene, ammonium compounds, crude light oil, sulfur and coke dust are released from coke ovens.
But King and Gardiner preach about how 'environmentally friendly' wind turbines are. Do they ever mention selling RECs, which enable coal plants and other dirty polluters to pollute more? And how long before the parts and pieces need to be replaced on the turbines? These massive machines are under such tremendous stress that in less than a dozen years, they will wear out. Become a useless, unprofitable drain on the developer. What happens, then? The tax credits will have run out. The American people will have finally put down their collective feet and said a resounding "NO!" to the wasteful subsidies. Will King and Gardiner dip into their own pockets to replace the turbines (causing a repeat of that high-polluting manufacturing process)? They won't build the project NOW without tax-payers footing the bill... what do we expect will change in 5, 10, 12 years? Do we really believe that they would create Limited Liability Corporations registered in Delaware for their Maine wind facilities if they expected to stick around and be in this business for the long haul? Does anyone truly buy the sales pitch that they are building industrial wind projects to save the planet?
This is about money, it's that simple.
I won't be surprised if King and Gardiner make a deal to sell their project to Iberdrola. If we don't pay very close attention, there will be ONE corporation controlling Maine's energy system... and it's not a Maine company, nor even an American one. When Mr. King wrings his hands and talks about needing wind to 'get us off foreign oil' because 'those people don't like us very much' he should be reminded that those Iberdola execs that he's been flying around in helicopters with as they tour Roxbury are from a company based in Spain, and partnered with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.
It's time we stopped drinking the Kool-aid that powerful and once-popular men like King and Gardiner hand us. These turbines rolling across the Maine countryside aren't impressive. They are evidence of corporate control and wasteful spending... and they showcase a disaster in the making.
These gentlemen are very adept in the art of 'spin'... whether for the Roxbury project, or their proposed project in Highland. Their published comments raise questions, though...
“King and Gardiner said the $102 million is a loan and not a grant. Repayment starts when the project goes online, which is expected to be in November or December.
““This is a loan guarantee,” King said. “This is money that has to be paid back. This isn't a grant.”
Ah, but who’s guaranteeing this loan? The DOE is actually the American tax-payer, right? What is the DOE’s lending criteria for Section 1705 loans such as that approved for Independence Wind? In effect, the DOE has NO quantifiable lending criteria for lending to wind projects. Their two main objectives are to get a primary secured position (first lien) on all of a project's collateral, and get an independent evaluation of the project's forecast economics from a rating agency. Since the rating agencies (e.g. S&P) have no historical experience in wind power projects; their opinion is essentially based upon the developer's "projections"--assuming the project is successful. The DOE (i.e. the American tax-payer) is taking on very high risk energy projects by default because the commercial markets ARE NOT WILLING TO TAKE ON THE SAME RISKS. If the borrowers default due to poor performance--what does the DOE (American tax-payers)get for collateral?
And speaking of grants: Will Mr. King and Mr. Gardiner take advantage of the 1603 cash grant? Yes, it’s a GRANT, from the Federal government (which is also supported by tax-payers) for up to 30% of the project’s cost. A $30 million dollar, no-strings-attached gift is quite a sum for a man who said, “There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.”
And then, there are those other subsidies such as Tax Production Credits, Renewable Energy Credits, Accelerated Depreciation, and in some cases, TIFs. Let’s not gloss over the facts.
“Since April, more than 150 employees of several Maine contractors have been working at the turbine sites, preparing them for the turbines.”
“Record Hill “will provide sustainable power to the state while funding 200 construction jobs,” Chu said.”
““We're looking forward to starting to generate some local electricity,” Gardiner said.”
So... what is it? 150 temporary jobs--or 200? Could this be another example of ‘weighting’ the numbers? Somewhat like claiming a wind development will power “X” number of homes, while omitting the fact that the ‘rated’ capacity is far different from actual production numbers... at best 32%, and more realistically, 21% of rted capacity, here in Maine.
And...is the electricity generated by the Roxbury project NOT going into the New England grid, but powering Maine homes and businesses, instead? Let's see proof of that, please. Since Maine already produces more power than we consume, what will this sporatic, unreliable product be displacing? As a state with one of the highest percentages of ‘renewables’ in its portfolio in this country already--one would hope erratic, undependable wind won’t replace a storable, reliable renewable like hydro.
“In the four and a half years it took to reach this stage, King said he and Gardiner held about 40 public meetings in Roxbury, and meetings with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection for permitting.”
When was the last time Mr. King and Mr. Gardiner had a ‘public meeting’ with the citizens of Roxbury? I think they’d find that earlier perceptions of the project don’t square up with the current reality. I urge the developers to hold another ‘informational meeting’ in the local area.
“Clean energy is a major driver of American competitiveness, and investments like these are essential to secure our position as global leader.”
While it always seems nice to be a leader, I doubt the Pied Piper’s first lemming was enamored of that designation. Countries in Europe who were ‘leaders’ in wind energy are now seriously rethinking their positions, and cutting or eliminating government subsidies such as that offered by the DOE and other Federal, State and Local agencies. The wind lobby refers to Europe often, when touting the benefits of wind. But a quick search on the internet will show far more negative reactions to the effects of grid-scale wind proliferation on that continent than it does, high praise.
“Chu said the turbines will be installed with innovative Turbine Load Control technology, a system of sensors and processing software that allows the turbines to continue to generate electricity under turbulent conditions rather than be shut down completely.”
“Turbine Load Control technology.” “Operating under turbulent conditions.” ??? Before this new innovation is foisted upon the citizens and environment of Roxbury, let’s see the science behind this, and the safety studies. And the economics. Just as in the case of Noise Control Operations mode (NRO) let’s make sure this 'technology’ is viable and safe before allowing this change. Early reports say that NRO is actually more bothersome than standard operations mode, due to the luffing of the blades in the wind once they are feathered.
Denmark... and Vietnam. How many other foreign economies are OUR tax dollars keeping vibrant and viable, while Americans struggle?
“the tower sections are made in Asia, because that's where the new efficient steel mills are,” Gardiner said.”
Well, of course the “efficient” steel mills are in Asia! How stringent are Asia’s emissions standards? (Not very.) And what is the going pay-rate for Asians holding down manufacturing jobs? We are shipping American dollars overseas, and in effect, promoting dangerous, toxic pollution and sub-standard wages for our foreign neighbors, while hard-working Americans look for jobs.
I am a Mainer who opposes the current wind energy plan for Maine. There are no two ways around that fact. I’m sure there will be commenters who take advantage of this opportunity to discredit me.
Nonetheless, I comment under my own, true name. I urge the opposition to do the same.
No matter what your age, I love that you care enough to weigh in on this important issue.
I just wanted to say one thing. You and I ARE paying for these wind projects, in many, many ways. 60-70% of the cost of these developments is picked up by the American taxpayer; thru 1603 cash grants (not loans--it's free money to developers) of up to 30% of the cost, and then the developers make use of a multitude of other tax-payer provided perks. TIF's. Tax Production Credits. Renewable Energy Credits. Accelerated Depreciation. One small, $200 million dollar project can reap $120 million from you and me.
And that's just one small part of a very big story. I appreciate your interest, and I hope you will do independent research on this topic.
Have a great day.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
It was distressing to read "an act of the some of the opposition that were probably upset or concerned about First Wind's placing the signs out.”
While I hope it's not the case, I suppose it's only natural that opponents of mountaintop industrial wind are some of the first suspects people think of, but to have Puiia state that is of great concern. Surely he knows better than to throw out statements like that? I hope that before making similar statements, Mr. Puiia takes a moment to consider the weight of his words. Has he taken a 'position' on industrial wind?
The fact of the matter is-- everywhere wind developers go, they divide communities. It would be one thing if their product had real value. But it doesn't. There are a few land-owners who will make a fast buck... but the only real winners are the developers. On a $65MILLION project such as this, the 1603 cash grant FW can obtain is upwards of $18MILLION. A no strings attached gift from the federal government-- which doesn't HAVE that $18MILLION, of course... so it will borrow it from countries like China. And it will be up to us-- and our descendants--to repay the loan. Not only that, but up to 60% of the cost for the development is spent in places like.... China. Where the turbines are manufactured.
Add to that the accelerated depreciation (another tax-payer subsidy), TIF's (tax-payer subsidy), REC's (tax-payer subsidy) Tax Production credits (tax-payer subsidy) and other rate- or tax-payer gifts, and First Wind walks away with a pretty good chunk of change in their pockets. All provided by Rumford citizens, Maine citizens, American citizens.
And yet.... wind is the least valuable energy source we have.
Please think about this, people of Rumford. Please invest a few hours in independent research. All is not as the wind developers like to have you believe. Europe is saying 'no' to industrial wind in a big way, after 15+ years of giving it a try. Let's learn from their mistakes before making the same expensive and catastrophic ones here at home.
Your letter was thoughtful and well-written. I certainly empathize with your plight, and I don't know of anyone who begrudges a hard-working Mainer his or her job.
You state: "Opposing wind power is supporting Maine’s highest growing unemployment rate and supporting Maine being ranked 50th as a state to have a business or career.
"There are only two positions here. You can be part of the problem or part of the solution."
The question must be asked: Are jobs worth ANY COST?
I don't believe there are only "two positions". I believe that it is dangerous, in the long term, to create a false economic upswing when the only reason that upswing exists is due to massive subsidization. "Wind" is a house of cards. IF a wind facility produces a product of value, then it will stand on its own merit. If Mainers wish to buy renewable energy, they will. But they should not be forced to by a government mandate.
America is in big trouble. We are borrowing money from countries such as China to support industries like wind. Not only that, but those subsidies (a huge portion of which is "American Recovery and Reinvestment" funds) are being sent--in large part--BACK to countries like China, where turbine components are manufatured. A look at non-biased scientific and economic data will show you that the paltry benefits of wind energy are far outwieghed by the negative impacts--whether economic, environmental, or health-related.
I do not minimize the significance of your employment. And I understand your desire to do what you can to protect it. I only request that you ask yourself if such jobs are worth it, at any cost? I know of Mainers who are losing income (as well as losses in their real estate investments) BECAUSE of industrial wind. I'm sure you agree that your tax-payer supported job has no more significance than their livelihoods which were created (and exist)based purely on their hard work and ingenuity, and the value of our natural environment.
Citizens who oppose Maine's Wind Energy Plan are not selfish elitists or a part of any 'environmental fringe'. That is demeaning to those of us who are standing up for what we believe is right, after researching the facts concerning industrial wind. I will not put you down for working in this industry, and I hope you will attempt to understand that just because many Mainers oppose mountaintop industrial wind, we aren't the 'bad guys'
We're just brave enough to stand up to oppose a plan which we feel is wrong on many levels, despite opposition from a powerful and well-connected corporate lobby.
Stories coming from Rumford and other towns across the state are disturbing. They show select boards with serious conflicts. Do they work for the people in their towns (who hired them and can fire them)... or do they work for wind developers?
If wind facilities were given tax-exempt status, would ANY town want them? If they were not allowed to bribe citizens with their mandated 'tangible benefits', would citizens be entering into these debates?
Please don't let the wind industry divide your town. That's what they want. Their ability to have their way depends on the weakness of the communities they target. As long as ONE resident of your town is worried about their health and well-being, the selectmen should put those concerns before those of First Wind, or Patriot Renewables, or any other developer who is in this for money, and money only. Please remember that-- they aren't in this for any reason except to get rich from tax-payer subsidies, grants, and other incentives.
Hold your selectmen to their oaths. Remind them of their oaths... read them back to them. Did they promise to look out for the well-being of the citizens of Rumford? If they did, hold them to their oath, or remove them. It's that simple. They work for YOU, the citizens of Rumford, and not the wind industry.
The townspeople and their representatives would do well to remember that First Wind is not there to help them or make them rich. They want to develop their hills in order to make money-- gobs of it, subsidized by tax-payers--and their concerns are not about residents' health, property values, or anything else.
And speaking of property values--Rumford will be placing an encumbrance on tax payers by making wind turbiner setbacks from residences rather than property boundaries. They are specifically 'taking' value from real estate by restricting what property owners can do with any land that falls within that setback range. What if a property owner wants to break off a lot to sell? Or give to one of their children to build on? If that portion of the property is too close to a turbine, the town has reduced its value-- possible by 100%.
Please think about all the ramifications of taking advice from a developer. They are not in this to be good neighbors, and to design an ordinance to suit them is dangerous and naive.
I am glad that the Dixfield selectmen are doing their best ot gather all information possible about TIFs so that they can help the townspeople understand this form of subsidy.
I would remind them, however, that TIFs were designed to entice businesses to a certain town... to give it the advantage over others when a business bringing JOBS was hunting for a location in which to settle. A TIF is another tax-payer subsidy, and let's face it... a wind development in Dixfield will not provide long-term jobs to locals. Additionally... Patriot Renewables came to YOU. You don't have to entice them-- you have the mountain they want, and they are not going to walk just because you don't give them another hand-out. Or... maybe they will? If they do, what will Dixfield have lost? Not an industry which will help support your townspeople. There may be a short-term upswing in business during construction at a few of your local stores and such, yes. But when the construction is over, what will you have gained?
I encourage you to speak with your counterparts in Freedom and Danforth and Mars Hill. See how much their taxes went down, and for how long.
I urge you to think long and hard about what you might give up if this project is placed atop your mountains. What will happen to the value of the real estate in the vicinity? Reports from other places show that real estate within 2 miles of wind projects can expect to see a reduction in value of 25-40% or more. There are many facets to these developments which people don't stop to think about. I hope you will continue to look closely at this issue. All is not as it appears on the surface.
And thank you, Sun Journal, for printing such a thoughtful commentary.
And now... I would like to see the wind lobby and our legislators answer every one of the questions she posed.
Every single one.
Maine people deserve the same consideration which was given to the corporate wind lobby when the Governor's Task Force decided Maine's mountains were expendable.
In a December, 2010 LURC commissioners meeting, former Senator Peter Mills stated clearly to the commissioners that he and his colleagues in the 123rd legislature made the decision of “sacrificing our mountaintops” as a contribution to the “greater good.”
I find it hard not to resent that statement, and I take exception to the legislature deciding to sacrifice our natural resources, without input from the people who live here, for a 'greater good' which has not been proven.
Thank you, Lisa, for your 'voice of reason'. Mr. Carroll was clearly in panicked 'damage control mode' when he wrote that commentary, throwing out wild accusations because he is worried that the winds are changing. Apparently he was unprepared for such opposition to his wind project, and he was attempting to sway the public-- not with facts, but with more wind industry innuendo and rhetoric.
If that sign-up sheet existed, we would have heard about it that night, by those who supposedly signed up to speak.
If his life were being threatened, he would have reported it to the police with specific details.
Instead, this businessman insulted the locals who were standing up in true, American fashion and telling a state agency which works for them, what they would like it to do.
Mr. Carroll works for Patriot Renewables... the same company which recently offered a bribe to the citizens of Woodstock, saying PR would 'donate' $120,000.00 to save teaching positions (for one year) if they did not have to spend more on legal fees in regards to their Spruce Mountain project. They were attempting to use neighbor against neighbor-- hoping pressure from the town residents would persuade those who are appealing the DEP's approval of the permit to drop their appeal. Shameful.
Corporate interests are trying to poison the River Valley. It's time the wind lobby realized that their scare tactics and behind-closed-door deals and wild accusations are no longer working. Locals have seen through their aura of benevolence.
I hope the residents will continue to show good judgement and strength of character.
It's an out-and-out bribe, and I don't believe the good people of Woodstock will fall for it. Patriot Renewables had one goal-- they hoped their offer of $120,000.00 to 'save' teachers' positions would convince some townspeople to pressure those who are opposing the wind development to cave in and stop their court appeal.
That is despicable. PR is not some benign new neighbor wanting to be 'part of the community'... they are a for-profit entity whose only goal is to get their development permit application in hand, build their industrial wind facility, and take their millions in tax-payer subsidies.
Common sense Mainers know the score, and we can see blatant bribery for what it is.
Did PR also offer to continue that $120,000.00 for every years for the life of their project? Because a band-aid won't fix the problem, and folks know that. All it would be is a quick fix... with a bit of shame on the side.
Community members support one another, even if they don't agree. I hope the good people of Woodstock see this bribe for what it is-- and I hope it infuriates them. We aren't some back-woods yokels who will take hand-outs and then turn a blind eye to this sort of corruption. What saddens and maddens me the most is that our legislature sanctions bribery in this form, and for this particular industry.
This has to stop. If a wind development brings value to a town, the developers would not have to bribe residents. But they do-- and they have, in every single town they've approached. I find that appalling, and I believe it's time to put a stop to it.
It's an out-and-out bribe, and I don't believe the good people of Woodstock will fall for it. Patriot Renewables had one goal-- they hoped their offer of $120,000.00 to 'save' teachers' positions would convince some townspeople to pressure those who are opposing the wind development to cave in and stop their court appeal.
That is despicable. PR is not some benign new neighbor wanting to be 'part of the community'... they are a for-profit entity whose only goal is to get their development permit application in hand, build their industrial wind facility, and take their millions in tax-payer subsidies.
Common sense Mainers know the score, and we can see blatant bribery for what it is.
Did PR also offer to continue that $120,000.00 for every years for the life of their project? Because a band-aid won't fix the problem, and folks know that. All it would be is a quick fix... with a bit of shame on the side.
Community members support one another, even if they don't agree. I hope the good people of Woodstock see this bribe for what it is-- and I hope it infuriates them. We aren't some back-woods yokels who will take hand-outs and then turn a blind eye to this sort of corruption. What saddens and maddens me the most is that our legislature sanctions bribery in this form, and for this particular industry.
This has to stop. If a wind development brings value to a town, the developers would not have to bribe residents. But they do-- and they have, in every single town they've approached. I find that appalling, and I believe it's time to put a stop to it.
Here we see it, in print and online... proof of bribery.
In essence, this is the deal: IF Patriot Renewables is allowed to build their wind project on Spruce Mountain, and IF they don't have to spend any more money on legal fees fighting appeals of their permit, then they will donate $120,000.00 to 'save' three teaching positions. For one year. What heroes.
But what happens then? After that $120,000.00 is spent? Will the developer commit to saving those three teaching positions for the life of their project? Say... for the next 20 years? Highly doubtful. And in all reality, Patriot Renewables won't be the owners of this project for more than a few years before they sell out to a larger energy company. Ask them straight up, and see what they say. Watch their eyes, their posture, when you ask. They are not in this to be good, long-term 'neighbors'. They are in this because it's a 'get rich quick' scheme paid for by our tax dollars. Let's take THOSE to save our schools.
I'm sorry, but this is sick and shameful. I don't believe that the good people of Woodstock would even consider taking this bribe. What this company is doing is so obvious-- pitting neighbor against neighbor. For will there not be a few who are woo'ed by this offer who try to urge those who are opposed to the wind development to cease their opposition? The company is surely hoping citizens will try to coerce the wind facility's opponents into stopping their appeal--laying the blame for those lost teaching positions squarely at their feet. I hope the folks of Woodstock will see this for what it is-- and rise above it.
Similar things have happened at other wind developments-- Vinalhaven, for example. George Baker has publicly laid the blame squarely on those 'few' on the island who are suffering from the excessive turbine noise if any loss of electricity (and higher electric bills for islanders, because of it) results if Fox Island Wind is forced to comply with the DEP noise standards. It takes moxie to stand toe-to-toe with powerful corporate interests. It takes pluck to say 'no' to bribes and coersion. It takes courage to oppose a scheme which is touted as being 'green' and good for the economy.
Science and economics--sound science and economics-- numbers produced by unbiased experts with no stake in industrial wind, tell us that developing our mountain ridges for an undependable, intermittent and very expensive energy source is a colossal mistake. Wind will not 'get us off foreign oil'. However, we WILL have Maine's very wind owned by foreign companies such as Iberdrola, a Spanish and United Arab Emirates conglomerate. Or First Wind, which has as some of its excutives men who were arrested due to suspicions of having ties to the Italian mob and bilking the government of millions in wind subsidies. Other FW executives were formerly employed by Enron.
It's time to take a stand. If you don't have the facts about this wind plan at your disposal, they are easy to obtain. If you need help to begin your education into this very important topic, feel free to email highlandmts@gmail.com. We will give you access to links, books, experts--and we can connect you to folks here in Maine who are already living in the shadow of industrial wind.
Mainers don't cotton to being bribed. And Mainers are known for standing up to do what's right. I hope the good people of Maine will look wind developers in the eye, say 'No, thank you' to their bribes, and show them the way to the Kittery Bridge.
Like Alan Michka, I was also stunned by the harsh tone taken by the SJ editorial staff in their "Red Tape" op-ed. Not only was the paper denigrating the legislative process by which citizens attempt to have a say in their own government, but they didn't verify their facts before giving Angus King their full support. I listened to a video recording of Mr. King again last night to make sure of my own facts, and that stack of permit application paperwork they quoted as having cost the former governor $5Million, he stated on that recorded SECD meeting as costing him $2Million. He wanted the attendees to see for themselves 'what $2Million looked like'.
Granted, he has had to make some adjustments to his permit application due to the fact that it was submitted incomplete and had to be taken back off the table, and the 'expedited wind clock' had to be stopped. He has also adjusted the number of turbines in the hopes of appeasing the Appalachian Trail Clubs, but it's a stretch to believe that those adjustments cost another $3Million.
Readers deserve to have statements like that verified. Is there not a journalistic code of conduct or ethics that comes into play?
I hope the SJ will do a better job and tone down its seemingly biased rhetoric in the future.
There were other subtle changes to my letter, also, which I didn't specify up above...
Just thought I'd say... I'll try to post it to http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/ if I can find the time, and readers can compare the two, for themselves.
While I am pleased the the SJ chose to print my rebuttal to their op-ed, it is rather frustrating to have that disagreement edited. My rebuttal came in under the word limit. My letter was MY opinion. I did not have the ability (or the right) to edit their opinion last Sunday, and yet, my complete words were tampered with.
This IS stil America, right?
In my rebuttal, I did not write "Maybe even a scam". There was no "maybe" in my letter.
In talking about our educational attempts, I wrote: "Regular citizens have been trying to educate our fellow Mainers through informational meetings, LTE’s and by sharing resources, distributing literature and talking to our neighbors. Don’t believe US, but do your own research. Knowledge is power–and power is something our industry-controlled government is taking away from us."
And this was my final paragraph:
"The wind lobby and its media supporters are getting worried. Mainers are known for staring down bullies and doing what is smart. Doing what’s RIGHT. Please educate yourselves on the topic of mountaintop industrial wind. The truth will blow you away.
Why would the SJ NOT want Mainers to become educated about this important topic? Why would they NOT include links to resources? When a citizen such as myself is encouraging Mainers to be proactive and study this plan which will impact us for decades, why would this newspaper not wish to contribute to that effort?
This, added to the troubling editorial last Sunday, is worrisome, and I hope it is not indicative of the direction this state and country are headed. What is happening to our freedom of speech?
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Township, Maine
P.S. See the links above to begin your own research, please.
This is one of the most biased and offensive op-eds I've read on the very serious topic of mountaintop industrial wind. And it shows exactly how worried the wind lobby is.
Wow.
Yes, John Baldacci wanted to get rid of red tape for his wind lobby pals. It was job security for this former governor who hopes to keep his 'hand' in the renewable energy field. It was protection for his friends who make millions from our tax dollars. It was self-protection, all the way. They'd suffered a loss at Redington, and the wind lobby wanted to make sure that that did not happen again.
It worked, too, didn't it? Has a single wind developer been denied a permit since that time?
I find it unconscionable that this newspaper expects us to feel bad for Angus King. And has Mr. King really, honestly spent $5 Million dollars? I'd like to see proof-- for just a couple of months ago, he was quoted as having spent $2Million. Could the $5 Million be the triggering number to ensure he receives our subsidy money? Before the editorial board uses figures in the millions of dollars, they owe it to their readers to require proof. And besides... are we seriously supposed to NOT oppose a mis-guided and terribly expensive plan simply because one developer made a poor judgement call and invested in something which is ONLY a good investment due to the government's largesse with tax-payer money? OUR money? Mr' King's partner, Rob Gardiner, stated himself that wind energy could not exist without huge subsidies, and would not support itself. Sorry. I can't raise a lot of sympathy for wealthy individuals who are not, in reality, trying to save the planet, but who are selling Maine's quality of place in order to fill their pockets. I don't intend to sound mean, but that is the honest truth. Mr. King should have thought ahead and considered the independent thinking and common sense of those people whom he led for 8 years.
Why the venom and vitriol in this op-ed? Why would the editorial staff or the publisher have a problem with Mainers trying to work within the system established for us? We were not allowed to have a 'say' before our government decided to foist an expensive and dangerous wind energy plan on the state of Maine. The wind lobby has been brainwashing the public for years. When citizens decided to look into the FACTS about industrial wind, we were stunned. The paltry benefits this plan would provide are greatly overshadowed by the huge negative impacts. Regular citizens, without the wind industry's money for media blitzes and advertising campaigns, have been trying to educate our fellow Mainers. We have few options and outlets. We speak in meetings. We write letters to the editor. We share resources and distribute literature and talk to our neighbor. We ask people not to believe US, but to do their own research. We believe that knowledge is power, and power is something that our industry-controlled government has slowly taken away from us.
Why would this newspaper castigate Mainers for trying to change a policy which we truly believe to be one of the biggest mistakes-- and yes, scams--to come along?
The staff is attempting to sway our new governor, without a doubt. By taking his own desire to cut 'red tape', they are hoping that he and the new Legislature will disregard these protective bills which will be coming up for vote. In my opinion, this is a low blow, eespecially coming from a news medium.
Billions of dollars are at stake. The wind lobby is scared, and they will be stepping up their PR and attempting to scare Mainers into supporting mountaintop industrial wind. Expect to see ads saying that 'wind' will counter the effects of globla warming... something which experts are showing to be a misleading claim. Expect to have them say that wind energy will increase our national security. Poppycock. When does a nation need the most power, and the most reliable power? Where there is an emergency! Increasing our load of unreliable and intermittent and very expensive electricity will certainly not help America protect her borders. Expect the wind lobby to try to make us feel guilty. Frightened. Irresponsible if we don't support their plan, and brave, 'green' citizens if we do. Expect them to tout jobs... temporary construction jobs, and short term local 'booms' during development. Those same 330 construction workers would be kept gainfully employed in repairing our infrastructure, which is needed to bring millions of people to Maine to spend their tourism dollars. Once our iconic mountains are covered with 350 miles of 40 story turbines, those tourist will go elsewhere. This wind plan is self-perpetuated loss for Maine's economy in the LONG-term.
This op-ed is just the beginning. As Mainers see more of these types of anger-filled articles, they can rest assured: the wind lobby and its supporters are getting worried and desperate. Mainers are known for staring down the bullies and doing what is smart, and what is RIGHT. I urge you to educate yourselves on the topic of mountaintop wind energy. The truth will blow you away.
The state's wind development plan is sure to be the leading story in Maine in 2011. I am saddened when I see neighbor pitted against neighbor, when the only 'plus' side to this industrial wind plan is that folks believe that the short-term jobs brought to the region and the temporary reduction in property taxes might make the whole thing 'worth it'. I also can understand why townspeople might get antsy about receiving input from people who aren't residents or tax-payers. We're territorial and proud.
But realistically, we ALL have a stake in this game. Rumford is only one of dozens upon dozens of communities and UT's which are targeted for wind development. And citizens who are concerned about the long-term financial, and environmental health of this state, as well as that of its residents, have put in countless hours researching the facts about industrial wind. Not the hype or rhetoric given by the wind lobbyists, but facts garnered from unbiased experts... scientists, doctors, economics experts, physicists, accoustics engineers, utilities experts... and on and on. As frustrated as citizens become over the conflict spurred by wind development projects... imagine how frustrated Mainers get who have dedicated months or years of their time and thousands of their own dollars, as they try to educate fellow Mainers about the vagaries of industrial wind.
I commend those who have the desire to learn more. But I urge you to get your data from those who have no financial stake in wind developments.
The facts show that wind is an unreliable, intermittent energy source which will cost tax-payers and rate-payers far more in the long-term than any short term gains a few might realize.
The facts show that properties within two miles of industrial wind developments can lose 25-40% of their value... with some properties showing a complete loss.
The facts show that unless the full amount for decommissioning these projects is collected up front and held in a third party escrow, developers often sell off and/or abandon their projects (once the government subsidies and tax production credits and renewable energy credits expire and they've made their millions in profits) leaving it up to the host community to deal with the rusting and abandoned equipment.
And right here in Maine, the facts show that many of our neighbors are suffering from a loss of their quality of life. They are miserable in their homes... homes which, for many, are their only real investment.
And for brave citizens who have had the courage to stand toe-to-toe with a powerful corporate lobby, the facts show that there are no depths to which the wind industry will not stoop to convince Mainers to support this ill-advised plan.
I've witnessed proponents of 'wind' use scare tactics.. saying that wind energy will reduce carbon emmisions, counter the effects of global warming, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring our soldiers home. And yet... when they are challenged on these statements, they retreat, quoting 300 temporary jobs and a short-term boom for local shops and restaurants.
When they are confronted with scientific data showing they tell untruths, they hide behind statements like: "Well, that study was paid for by the oil industry!" Never mind that independent scientists verified the data, never mind that many oil companies like BEP are ALSO invested in wind energy-- that statement is intended to negate the validity of such studies.
On the opposite end of the spectrum-- wind proponents like to quote a survey which says that 80% of Mainers support industrial wind... but that survey was paid for by Reid&Reid, one of the major wind development contractors... and the questions asked haven't been made known to the public. Without full disclosure, how are Mainers to know what was asked in that survey? If people were asked: "Which would you prefer... electricity produced by coal, which pollutes and which entails the complete degredation of Appalachia's mountains--or electricity produced by 'windmills'?", many would most likely say they supported wind energy. I'm not saying that is what the questions were... I'm saying, if you expect to be believed--then give full disclosure. That is only fair.
But the wind industry works hard to maintain their 'proprietary information'. That is why we see very little production data made public. That is why they can still quote 'capacity' figures rather than real production rates.
I've witnessed the wind lobby talking about national security being tied to wind energy-- until they are challenged on it. I have seen them try to make Mainers feel guilty about coal mines in Appalachia... when we do not get our electricity from coal. There is no end to the tactics they try, or the spin they create..
So, yes. Please learn all you can about industrial wind, But remember where your information comes from. Take it with a grain of salt. Don't believe me, and don't believe the wind lobby. Do your own research. If you truly want the FACTS, you will find that the paltry benefits of 'wind' are far, far outweighed by the enormous negative impacts.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Wed, 12/22/2010 - 15:25
Ms. Willard is to be commended for attempting to do some independent research into the unique sounds produced by industrial sized wind turbines. I don't, however, believe she looked far enough. 130db of sound would certainly be 'dangerous' to humans-- in the immediacy. Wind turbine sounds, from what I understand after speaking with experts and reading literature, is completely different. While a short term exposure to the sound would be, to some, only mildly annoying, it is the long term effects which are causing health problems.
Some people cannot escape it. For as long as the wind blows, they are assaulted by high, low and ultra-low frequency noises... some of which cannot even be heard by the human ear-- but rather, they are 'felt'. I have spoken to neighbors here in Maine who are suffering. I have corresponded with doctors who are studying this. And I have been exposed to the sound in the short term, and can imagine what ceaseless exposure might do.
I listened to an informational talk by an acoustics engineer who has studied the wind developments in Maine extensively. He played a recording of the actual sounds produced while he spoke. It was not hard to hear him over the noise, and yet, when he turned it off without warning, the reactions of the listeners was amazing. Almost everyone of them expressed a great feeling of 'release'...they hadn't even realized how their body was reacting to those sounds, until those sounds ceased. Tension, anxiety...we didn't know we were experiencing them until the cause was taken away. It made a great impression on me. And that was after only ten minutes of exposure, and the db's were set at a realistic level, not exaggerated for effect. I had no problem believing that long-term exposure surely must produce sleeplessness, anxiety, hypertension... and all the health problems related to those conditions.
I urge the citizens in communities where wind developments are proposed to move with caution. Set moratoriums while you gather FACTUAL information. Don't be taken advantage of because you do not have sufficient data. I hope you will look at this issue from many different angles, and not make it solely about any financial benefits promised by the wind developers. Please remember-- they are 'in' this for one reason, and one reason only... to take advantage of the huge tax-payer subsidies available to them upon completion of their projects. Our taxes are paying for their wind plants, and without those government hand-outs, they would walk away. This isn't about saving the planet, and studies are showing that adding wind to our energy mix does NOT significantly reduce carbon emissions. In some cases, these turbines do not even have to produce electricity for the developer to profit, as they can sell their carbon credits or use them to offset carbon produced by their fossil-fuel subsidiaries.
Let's work together on this. Let's be respectful of our neighbors, many of whom are suffering, or who may suffer--if turbines are erected within a mile or two of their homes. Let's consider the irreversible damage to our mountains, and our tourism-related livelihoods, and to the habitat of our wildlife. If the concern is global warming, let's think about the thousands and thousands of acres of carbon-sequestering trees which will be permanetly removed from our high-terrain regions. Let's not forget the 400+ mile long high-voltage transmission corridor with its attendant health risks which will necessarily cut a swath through 75 Maine towns due to the fact that our existing infrastructure is not designed to handle wind's erratic nature and wild fluctuations. There is so much about this wind plan which Mainers are not aware of, but the truth is out there. Please be cautious and open your minds to hear the facts. Thus far, the wind industry has had years to sell their products with 'spin' and without opposition. I urge citizens to listen with an open mind to the 'other side'. The truth will blow you away.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Fri, 10/29/2010 - 16:16
Wind developers routinely demonstrate their largesse by offering to towns and counties a neutral and unbiased consultant to look at their finances for them. Wind developers offer to pay for that objective, independent counsel. And then... they recommend a firm like Eaton Peabody.
Of course they do.
If a representative from Eaton Peabody states that they are a neutral facilitator which doesn't represent industrial wind companies, please be very suspicious. They need to remember who their clients have been... and who they ARE. They need to think about what documents they might have signed and sworn to. What documents might be 'on record'.
I agree that wind developers SHOULD pay for consultants and attorneys if they are coming into a town and causing expense as those communities deal with proposals for wind energy plants. But I urge all towns to seek their own independent counsel... an attorney or consultant who has not been tainted by industrial wind. If Patriot Renewables, First Wind, Highland Wind LLC and others are on the up and up-- then they won't mind if a town hires a firm or individual who has no ties-- NONE-- to industrial wind.
Don't put your faith in Eaton Peabody. Not in this instance. In some capacity, they've already represented wind developers in Maine. Don't take guidance or advice from wind developers, or from me. I urge all townspeople to seek out truly independent advice. No matter which way you lean on the topic of industrial wind, your townspeople deserve unbiased, expert counsel.
Reading that article actually made me ashamed... if that's not blackmail, I don't know what is.
God Almighty, this is what we've been reduced to by these wind developers, who have sanction by our state government to legally bribe Mainers in order to get their way. And while I've dreaded this day-- knowing it was coming-- still... to read it in print was a shock. And it is heart-breaking.
Well... shocked, saddened, or ashamed... I've never been one to fold when threatened. If I know my fellow Mainers, that will get their backs up, as well. I hope residents stop and think carefully about this situation. The areas around these wind developments WILL be posted. Perhaps not the whole parcel, but surely, the ridges surrounding the turbines will be. No matter how many times residents might hear "We don't INTEND to post the property", developers cannot afford to allow the region surrounding these developments to remain open to the public. There is too much danger-- too much liability. They know it. They just don't want US to know it until they've received their high-priced permits. It costs alot to buy the integrity of a portion of town, after all.
I understand that times are tight. I understand how a family can feel desperate. But what this land owner is doing is wrong. They have a right to post their property, yes. They do NOT have the right to coerce a segment of a population to capitulate to their demands-- or else. They have other options to obtain income from their property. Those ways may not be as 'quick and easy' as the dollars offered by the wind industry, but they would surely be obtained more honorably.
To try to intimidate others or to coerce them into supporting something--or else!-- is wrong. And reading that made me ashamed.
Will we let the wind industry do this to us? By God, I won't. I only own a pitiful 70 acres. I'm not nearly as poor as are these people who are burdened with 4,500 acres. But I don't post my property. If you'd like to come and smowmobiles across my north forty, you're more than welcome to. If you want to enjoy 'pristine Maine' though, you'd better do it quickly. I've got two developments proposed for my front and back yard, too.
Respectfully-- but very saddened,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
I was saddened to read your comments in this forum, Candiceanne-- and as an anti-bullying advocate, I was also distressed to see tactics usually employed by middle-schoolers being used in a public arena such as this. Please, please stop these personal attacks on those who oppose your views.
You've mentioned as candiceanne and as commonsense that you would like to see an educational forum on industrial wind, and yet, each time one has been organized in your area, you have maligned the people who organized it, the people who spoke, and the actual topics discussed. You've inferred that these educational meetings were biased, but at least three wind developers were asked to attend the last one in Rumford, and they all declined the invitation to send their own experts to speak. I encourage YOU to take the lead, just as those good citizens have done previously. YOU can arrange the speakers, the venue, the topics. It is every bit as much YOUR right as it is the right of those others who have worked tirelessly on this topic in the past. You cannot wait for others to design something of which you would approve-- but you have it in your power to do it, yourself. You could have it arranged within a week. I know, because I've done it, and I would be happy to help you with any logistical details, if you need help.
It's not okay to defame others. It's not okay to complain about something unless you are willing to give an equal or better effort to change that which you are dissatisfied with. It's never okay to resort to the type of bullying which you do here online, protected by a screen name and not looking your opponents in the eye. Please, candiceanne. This is a serious topic, and it deserves to be dealt with in a mature and reasoned manner. Whether you are a resident of Florida who comes 'home' to Maine on a part-time basis, or a former governor who was born in New York but who chose Maine as his home, or whether you are a native, born and bred-- we are all human beings, and we are Americans. We all love this state. This issue deserves a thoughtful and factual discourse. I believe you owe several people a sincere apology for bringing their personal lives into the spotlight. Especially when you are unwilling to do the same.
I would love to sit down with you and have a candid conversation. I believe two women, working together, can solve all kinds of problems. I'll even come to you, and take you to lunch. What do you say? Can we stop this vitriol and have a meaningful discussion and/or respectful debate? We women should be peace-keepers, even when we are at odds. You may email me at home at roomtomove@tds.net or call 628-2070 any time. I'd appreciate the opportunity to speak to you personally.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Tue, 10/12/2010 - 16:07
Hi Queenhoneebee.
I was impressed by what you wrote under your profile, and admire you for wanting to participate in discussions free from personal attacks and some of the other misbehavior which is sometimes present on these forums. That's why I was surprised by your 'wasting time and spitting on their children's futures' comment.
I assure you that by participating in Saturday's protest, those Mainers were doing just the opposite: they were--WE were-- doing our best to PROTECT our children's futures.
I encourage you to do just what you admonished us to do, and research the issue of mountaintop industrial wind. I have no doubt you will be shocked by what you learn, as I was-- and as I continue to be, as new information is discovered daily. I was once in favor of wind energy-- until I truly learned the facts.
I have been reading, listening and learning about this topic for a year. I have spoken to soils scientists, wildlife biologists, environmental engineers, a physicist, acoustics engineers, economists and doctors, as well as Mainers living in the shadow of industrial wind in Freedom, Vinalhaven, Stetson and Mars Hill. When one has the opportunity to listen to the facts from unbiased experts, and the eye- and ear- witness testimony of those on the ground, one's perspective changes. Most citizens have only been exposed to the rhetoric and tag lines, to the hype about 'wind' saving the planet from global warming and 'wind getting us off foreign oil', and that is what they believe. But please don't believe everything told you by the wind industry and the current administration. They have a massive 'stake' in the game, and it comes in the form of your tax dollars, and mine. Wind energy is NOT the panacea they would have us believe it to be.
I would be happy to provide you with information regarding industrial wind, accumulated over the past several months, or send you contact information and links to experts in various fields who are standing up in opposition to this mis-guided plan. Please don't dismiss ordinary citizens who are doing everything within our limited power--and within the legal limits set by our Constitution--to 'have a say' as we attempt to do what we truly believe to be the RIGHT thing to do.
The facts will blow you away. Thanks for taking the time to comment.
What is ironic is that the "Maine' which people fall in love with is the Maine which is struggling to survive. The backbone of this state is-- and has always been-- the working-class man and woman. Those who go to work, pay their bills, fret over how to send their children to college... or even, how to heat their homes or pay their taxes.
JDwight made a single reference to the 'wind power elite'... and yet, that struck a chord. So many Mainers-- and Americans-- do not understand how much power and influence this single industry has over the citizens of our state and country. Sadly, the average American... busy struggling to survive and raise a family and make ends meet... has bought in to the rhetoric spouted by the wind industry and our administrations. They believe that wind power is 'green'... that it will reduce our carbon emissions, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and reduce our electric rates. The facts--scientific and economics-based facts-- state that this is NOT TRUE! We are being sold a 'line'.. and the facts says this: Industrial wind is not economically feasible, not beneficial to the global environment-- nor for the environment and ecosystems wherein the projects are located. There are health concerns, decreased property values, bird and bat deaths, fragmentation of wildlife habitat, loss of 'quality of place' and 'quality of life'... all for an energy source which is intermittent and unreliable and is not compatible with our grid-- thus the need for a $1.4 BILLION upgrade, which will cut a swath through 75 Maine towns. Towns which do not need the power produced (Maine already exports electricity) but towns which will find this corridor to be a detriment to Mainers--whether through increased instances of leukemia--proven to be an impact of living close to high-tension wires-- or simply through higher monthly power bills-- for CMP customers will have to pay for a portion of this transmission project, as decided by Maine's PUC.
There are no positives to land-based industrial wind in Maine. So.... why are we allowing the 'wind elite' to have their way?
We should NOT give in and bow down before 'industry' as our administration is doing and has done. This country was fashioned to be run 'by the People and for the People'.... let's not bow before the 'wind elite'. We have the power of our voices and our votes. Let's use them .
Thank you, JDwight, for voicing what so many of us are coming to realize is the truth.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. , Me
For access to the FACTS about industrial wind in Maine, contact me at highlandmts.gmail.com
Please see my other comments regarding Ms. Adams' coverage. While she is a faithful reporter, she did get a few facts wrong. As did you.
Those who followed the dialogue you mentioned are aware of your identity. Several Rumford residents came up to me last night to say they were aware of who you are, as-- apparently--your invective is as evident in your prose as it is in person. However, I will remain polite and leave it up to you to 'come out'.
This is not a contest to see who can spout more vitriol. This is a serious issue. At least three wind developers were personally invited to atttend the forum to give their 'side' and we looked forward to the opportunity to challenge their statements. In my opinion, they do you and your community a disservice by not taking every opportunity to educate.
You have made it clear that you support these developments by all the comments you've made under at least two different screen names over the past few months. And frankly, I would be beating my head against the wall to try to convince you to listen to 'the other side'. I wish you would be open-minded, but until such a time as you are willing to be polite and fair and not defame people whom you don't know, there is not much point in trying to talk to you. Still, I once more extend an invitation to you to contact me for access to the dozens of documents I have which convinced me to take the position I have taken, or for access to experts who will speak knowledgeably to you on this subject.
If you understood me to say that no property was for sale in Mars Hill, I apologize for the misconception. I will go back and re-read that exchange when I have a few moments. My intent was to say that those homes in Mars Hill which have been adversely affected by the wind development are not on the market, as I believe they are involved in litigation with the wind developer. Thus, we have no comparable sales data from that local market to use when as we try to discover what effect there will be on the value of Maine residences.
Now is not the time for personal atacks. Now is the time for community members to work together to shape their own destinies. People sometimes disagree, and the sign of true 'community' is when you can disagree without being disagreeable. Don't take it from me. Angus King told me that.
If you wish to continue this conversation, please be a responsible citizen and contact me for a calm and mature discussion. I wouldn't be surprised if the other panelists would speak to you personally, as well, despite how you maligned them. Personal attacks are not allowed in these forums, but you have repeatedly decided to ignore the rules. I hope you will change your behavior, as it does not add anything but a 'side show' quality to a very serious debate.
As one of the panelists a the forum last night, I would like to add/correct a couple of points Ms. Adams made. I live in Lexington Township, not Highland Plantation. Independence Wind has a proposal for a grid-scale wind energy plant for Highland Plantation, the community which is adjacent to Lexington, and I did mention that project last night, as it ios the one I am most familiar with. In the last month, however, Iberdrola has submitted an application to LURC to put met towers in Lexington and Concord.
And I did not say that property values would decrease, I quoted a comprehensive report by McCann Appraisal Services which studied the effects of wind developments on homes within two miles. His conclusion was that property values drop by 25-40%, with some total losses within the 'footprint' of a development. In Maine, we do not currently have comparable sales data to make that conclusion, yet, so we are relying on the expertise of others across the country to help us in our decision-making process.
The forum was only 'decidedly one-sided' because wind developers chose not to attend. I know for a fact that Angus King was personally called and invited, and First Wind and Patriot Renwables were also asked to come and present their 'sides' of the issue. There were also articles in newspapers inviting the wind industry to attend. It was a wonderful opportunity for some open and honest conversation, and wind developers who wish to become part of those communities did them a disservice by brushing off the opportunity to educate residents. Over the past year, I have discovered that the industry does not like to attend any meeting where they aren't in charge. When they quote a 'fact' and are asked to prove it... they can't. And when they are asked if they will put their promises in writing... they won't.
In regards to the Counsins Island reference... that plant is only used to supplement our electrical needs on a half-dozen days a year when New England is at peak usage, such as during an extended heat wave. I also believe the oil is piped to the plant, not trucked in.
I counted 69 in attendance, excluding the panelists.
Husband is picking up daughter, so here I am, again.
Thank you for the calmer tone. I appreciate it.
I was asked to speak about real estate values. I have been a licensed real estate broker for 22 years, and I have owned a small real estate company since 2001.
In my brief presentation (for we were asked to be brief, so that people could ask questions at their leisure, and that is an excellent way to engage and learn) I will be talking about industrial wind's effects on real estate values. We in Maine do not yet have 'comparable sales' from which to judge the exact effect wind turbines will have on homes within their sound- and view-shed. Mars Hill is the only wind development which has been operational in Maine for an extended amount of time, and those homes which have been affected by this development are not currently for sale. Therefore, we have to rely on experts from other parts of the country, who have studied this. I will be sharing a comprehensive report completed by McCann Appraisal Services in Illinois, which was done at the behest of county officials prior to their consideration of a wind turbine development. I would be happy to share that 80+ page document with you, if you do not wish to come to the meeting tomorrow. I believe it is in our best interests to learn from others' experiences and mistakes. If we looked to countries like Denmark and Spain, we would not be considering this proposal... and they have been heavily invested in wind for many years. If you are interested, I will dig up some of the articles I have and email them to you.
There are many other reports and studies which have been done on this issue. The wind industry likes to quote from a Department of Energy study which was completed last year, but which has been refuted by others. We have to take all the data given us and determine who we will believe... and why. Do the studies come from people who stand to gain or lose, based on the outcome of the study? Are they independent sources, with no stake in the conclusions? These are hard questions. I sense you have a genuine desire to know the facts, and that you've been extremely frustrated by 'the process'. So am I.
So am I.
I will do my best to answer questions tomorrow night, and if I do not KNOW the answer, I vow to do my best to discover one.. from experts who are unbiased. I hope you will keep an open mind and heart. Just because a group of people shows passion about an issue does not make them 'nut jobs'. Some of our biggest heroes in history were passionate about what they believed in, too.
And some were just nut jobs. :o)
I'd like to meet you. I think we could have a very productive-- and pleasant-- conversation.
Sorry, Common Sense... and I really do have to run to get the girl.
But let me ask this...
What are your qualifications, that you can so easily dismiss these people? It's too easy to hide behind a screen name. I inderstand it, but if you are going to put others down, you should not be allowed to do it with impunity. There are consequences for our actions, and each of these people are speaking out without hiding. If you are going to be insulting, please have the courage to put your name behind the slur. It takes courage, but you'll be respected for having some.
And.... how about Warren Brown, the DEP consultant, who two weeks ago determined that Fox Island WInd was, in fact, creating noise above the DEP's night-time limits, even though FIW had been claiming they weren't? Is he one of the experts you would respect?
Please, Common Sense... don't be nasty. There's no place for it here in such an important topic. You can blast me all you want, but you should really come to the forum and do it to my face. I might cry, but that's okay. I'll go home afterwards and relax to Mr. Rand's CD. Don't knock it until you've tried it.
I am really glad to see you engaged in this topic. But are you open-minded? I hope so. Trust me... it's a hard way to be and it takes a humble spirit. When I first heard about the governor's plans to install 2700 MWs (nameplate capacity, not actual production) of 'wind mills' on our mountains, i thought perhaps it was a good idea. I was not opposed. But then, you see, I started researching the issue. And Common Sense, I've gotta tell you...the facts scare the dickens out of me.
Now...it's hard to speak to somoeone who's a mystery to me. Here I am... real name. No hidden persona or agenda. I am a mother, wife, owner of a small business, part-time writer and farmer. Just a native Mainer who cares. Cares about alot of things... but what engaged me in this battle was the fact that there is so much that is simply WRONG about industrial wind. And I've read information from experts around the world, not just here in our corner of Maine. Unfortunately, we don't have them personally at our disposal for forums such as the one being hosted in the River Valley. But truly, Common Sense.. if you have your own expertise to add to this debate, you are welcome to come and give it at tomorrow's forum. We are doing our best to present factual information and to hear from all sides of this issue. You will, however, have to state your real name. This is an open and honest debate and there will be reporters there who may want to interview each person who speaks. That is what we ALL want... nothing under cover... everything exposed to the light of day. (You won't have to disclose your screen name, of course, so no worries there.)
There is no doubt that there are people who will benefit financially if industrial wind comes to their town or township. Landowners who sell or lease to developers are sure to make a handsome profit. I have never been opposed to getting a return on an investment... but that investment can not have deleterious effects on others. And it is a fact-- many impacts on a parcel of land do not cease to exist once a blazed line or a piece of rebar is met. It doesn't work like that. Just ask folks living near a pig or chicken farm. :o) (Full disclosure... I have five pigs here at The F.A.R.M. Thus far, my neighbors haven't complained, but we have an awesome set-back from other property lines.)
And then we have those temporary construction workers. I think of them all the time. They are hard-working men and women who are doing a job and trying to pay their bills and raise their families. But how many more, full time, year-round jobs could we create if we took those millions and millions of tax-payer dollars (the lion's share of which goes to the developer and overseas to places like Denmark and China, where the turbines are manufactured) and used them to make our aging housing stock more efficient? That would be a win-win-WIN! Contractors, electricians and plumbers put to work... old furnaces and water heaters replaced with more efficient and cleaner burning models... that would not only reduce our use of fossil fuels, but would reduce carbon emmissions AND keep more money in Mainers' pockets. All without the loss of a single ridgeline, and without the worrisome health and environmental impacts of industrial wind.
We have to look at real impacts, REAL numbers (not what developers 'sell' but what experts with no stake in the game tell us) and real, long-term solutions. These projects have, at best, a twenty year life span. They are heavily subsidized. They aren't compatible with the grid, and because of that, we need 500 miles of new high voltage transmission corridors cut through this state (please thnk of herbicides, and increased cases of leulenia when you consider some of the impacts). And CMPC rate-payers will bear a good portion of the cost, even though we don't need this wind power and it won't stay here in Maine.
My friend, I could go on, but I invite you to come to the forum tomorrow. Whether we agree or not, or whether we choose to disagree, we each deserve an opportunity to hear and to speak. That's what being an American is all about... open dialogue and nothing covert-- not laws and decisions made in back offices and without Mainers' input. Please come.
I'd write more, but there's a teen needing a ride home from Driver's Ed. Have a nice evening, Common Sense. Thanks for the dialogue.
I suppose the answer to your question depends on who you consider to be a 'nut job'. Out of all those invited for the panel, I probably am the one most qualified to wear that honorable title, as I am a part-time humorist and the writer of a light-hearted, folksy newspaper column. I also have two teens still at home (who drive me nuts) and I work with my parents (who drive me nuts... but please don't tell them I said that as I'm still a bit scared of my mother.)
In all seriousness, the other members of the panel are, yes, experts in their fields. JDwight is an economist and investment advisor. Robert Rand is a leading acoustics engineer who has been working on wind-related sound issues for a long time. I do not know why you disqualify Dr. Aniel, but unless you, too, are a doctor, I think perhaps that is unfair. Attorney Chris O'Neil is, I believe, particpating as a moderator of sorts. I've spoen to him at length and found him to be wise and stable and very knowledgable.
If there are people whom you can think of who would be qualified to speak on industrial wind-- scientists, economists and other experts-- wildlife biologists, soils scientists, environmental engineers, etc.-- people who have put months or years of their time into studying this topic, please share those names with me. I would love to make their acquaintance. We are interested in the facts. Period.
Take care.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. ME
P.S. If you'd like to email me for a flyer with the pertinent info, please do at highlandmts@gmail. com. I'll do my best to forward that info to you.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Tue, 09/28/2010 - 16:00
As a woman living in the western mountains a few miles north of Dixfield who is facing two wind turbine developments close to my home, I hope the residents of Dixfield will understand if I weigh in, here.
I wonder if you realize how lucky you are? I wonder if you can fathom the countless hours and the many dollars which residents of your town have put into making sure Dixfield is protected. It is much, much easier to loosen restrictions on a zoning ordinance 'after the fact' than it is to tighten them... especially if development is allowed to be built under those laxer regulations. What if, after all this, the residents vote down the zoning ordinance, the turbines come (and I hear the River Valley has up to 100 of them proposed for the mountains surrounding you) and you can't abide them?
What if they DO cause health problems? What then? The developers don't have any incentive to take the turbines down once they have the ability to collect subsidies and tax production credits. So... maybe they'll tell you they can turn back the speed at night... would that not prove that this plan is NOT about generating as much clean, renewable energy as is possible? Would it be okay if you discovered that you'd lost your iconic ridges for a false promise?
What if having 400 foot tall turbines marring the horizons and producing disturbing sounds and shadow flicker reduces your property values? Or causes a loss to your tourism trade?
What if they don't work????
What I am saying is... it's better to be safe than sorry. You folks have the opportunity to take control of what happens to your mountains and you have the ability to keep your quality of place and quality of life. Many of us here in Maine don't have the opportunity and the freedoms which you have. Those of us in unorganized territories in the "Expedited Wind Permitting Zone" do not have the power to determine siting for such intrusive developments We can not ban them. We are at the mercy of an over-worked Land Use Regulation Commission which is constantly being inundated by proposals for wind turbine developments all across Maine.
Please play it safe. Please remember that wind developers are in this for our tax dollars, which are up for grabs to whomever can get their turbines placed first. No matter what they tell you, science and economics prove that these are not the panacea which the industry and our current administration tout them as being. Please keep your sense of community and don't get angry at those who are simply trying to do what they believe is the RIGHT thing to do. Be proud that there are still people who will stand in the face of big money and big power and try to protect the little guys, against all odds.
You're really lucky, and I wish I had the same opportunity which you have to protect everything that's special about rural Maine.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. Me (in close proximity to Highland Wind LLC's and Iberdrola's wind development proposals.)
Please take the opportunity to attend the wind forum at Mt. Valley High in Rumford tomorrow night (09-29) from 6:00-9:00 p.m. Experts will be available to answer your questions, and if they don't know the answers, they will find them out for you. This is another excellent opportunity to become informed.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Tue, 09/28/2010 - 11:31
Hi Common Sense
Property rights... that's a very sensitive issue, and with good reason. I understand your perspective, but the fact is-- all governing bodies have restrictions on what an owner can and cannot do with his or her property. Where I live in LURC territotry, for example, I cannot build a building more than 25 feet tall. LURC has been charged with protecting-- among other things-- the aesthetic quality of our rural areas. So if I decide I want a four-story building... I'm out of luck. Because LURC has the right to tell me what I can do on my own property. When you think about it, a four story building-- say 40 feet tall-- is much less intrusive on my neighbors than a 400 foot tall windmill would be. And my building wouldn't produce high, low and ultra-low frequency noise, nor would it kill migratory birds and bats. It wouldn't need miles of new roads blasted and built, no wetlands would need to be filled in, and no clearcuts need be made in order for me to build it. I wouldn't even expect any of my neighbors to subsidize it for me. :o)
I understand your point (although I know Freemont and Dan, and I don't expect them to get quite as radical as you predict any time soon... they have loads of common sense, for sure!) Please try to understand the perspective of others. I see you in these forums on a regular basis and I can't quite understand why you are such a proponent of these mountaintop wind developments, when daily, more facts are emerging proving what an ill-advised plan they are for this state-- in every way. If you work in some sector pertaining to these projects, I suppose you are protecting your job, and I 'get' that. But let's stick to the facts if at all possible. Towns and states have historically been able to tell us what we can and can't do on our property. And occasionally, they also decide to come in and "take" it so that they can do what THEY want to with it. Sight, sound and contamination don't recognize property borders or town lines. What we each do on our property affects others, and since we don't seem capable of taking our neighbors into consideration when we decide to make an impact on our land, governmental bodies are charged with doing it for us. It is up to Common Sense citizens to decide what is best in their own corner of Maine.
Please come to the wind forum in Rumford on Wednesday night (Mt. Valley High, 6:00-9:00) to listen to scientifically and economically based information about these projects. You won't be sorry, and you just might understand where folks like Freemont and Dan are coming from, and why they are working so hard to do what they believe is the RIGHT thing to do.
This is a wonderful testament to how citizens can work together to direct the future of their town and protect their natural resources and their residents. I know that hours of hard work went into the drafting of this ordinance, and those involved should be commended, as should all those who came out to vote on Thursday night.
Mr. Trafton will do a great service to all when he speaks to AVCOG on Planning Day.
Congratulations to all for showing Mainers what can be accomploshed when we work together.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Thu, 09/16/2010 - 07:19
It's no wonder wind developers are finding it hard to procure financing for these wind energy plants. With more Americans learning the facts about these projects every day, there has been a groundswell of opposition to them. We must direct our government to halt the subsidization of this mis-guided plan until science has found a way to reduce the high, low and ultra-low frequency noise they produce. In addition, we must be intelligent when deciding where to site them. It's been shown that stringing them out along ridgelines is a mistake-- both from an environmental and an economical standpoint.
Without huge tax-payer subsidies, these would never find investors, for they can't produce a return on the investment. People are discovering facts like this, and when a state is threatened with large-scale destruction of many of its iconic mountains for a plan to produce expensive power which we do not need, but which is, for the most part, destined to be shipped out of state on new high-voltage transmission wires (which we also wouldn't need if it were not for the wind power) then those citizens should, and will, stand up and say "No!"
I 'hear' your frustration, and I understand it. But there are several things which must be taken into account when considering wind generated power-- one of which is its exhorbitant cost... Wind power is many times more expensive that renewable hydro power which we could purchase from Canada--if, in fact, we needed additional electricity. Currently, Maine does not. I do not believe manufacturers or retailers will move to Maine if they are forced to pay for super-expensive electricity. That has been a sticking point in the past, and is one of the reasons towns occasionally offer TIFs-- because they hope to entice companies which cannot afford the high cost of doing business in Maine. Industrial wind power and new transmission corridors will not help lure businesses...not from an economical standpoint, and probably not from a 'quality of place' perspective, either..
In addition, if jobs are a concern of yours, wouldn't it be much, much wiser to take the billions of dollars which the government is prepared to hand out to wind developers and use those tax-payer subsidies to make Maine's aging housing stock more efficient? Hundreds of builders, electricians and plumbers would have jobs if we concentrated on conservation... we would have a win-win-win situation. Mainers put to work. Less fossil fuels burned to heat our homes (thereby reducing pollution, AND our dependence on foreign oil). And a unique environment kept safe from high voltage transmission corridors with their attendant Electro-Magnetic Fields, and high-mountain terrain protected from erosion, herbicides, fragmented wildlife habitat, and potential water quality issues.
I'd love to speak with you in more depth, if you truly have concern about this issue. Feel free to contact me at highlandmts@gmail.com
I encourage residents to approve the ordinance, and if they decide it needs to be tweaked or altered, to THEN rewrite it... keeping the mountains safe from development in the meantime. Two or three months could see a new, improved ordinance on the table... one which makes all residents feel that their natural resources AND their livelihoods are safe.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Township, Maine (another beautiful area that is being targeted by industrial wind.)
By Karen Pease, unverified — Fri, 08/27/2010 - 08:53
I understand residents' concerns about the possibility of restricting traditional uses of the land, and I'm sure the planning board can tweak any ordinance to make it workable for the town. My fear would be that if this ordinance is voted down, a wind developer could submit a permit application before a new ordinance is enacted... and I believe (though not sure...) that the town would have to apply whatever zoning was currently in place when it considered the application.
I'm not familiar with whether or not a moratorium is in place in Byron which would protect the town until a new ordinance could be drafted? I hope so, for their sakes.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease, Lexington Township, Maine
By Karen Pease, unverified — Tue, 08/24/2010 - 13:30
What is, really, in the 'best interest of the town'. Does it always come down to a quick buck? Is that what determines what is best for a town... or for an organization, or for a family or individual? If 'tangible benefits' and short-term lease payments and a temporary reduction in taxes were all removed from the equation, what, then, would be in the 'best interests of the town'?
Would it be best for the town to have hundreds of thousands yards of bedrock and earth blasted and relocated on the beautiful ridges above their homes? Would the high, low and ultra-low frequency noise produced by turbines be unnacceptable to the townsfolk and their neighbors, then? Remember, acoustical engineers are beginning to tell us that people living within 2 miles of turbines can suffer adverse health affects. And less cautious experts are advocating for setbacks of up to five miles in mountainous regions and up to twenty miles when turbines rise above open water. If money wasn't involved, would we be more likely to defend our friends and neighbors from the negative health affects of turbines? Would we care more about them, then?
If the monetary benefits were removed, would we be concerned about the miles of new roads which will fragment wildlife habitat and disrupt animals' hunting and foraging trails? Would we be outraged at the bird and bat deaths which will occur, instead of shrugging the fact off with inane coments about how house cats and automobiles are just as apt to kill them??
And what about economics? If the town was not going to receive those tangible benefits, temporary lease payments and short term tax reductions, would we be more likely to require that wind turbines be self-supporting and produce affordable electricity before they could erect their massive machines? Would we question the economics of a generation system which, at BEST, produces 35% of its rated capacity, but more often produces between 10-25%? Would we welcome a power plant whose product is up to four times more expensive an already-established renewable hydro source in Canada? Would we encourage development of an industry which we knew had a life-span of only 20 years? And which would be expensive and time-consuming to remove when its useful life was over? Would we allow them to be built, knowing that the money for decommissioning them had not been set aside at the outset, and understanding that it could very well fall to the tax-payers to foot those future bills?
Would it be best for the town's economy to lose open land for hunting, hiking, bird-watching, and the like to hillsides and ridgelines which will be posted against trespassing? Would we be more likely to protect the integrity of the wilderness experience for which tourists from around the world travel to Maine, if the almighty dollar wasn't being waved in front of our faces?
If the state of Maine had not sanctioned this form of bribery, and if our legislators had not approved it, we would not be facing these issues. There is no way in the world the people of Maine would allow such an ill-advised, misguided, destructive and economically unfeasible plan to move forward on our iconic summits. If money was taken out of the equation, Mainers would be shouting "NO!" from these mountaintops. If the money was gone, then--we would really, really be working in "the best interest of the town".
All is not lost. I am encouraged. As more and more Mainers become informed on the true facts about these projects, the wind is shifting. People are standing up. People are speaking up. People are exercising their rights and calling for a stop to this foolish plan. Money isn't the be-all, end-all that the developers believe it to be. Some people care about the whole picture, and not just the short-term monetary gains. I hope the town of Carthage will recognize that there is much more value in its resources-- both human and 'natural'-- than there is value in being the temporary recipient of hand-outs from a for-profit company who is reaping its rewards from American workers' hard-earned tax money.
The only merit I could find in Mr. Payne's letter was that he discovered a website which hadn't been updated for some time. He used that outdated information to his advantage, and that's not surprising. When the facts aren't on your side, you have to try another tack to try to fool the public.
Mainers are finally getting the true picture. Many dedicated people are working hard to educate the public about the realities of industrial wind and it's beginning to pay off. One result of that is that those in the wind industry and the 'renewable energy' field are hustling to come up with new propaganda, new half-truths, new ways to try to gloss over what it an incredible-- and very nearly successful-- scam. Those in the 'wind' business have had long-term access to the same facts which we are now discovering, and they are panicking... worried that their houses of cards-- supported by our tax dollars and NOT by good science, economics or stewardship-- will come tumbling down.
It will, if only the good people of Maine continue to hold accountable those who are responsible in the industry, as well as our governor and legislature... the latter of whom happen to work for us. Let's do what's right. Let's have the facts, instead of tag lines and feel good propaganda. Let's listen to the unbiased experts instead of those who stand to profit from industrial wind.
After Wednesday night's meeting at Dirigo High School in Dixfield, there can't be any doubt in the minds of the people of the river valley and western mountains that industrial wind is ANYTHING but a sound investment. Acoustical engineer Rob Rand gave an excellent, well-researched, fact-based presentation on wind turbine sounds and how they travel, what their properties are, and how they affect people living within 2 or more miles. And economist and financial advisor J Dwight explained the financial aspect of industrial wind. Where the money comes from, where it goes, how IW will affect electrical rates, and why the push to install hundreds of miles of wind turbines along the mountain ridges of Maine is nothing but a scam. A government sanctioned scam to misappropriate tax-payers' hard-earned money and redistribute it among a few wind energy companies-- Independence Wind (i.e. Highland Wind LLC), Trans-Canada, First Wind, Patriot Renewables, and the like.
The "investment" must not be allowed to go forward. The more I learn, the more appalled I become at what we are allowing to happen here in our state. I urge every reader-- every citizen-- to become informed. Get the facts. Speak to and listen to experts... scientists, economists, environmentalists, and your friends and neighbors whom you trust to have common sense. This "investment" will not benefit the people of Maine, nor will it be good for this land which sustains us in every way imaginable. Industrial wind is not the panacea the wind industry touts it as being. This is all about the money... scads of it. Scads of OUR money. Please, get the facts and then exercise your right as an American to say NO! Before it is too late and we find we've done nothing to protect our land, our homes, our health and OUR investments. It's time WE, the tax-payers and the people with common sense, stop buying the propaganda that wealthy corporations (or in First Wind's case, not so financially stable corporations, perhaps?) feed us. We need to resume control of the direction in which this state should go, and look out for each other and our future. If science and economics say "NO!", then what are we waiting for? Please, make a stand and take back your power.
Industrial Wind is a terrible mistake, and the only "investment" is that we are spending OUR money and sacrificing OUR mountains and quality of place and quality of life to make wind industry executives wealthy. When our 'investment capital' stops coming their way, they will be gone-- moving on to greener pastures. And we will be left with hundreds of massive rusting relics to remind us of our folly. See http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/wind_energys_ghosts_1.html for an example of one state which had to learn the hard way. Let's learn from their mistakes. Let's be proactive. Let's be brave. And let's make IW PROVE what they say, rather than swallowing every line they feed us. There are many more financially sound ways in which to invest our tax dollars and make our environment healthier. Let's make Maine a state that leads in COMMON SENSE. All other benefits will follow.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease, a native Mainer and a proud NIMBY. Not In Maine's Back Yard!
Lexington Twp., Maine
It was uplifting to see so many residents turn out at the Dixfield forum last night. Hard work and a desire to educate the People of Maine is truly making a difference, and we are lucky to have people like Dan McKay and organizations like the Friends of Maine's Mountains and the Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power helping to accomplish that goal. I urge anyone with questions about the true impacts of (and the real push behind) industrial wind to take every opportunity to get informed. There is a world of information available from unbiased experts, and many good folks prepared to help Mainers find it.
By Karen Pease, unverified — Tue, 08/17/2010 - 00:05
“It's all about that view,” Baldacci said, staring out over the tops of trees at Mooselookmeguntic Lake and the Bemis Mountain Range.
“That view says 'Maine,'" Baldacci said. "It gives people an inspiration and it's going to be that way forever.”
But... it's NOT going to be that way forever. Not if Governor Baldacci has his way. The governor is directly responsible for LD2283, the "Expedited Wind Permitting Law" which removed the public's right to object to a wind turbine development based on its scenic impact.
It is unconscionable that our administration has sold our mountaintops to the wind industry, which had a direct hand in writing this misguided law. One example of how a wind developer contributed to the fashioning of this law can be found at: http://highlandmts.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/comments_rob_gardiner_...
These two documents tell a story that few Mainers are aware of. And that is only the tip of the iceberg...
Governor Baldacci is selective in what bit of view says "Maine". When he wants money for a scenic turn-out, then the view from there of Mooselook and beyond is priceless, and has value--not only in its beauty, but in its economic draw. But if he wants money from industrial wind (or 'energy'... the field in which he hopes to work once his term is up in January) then the view of mile upon mile upon mile of 400 foot tall turbines and mile after mile after mile of high voltage transmission corridors must also say "Maine".
Governor Baldacci needs to stop being so selective and make up his mind. Or better yet, since he's proven over and over again to the people of this state that he does not have the desire to put that mind to work for the betterment of the citizens and the natural resources of Maine, he should resign now. Please, sir. Do us a favor. Resign... while this is still, "Maine... the way life SHOULD be".
I don't understand why First Wind was given a soap box at a meeting between Rumford's selectmen and its planning board. And I certainly don't comprehend why the town's selectmen are not TRUSTING in that board-- which was charged with drafting a protective ordinance for the citizens of Rumford.
Anything drawn to protect residents and tax-payers is bound to be labeled 'anit-wind' or 'anti-business'-- especially by Industrial Wind execs and Big Business. It is hard for town governors to see past the promised, short term financial benefits promised by wind developers-- especially when times are so hard. But I encourage Rumford selectmen and anyone truly interested in learning the facts about industrial wind to contact me. I can put you in touch with experts from around the world who are unbiased-- with no stake in the game. No matter your question, they can answer it. Please heed the advice of the people with whom you charged to find the common-sense answers. Please do not believe a biased source such as a Wind executive, when you are looking for facts. They have millions of dollars at stake, and are versed in giving standard arguments designed to sway the public. There are some things worth keeping, no matter the short-term gain. Quality of life, quality of place, health, money... these are all up for grabs, if Rumford kow-tows to Big Wind.
Aw, doc. You're doing it again. Do you have any idea how many people ask, "Why doesn't Dr. Jennings get it? Why won't he LISTEN to people... to PATIENTS? " That' sir, is the sign of a true doctor, a good doctor. A doctor who adheres to his oath. He listens to the complaints of the people he's sworn to try to heal and nurture.
Surely, you can not reasonably ignore the many, many people who have legitimate complaints? Have you ever actually SPOKEN to any of them? If you are TRULY interested in being a friend and a doctor, please contact me. I can put you in direct contact with many people whose health is being adversely affected by industrial wind. No human being could listen and not be moved... not be concerned. No matter how often you say it isn't so, the facts don't change. You do the people of Maine a disservice by using your degree to try to sound like an expert in the area of industrial wind and its associated health risks without first treating the patients affected. We are inclined to believe the words of a man with an MD after his name. Please do not take advantage of the PEOPLE by speaking on this topic until you have interviewed a host of individuals who are suffering from maladies associated with industrial wind turbines.
You did your best to disrupt the forum I spoke at in Brunswick. I allowed you to have your say, even though a true gentleman would have gone to the trouble to arrange his OWN forum rather than try to take over one which was put together by hard-working activists who BELIEVE what they are doing-- who BELIEVE they are right. Because, you see... we listen to the experts... those who are unbiased and have nothing to gain (and often, much to lose) by speaking out and sharing the FACTS they have discovered. Your 'silver buckshot' reference, sadly, makes me wonder if you have a stake in Angus King's projects, as that is one of his standard tag lines when trying to sell his product. I hope that's not the case. I hope it is simply that you are too set in your ways, or too stubborn to listen to opposing views and give them credence... For a stubborn man can relent, and will gain the respect of his peers by admitting he was wrong. Some of our legislators have done that very thing.
You belittle your fellow citizens who have spent months researching industrial wind by pretending to know what our motivations are. While scenic impact in this beautiful mountainous region is certainly an important factor to take into account, due to the potential economic fall-out and Mainers' hard-sought 'quality of place', the 'view' is simply NOT the issue of paramount importance to many of us. If it was proven to you that IW was NOT economically feasible, if we could show you research done by scientists and physicists that shows IW does NOT reduce dependence on fossil fuels or reduce carbon emissions-- would you then begin to question the intelligence of destroying our high terrain and fragile ecosystems? If we could show you that property values in the vicinity of IW plummet-- sometimes as much as 40% or more, would that convince you to stop touting Big WInd as 'silver buckshot'? Seriously, sir... we have access to FACTS-- facts that the people of Maine deserve to know. If you are a caring man and professional, surely you will avail yourself of the resources we can provide to you. Surely you can then put your title of 'doctor' to its best possible use, and begin to help heal the wounds this misguided plan has created across this wonderful state.
I urge you not to be stubborn-- not to be too set in your ways to consider information from sources other than the wind industry. They have millions of dollars at stake-- they are biased and have a huge conflict of interest. Please give heed to those who are selflessly trying to educate a public which has been misled and taken advantage of. Simply tell me what specific topics you would like to learn more about, and I will put you in touch with experts and reference materials. You will grow in the estimation of many if you keep an open mind and disseminate the facts rather than the Industry's propaganda. I look forward to working with you on this issue, if you so desire. I am not an expert, and have no title with which to garner respect. But I am an American and a Mainer who is committed to taking care of my native state and those who call it 'home'
Respectfully Submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME
By Karen Pease, unverified — Wed, 08/04/2010 - 18:19
It breaks my heart to see small towns divided by Big Money. Because property tax-payers are struggling, any promised 'relief' sounds too good to be true. That's because it is.
Carthage residents are at a disadvantage. They are without a comprehensive plan or the ordinances designed to protect its citizens from questionable development, or from unscrupulous developers.
I attended the most recent meeting that Carthage held with Patriot Renewables, and I was amazed to see how many questions the industrial wind company dodged. They constantly used excuses like "That's privileged infomation" or--even more ridiculous-- they'd not give ANY answer to the hard questions. They'd simply frown, turn away, and say "Next question!"
If I was a resident of Carthage, I would want solid answers. I would REQUIRE them. And if I was a developer who truly BELIEVED the bill of goods I was selling, I would proudly shout out the answers to the folks I was attempting to make a sale to. Carthage residents believe industrial wind will be a boon to them. But Carthage residents should ask their neighbors (in towns which are already experiencing the results of IW's false promises) exactly what might be in store for them. Have all the promises made to THEM come true? And what negative impacts resulted from IW's intrusion into their peaceful villages? I hope they will not let the promise of instant and short-term cash convince them that any development is good, especially when it has been proven to be a misguided and expensive proposal. Industrial wind is not a panacea. It is a scam to put government subsidies (tax-payer dollars-- yours and mine) in the pockets of a few IW developers . The benefits to Carthage are but a drop in the bucket, and the bucket has a hole.
Please look out for your neighbors. Please do not let promises of economic development, road contracts and cheap taxes keep you from demanding the answers to hard questions. Our citizens-- our neighbors-- are natural resources, too. Let's be good stewards and take care of each other.
Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME (for answers to questions and to find great resources, please check out www.highlandmts.org)
It is very unfortunate that Earth First chose to demonstrate the way they did. I assume their purpose was to get publicity for the causes that are dear to them, but the publicity generated was mostly negative, as evidenced by the opinion of the SJ editorial board.
When such things happen, there is an unwarranted backlash against people and groups who are working hard to affect change through legal avenues and by old-fashioned 'hard work'. Other concerned citizens who are active in promoting the environmental health and economy of this region are here to stay, and have to suffer from the poor image generated by more 'extremist' groups. I applaud First Earth's courage and conviction, but I believe that common sense and a reasoned plan combined with long-term goals would have been a more valuable legacy to leave for the folks in northern Franklin County.
I have nothing but the greatest respect and love for Jay Wyman. He has been a friend of mine for more than two decades, and we were co-workers on a rescue service in the early 90's. One of the things I love about living in Maine is our ability to disagree on issues while remaining friends. I'm not part of an 'environmental' group, which is what Jay references in his guest column, but I AM a member of the Friends of the Highland Mountains; a group of diverse citizens who have come together to oppose the wind turbine development proposed for Highland's five mountains.
While I am not an 'environmentalist', I do try to do my part to live responsibly. I try to take care of our natural resources, which give us so much bounty. And until I took the time to research the topic of mountaintop industrial wind, I was a proponent of 'wind'. I believed what the government and the wind industry told us: I thought wind energy was good for the environment... that we would be making great strides towards slowing climate change and stopping global warming if we used electricity harnessed from the wind. And for the record... while I believe that the Highland Mountains are a very poor choice for wind development due to its proximity to the Bigelow Preserve and the Appalachian Trail-- one of the few remaining places in the eastern Unites States where it's possible to have a 'wilderness' experience-- I personally do not oppose mountaintop industrial wind in general because of its scenic impact. If these generating plants did what they are purported to do, I would not oppose them due to visual impact. But that negative visual impact has many far-reaching consequences, and one of those is tied to Maine's economy, which is driven by tourist dollars. While I might swallow hard but adapt to the site of 400-500 foot tall turbines peppered across 350 miles of Maine's ridges, I don't believe that tourists looking to find a pristine wilderness would do the same. If we have nothing special to offer them, I believe many will choose to stay home or go elsewhere for their vacations.
I oppose MIW for many, many more important reasons than the change they would make in the view, however. I didn't become active in the opposition of the Highland project without giving it serious consideration. I knew this battle would be time consumming and that it would have me doing things that I would never, in other circumstances, be doing. I prefer a quiet life, and I abhor controversy. But there come times in each of our lives when we have to stand up and do what we believe is right... or when we must stand up to prevent something we believe to be wrong. I believe the plan to place wind turbines along Maine's mountain ridges is misguided. I believe it is detrimental to our environment and our economy. I believe many Mainers are having their health negatively affected by the high, low and ultra-low frequency noise these engines produce. I think our wildlife is and will be impacted by that same noise, which is so foreign to our quiet forests... and which does not come and go like other man-made intrusions into their habitat, such as skidders and log trucks. As long as the wind blows, that invasive noise is unnatural and pervasive. Instinct tells me that, but I would not publicly state my thoughts if scientists and biologists with nothing to gain and much to lose weren't saying the same things and raising the same questions. As well, my experience in the business world might lead me to believe that MIW would be bad for our tourist economy and our real estate values, but I wouldn't be so bold as to venture that opinion if experts in the field weren't saying exactly that. Those same economists are saying that wind energy will never be competitive... that we will pay many times the price for wind as we would pay for renewable hydropower-- something we could purchase from Quebec if we needed it and if we desired to electrify our homes with a power source that was not fossil-fuel dependent.
The fact is, Maine already exports power. We don't need what these wind tubines will produce. And yet, it will be our mountains which are altered and our high terrain ecosystems which are injured and our wildlife which is affected, and our residents who can be harmed if the Governor's plan moves forward. In addition, it is our money which will be paying the lion's share of the cost for these developments, in the form of government subsidies and and tax production credits. Yes, there is money flowing into the 'host' communities, which the developers and the state call 'tangible benefits'. Of course there is, for without it, the government and the industry know that Mainers would not permit these developments. Unfortunately, we all have a price. Every one of us. And the developers are working to discover just what price our mountains and our way of life are worth. Because we are a poor state, on the whole, they know that we citizens are desperate for relief. Many of us can barely make ends meet, so when someone comes along and offers the promise of that needed relief, it is very tempting for us to allow ourselves to believe their glossed-over version of the benefits of their projects and take what they hand out. The know for a fact that wind turbines don't reduce carbon emissions... that's why we are hearing very little about their 'green' factor these days. They know that even though they tout their wind generating capacity, these turbines produce only 10-30% of that capacity... and that's why they say their actual production numbers are 'confidential'. If they did what they are purported, the developers would be shouting those numbers from the very mountaintops they are altering.
If we took those same billions of dollars and invested them in conserving power rather than generating more, our economy would flourish, and for much longer than the temporary construction phases of these projects. Homes could be insulated, windows replaced, heating systems upgraded and made more efficient. Building, plumbing and electrical contractors could be put to work and kept busy, year-round. We would be reducing our greenhouse gasses. The difference would be... no 'tangible benefits'. No big, temporary infusion of money for the town coffers or to the civic groups which are the current beneficiaries of the wind companies. But we would have something else, instead. We would have wild mountains, and a viable workforce, and less pollution, and less controversy and maybe even... more pride. We'd REALLY be doing the responsible thing, in my opinion. You may disagree, and I do respect your own opinion. (But I'd like to reserve the right to try to change it!)
Jay, this is about so much more than what it appears to be, on the surface. I know that as a selectman, you are trying to look out for the best interests of your town, and I laud you for that. But please remember this... not every business in Stratton agrees with your assessment. You might be surprised to discover that some of them are appalled to find that they believed Trans-Canada and 'sold out'. Some of them don't believe it behooves them to say that publicly... and how sad is that? In America, we aren't supposed to be worried about what we say publicly. But we sometimes are. I know I am. For better or worse, I choose to speak my mind, anyway, even when I am on the side opposite those with all the money, power and influence.
I invite you and any others who are interested to take advantage of some of the many resources which are out there regarding the issue of mountaintop industrial wind. It is an issue that is gaining attention world-wide, as many of our friends in other states and countries learn the facts behind the hype and propaganda, too. I have promised to do my best to deal in facts... science and economics tell the story better than I can. I hope you'll avail yourself of the knowledge of experts other than those who are selling a product and mitigating their damage with 'tangible benefits'.
It is a common misconception which you have, CommonSense, but I am pleased to see that you are getting involved in the dialogue regarding moutaintop industrial wind. Mr. Carter freely admits that he once supported the concept of wind power. Most Mainers did and still do. But the concept and the realities are very, very different. Most people believe that because the wind blows free and doesn't have the negative issues of radioactive waste like nuclear, or the pollution and supply issues like fossil fuel, that it must be good... and "green". And our government and industrial wind developers use that misconception to their advantage, selling their misguided energy plan to an unquestioning public.
If industrial wind power actually DID what the developers say it does, and if its positives-- to the environment, the economy, the energy situation-- outweighed its negatives, we would ALL support it. We would be foolish not to. But once we took the time to research the issue and learn the FACTS-- not the hype or innuendo and not the feel-ggod tag lines that King and other developers throw out-- we realized that there is, in all honesty, very little that's redeemable about mountaintoip industrial wind in Maine. From the state's official wind maps, to the biologists, to the economists to the scientists...they all say the same thing. Those with nothing to gain and much to lose are stepping forward and telling us that mountaintop industrial wind DOES NOT DO what the industry says it will do. And the numbers they consistently quote are based on RATED capacity, not actual production. The two are far, far removed from one another. No, CommonSense... once Mainers began to do research into this topic, the cover was blown off the wind energy plan. It is a subsidized feel-good plan to create unreliable and intermittent power which Maine doesn't need and which will not stay in this state. It will be many times more expensive than the hydro power we could purchase from Canada-- if we needed it, which we don't. It will have long-lasting environmental and economic impacts.. from tourism to real estate values to wildlife to erosion and water quality issues. The list is long. So please, don't discount citizens' concerns without knowing the facts. It takes a brave man to admit when he is wrong, and I've seen many friends change their stances on wind energy once they learned the facts... and admit that where they once supported the concept, they now vehemently oppose the realities of industrial wind. The truth is out there, and hundreds of Mainers are learning of it every week. I hope you'll take the time to have a serious look into the topic. And I'd be happy to provide you with resources to do exactly that. A good place to start is www.highlandmts.org. Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp. P.S. The Friends of the Highland Mountains are NOT against responsible wind generation, but on an individual or community-based level... where the turbines are smaller and have little or no 'footprint' or sound issues, and where the electricity generated is used by its hosts.
Aw, Ed. Respectfully, sir...you're going about this all wrong. I am a proponent of land-owner rights... but to a point. We ALL are. But because the effects of what we each do on our property sometimes reaches beyond those property borders, we have, as a society, implemented governing bodies to regulate--to some extent-- our land use practices. Just as I (in LURC territory) can't build a home above 25 feet high, or build near a stream, or paint my roof pink, so are industrial developments regulated. We do not have all-encompassing rights, because many things we do impact those other property owners and residents in the same vicinity. Our actions can affect-- not only our human neighbors, but those wild animals and native plants and ecosystems in the neighborhood, too.
I understand your point. We all feel the desperation of knowing we depend on foreign countries for a vital resource, and we have been inundated with warnings about global warming, too. But scientists with nothing to gain and much to lose by taking a stance are stepping forward and saying that there is a very good possibility that the environmental impacts of industrial wind may actually be detrimental to climate change, rather than having the positive effect we once thought. In fact, if you listen to IW developers as of late, you will see that they, themselves are getting much quieter about wind's 'greeness' when they tout their projects to the public. That's because we NIMBYs-- those of us who feel it is necessary to protect our natural resources (since those charged with the job are dropping the ball)--we NIMBY's are having some limited success in educating the public regarding the FACTS about mountaintop industrial wind. We're not fanatics. We're not looneys. And we're not selfish. We are normal human beings who have courage... courage to stand up and try to stop what we feel is a terribly misguided plan which could have long-term consequences for short-term and negligible gain. I hope you will keep an open mind. And don't feel like a hypocrite... you are honestly expressing your opinion. We're both lucky to live in a country where we can (and should) do exactly that. Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/
Hi Candiceanne. I hear your pique, and I understand it. However, I believe if you think about what the Carthage vote is for, you'll give the townsfolk who are pushing for a moratorium some understanding. A moratorium is not a NO vote. It is simply a means of protecting the town and its people. Small towns often don't have planning boards, and their comprehensive plans might not be all that comprehensive. When the state mandated those 20 years ago, industrial wind developments didn't exist in Maine. So, now we are playing catch-up. There are many, many facets to IW, and most Mainers do not know the full scope of their impact, nor are they educated on the 'greeness' or the economics of these developments. It is simply a case of being proactive to institute a moratorium, so that all residents (and property tax payers in general) can have some input. Home rule is a GOOD thing, and the more people who stand up to make their voices heard, the more we participate in this free society which we are so proud to be a part of. Breathing room... it's a good thing! For more factual information on IW, please visit www.highlandmts.org. From there, you can find many helpful links. Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp. http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/
Mr. Lee, I commend you for rising to the defense of your friend, Kurt Adams. No one wants to believe that a friend can do wrong, or be bought, or lose their ethics. I cherish my friendships, and count myself a pretty good judge of people... so I understand your desire to stand up for a man whom you have trusted. In all honesty, I hope your personal judgement is right. However, it's a sad fact of life that we ALL have our price. It may not be money; I hope that, more often than not, it isn't. But there is always something that we human beings will compromise our principles for; be it our family's welfare, our longevity... something. If we feel threatened in some way-- whether financially, physically, or emotionally, we do what comes instinctively... and that is: Whatever we have to, to survive. I don't know if Mr. Adams is guilty of compromising his principles, or not. I only know that things look pretty fishy. It was up to him to avoid all APPEARANCES of questionable behavior, and not just the questionable behavior, itself. And given the Wind Industry's track record, it certainly seems like the 'fix' was too easy... all they did was file an amended report, and voila! Their 'word' about what happened was accepted. That wouldn't have worked in my house. Not after the fact, not ONLY when there was a huge public outcry! We all make mistakes, but if they are truly innocent mistakes, we fix them IMMEDIATELY, once we discover them. We don't wait until we are caught in the headlights of scandal. I hope you are right about your friend. But sometimes, even the best of friends make mistakes.
I was at Patriot Renewable's presentation last night in Carthage. I was not surprised by the fact that the developer dodged each and every pointed question, and I was distressed that more residents did not insist they answer their simple queries. Some of the questions which were side-stepped were these: When Andy admitted that one close neighbor to the proposed development had signed an 'easement', he was asked if that included a confidentiality clause. Would that person who signed it be prohibited from opposing the development, or complaining about any negative impacts, should they become apparent? I'm sorry, that's confidential. Next question. How much of the granite and ledge atop the mountain will be blasted away? It's a 'move and fill'. Nothing will leave the mountain. How much of the project is subsidized? There's a 2 cent per kwh tax production credit. (Period... no mention of tax-payer stimulus funds or other subsidy dollars.) When asked how they KNEW that noise wouldn't bother anyone in the valleys and surrounding communities? There are computer models which tell us. (Aren't they the same developers who put the turbines in Freedom? Those folks could testify as to how good those 'models' are.) When asked if the developer would provide free electricity: We can't. That comes from CMP. When asked how much power their turbines are currently producing: That's confidential. Why is is confidential, if you want people to believe these achieve what they are touted as achieving... Next question, please. ........... In small towns across Maine, residents are hurting from high tax bills. The promise of huge amounts of money from developers is like a life-line, and many aren't able to see the forest for the trees. But the tax benefits are fleeting, and in other towns they have rarely, if ever, approximated their first blush promise. I believe one Freedom resident told me his taxes actually went UP the very first year after PR put their project online........ At one point a resident complained that there were outsiders in the audience with an 'agenda', and I wish now that I'd responded. If any of us from other towns had an 'agenda', it was to try to help and protect the residents of Carthage. We don't want to influence votes, we want to offer our resources and experence, so that each resident votes from a position of knowledge and strength. We were invited because we've been through this before, and we want to help bring the facts to the people of Maine. I wish the people of Carthage well when they vote next week. Remember that a moratorium is not a 'no'... it is a 'please give us breathing room so that we can do what's best for our town, our natural resources, and ALL our citizens.' Who can argue with that? Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Township
The people of Carthage have an incredible opportunity to be the designers of their own destiny. They have the chance to do what's right and what's intelligent, rather than what is forced on them by a greedy developer or a misguided administration. People living in unorganized territories in the Expedited Pemritting Area do not have that right and that privilege, so I urge you to take advantage of this wonderful opportunity and enact a moratorium. Take that breathing space a moratorium will aloow, and research the FACTS about industrial wind. Don't listen to rhetoric, don't believe what the developer says... everyone is clouded by their own desires and potential gains. Research the facts. Listen to the scientists and the economics experts... those who have no stake in Industrial Wind. And THEN... then do what common sense and integrity and a sense of stewardship tell you to do. This is a great opportunity to behave as an American citizen, by being involved and having a 'say'. Let your voices be heard. I wish you the best of luck. Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/ or www.highlandmts.org
"One who loves and supports his country or its interests". That's the definition of 'patriot'.
Industrial wind turbines are not the way to go if one is dedicated to doing what is in the best interests of one's country. In the beginning, we all thought that wind power was going to save us... that it was 'green' and would reduce carbon emissions and affect climate change. But with knowledge comes power; and the people of Maine are becoming educated on the realities of "Big Wind". We are also regaining our strength and our power, as we stand together to do the right thing. The patriotic thing. The harmful environmental and economic impacts created by grid-scale industrial wind on our mountains far outweigh the paltry benefits. Only a few with financial stakes in these developments are now promoting these megaliths. All others who learn the facts are coming out in opposition.
I'm very proud to be an American and a Mainer. I saw first-hand what we, the 'little guys', stand for-- and what we can DO-- when I was at the Big Wind Regatta on Saturday night in Freeport. I'm proud of the residents of Carthage for being proactive and taking a stand. You are true patriots. I've called us many things over the past year: patriots, Nimbys, Wind Warriors, Mountain Defenders... whatever label suits, you are doing what Americans are SUPPOSED to do.. you are taking charge of your own destiny! Good for you!! Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., Me http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/ or www.highlandmts.org
After attending the Trans-Canada/Sisk Mountain public and technical hearings, it was brought home to me just how much corruption we have allowed to bloom and grow in this state and in this country. State sanctioned bribery-- its legal term "tangible benefits"-- was not only admitted to, but it was the focal point of a Power Point slide show. So-called environmental agencies publicly admitted to being open to "mitigation"... another state approved manner of paying off those who might stand in the way of what our government wants. And currently, what the government wants is the folly of industrial wind.
Steve, thank you for speaking up. Thank you for being a voice of reason in Franklin County. The Land Use Regulation Commission will find cause to deny Trans-Canada's permit within the state laws and guidelines they are charged with applying. We've given them a hard task, but there are myriad issues which the commissioners can hang their hats on. We've got to have faith that these folks who are sworn to protect our natural resources will come through for us. As you have, time and again.
Dr. Jennings, I don't know what your motivation is in writing this article, but I wonder... do you listen to your patients when they explain their symptoms to you? If you can not immediately find a cause for their pain or discomfort, do you dismiss their claims that something is wrong?
Dr. Jennings, have you interviewed people living in the shadow of Big Wind?
I have spoken with our fellow Mainers in Mars Hill, Vinal Haven and Freedom. I believe them when they tell me how these massive machines affect them. The low and ultra low frequency pulsing and the jet whine of the nacelles are more than just an irritating sound, to them. It is an invasive and unceasing presence in their body... one that causes sleeplessness, dischord, anxiety... and many other symptoms.
I cannot casually dismiss such testimony. And I am thankful that there are people like Monique Aniel who do care enough to put themselves and their reputations on the line in order to affect change. Please take the time to listen... really LISTEN.. to our neighbors who are suffering. Remember your oath. You are sworn to it for a reason.
That's right. It's time for the citizens of Maine to recognize that being a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) is a GOOD thing. No... it's a GREAT thing! If we Mainers do not stand up and defend our quality of life and quality of place... if we do not protect the natural resources of which we are stewards, then who will? NIMBYs across this state are refusing to 'fly under the radar'...we take our jobs seriously. When we extensively research an issue and discover that it is NOT economically feasible, NOT environmentally friendly, that it is NOT going to significantly reduce carbon emissions (as it is purported to do), and that industrial wind developers are NOT being forthright about the negative impacts or forthcoming with the scientific data needed to make responsible and intelligent decisions, then heck, YES! Of course we're going to stand up, put our feet down, raise our voices and say "NO!"
It's all about the facts. NIMBYs are not about rhetoric or propaganda. Unlike industrial wind developers, we don't give Mainers pat phrases or standard tag lines about 'silver bullets or silver buckshot' or about industrial wind saving American lives. No quips which state that turbine noise will not be a problem beyond a half mile or so, and we won't point the way to a photo of a happy cow standing under a wind turbine and state that these developments on our peaks will not affect the wildlife... See, we've done-- and are still doing-- our homework. We WANTED to believe that wind power would do what it was purported to do. We care about this land and its inhabitants. And it is exactly for that reason that we are proudly wearing the label of "NIMBY" and refusing to fly under the radar.
Take away the money and the developers will blow away on the breeze. That money is mine, and yours, and my 94 year old grandmother's and my 27 year old son's. I don't know about anyone else, but I was not consulted prior to my government deciding that a disastrous plant to install 350 miles of wind turbines on our mountaintops was the best use of those hard-earned dollars. The wind is intermittent. The power generated can not be stored. Additionally, the power generated will not be kept in the state of Maine, for we do not need it. We are already an exporter of power, and should we need more, there is an abundance of renewable and affordable hydro power available from our neighbors in Canada. Science and economics. Both prove this plan is not feasible and should not be implemented.
So... hype and rhetoric aside, I choose to listen to the facts. And when my government does not do the same, but proceeds with a plan that is reckless and dreadfully expensive, I will stand up and, within the bounds of what is legal and ethical, do my utmost to stop it.
Mr. Powell, I thank you for standing up and stating the obvious... the TRUTH. As a worker in the industry, you are one of very few to come forward and state the realities of Industrial Wind.
Once Mainers have received the facts about the governor's and the wind industry's plan to develop Maine's mountain summits, they will stand together and put a stop to this disastrous scheme. You are right. If tax-payer monies-- those things labeled 'stimulus funds' and 'government subsidies'-- were not available in the billions of dollars to fund these projects, I am positive that we would not hear another word about how 'green' wind turbines are. We'd hear nothing of how they will stop foreign wars and bring American soldiers home. Nary a word would be spoken about silver bullets or silver buckshot, or how one small, 48 turbine development will power the city of Portland. Portland, and the rest of our state, already has its power supply. If more is needed, we can purchase renewable hydro-power from our good neighbors in Canada at a fraction of what it would cost us to purchase the Maine Wind power back from the New England grid.
Thank you for standing up and doing what is right. Thanks for caring about the truth. There is a multitude of people like me--NIMBYs proud and free--who are standing there beside you... proud of protecting our home turf, free to voice our objections, and determined to put an end to this scam. If the good out-weighed the bad, things would be different. But the facts show the opposite. Industrial wind on Maine's mountains is a foolhardy plan... and we Mainers aren't fools.
You're a brave man, Mr. Powell. Welcome to the club.
It's obvious that the wind industry is getting nervous, and well they should. The public is slowly but surely becoming educated on the realities of industrial wind. With knowedge comes power... and the industry does NOT want the citizens of this state to retain or regain that power which was granted us when this country was founded. If we assert our rights and say 'No!', then their multi-million dollar 'windfall' blows away on the breeze.
Mr. Rooks thinks Maine should 'lead the way'. Well, sir, there is 'leadership', and there is 'going off half-cocked'. Being a leader doesn't always mean one is FIRST. A good leader is cautious, reasoned, and listens to the words of his advisors. An exemplary leader learns from his mistakes and does not repeat them. Just because a leader CAN storm a fort, doesn't always mean that he should.
We are lucky. We have the experiences of many other countries which we can learn from. When others who have been experimenting with industrial wind for two decades finally say, 'Enough! No more wind! No more government subsidies! It isn't working, and until we can come up with a plan that PROVES it will, we aren't investing more money, aren't sacrificing more land, will not disrupt the lives of animals and people any longer!' Enter... many of our European friends.
We can learn from their experiences, and we SHOULD. We simply must not allow the government and the wind industry to push forward with their plans to desecrate more than 300 miles of Maine's mountaintops for a power source that is unreliable and intermittent, and which Maine does not need. We must not allow the raping of our natural resources for a power source that we can not store, and which we do not currently have the capacity to transmit. The recent approval of CMP's new infrastructure upgrade has 'wind' written all over it. How many Mainers will now have those dangerous high voltage lines in their backyards? We are already an energy exporter. Why must we be the ones to sacrifice for another region's electric needs?
If ever there was a time to be a NIMBY... if ever there was a time to boldly stand up and say 'No!', this is it. At the very best, this scheme has a life-span of 20-25 years. The impacts to Mainers and to this land will be long-lasting. Maybe permanent. Mr. Rooks attempts to show that we who oppose mountaintop industrial wind are spoilsports, or selfish, or unreasonable. But what are we, really? We're brave. Full of common sense. Tired of being scammed and taken advatage of. Tired of being lied to and taken for fools.
When Mr. Rooks and his wind industry friends can PROVE that the benefits of industrial wind outweigh the negative impacts, then perhaps I'll give his words credence. But we don't need any more of his brand of legislation. We've got enough of that, already. If he wants to worry about laws, he ought ot take a look at some of the ones on the books concerning 'conflict of interest'. There are many in this Big Wind game who are abusing those laws to the maximum extent.
For links to factual information about industrial wind, please visit www.highlandmts.org.
Recent Comments
Interesting timing...
On the same day Angus King expresses interest in running for Senator Snowe's seat, there is also an article about this 'free' electricity he's offering to the residents (not all tax payers, but voting residents) of Roxbury. It's only the cost of the first 500 kwh, but to some people, that will sound like a windfall. What will it amount to? $20.00 a month?
How unfortunate that due to Angus King's need for upgraded transmissions lines to get his wind power to the New England grid, ALL CMP rate payers must pay more in transmission costs. Every one of us, for years to come....
What Are Canton Selectmen Afraid Of?
Knowing Maine citizens as I do—I don’t think the people of Canton will stand for this ‘rule’.
Yes, executive session is acceptable when there is a personnel issue to discuss. But to have to request (in advance and in writing—are you kidding me?) permission to speak at a selectmen’s meeting where town business is being conducted is ludicrous. Such tactics are not something people in a free country will tolerate.
The town board should welcome having the townspeople speak their minds and speak freely. Emotion is okay. Passion should be welcomed! If Canton residents are speaking their minds, you should encourage them, not attempt to squelch or censor or prevent them. Thank goodness there are still people in this country who give a damn about something!
If Canton's leaders are doing what they were elected to do, they don't need to worry about residents exercizing free speech. Do Canton citizens feel they are being respected and listened to? Perhaps citizens should speak MORE, and selectmen should practice LISTENING. I'm sure the Board is comprised of good men and women who may just be inexperienced in dealing with conflict. Trying to avoid it by creating this type of restriction will (and SHOULD) have the opposite effect.
I hope the Canton Board will rethink its decision.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Distorting and manipulating the facts…
To quote Jeremy Payne:
“I applaud the Sun Journal editorial (Feb. 5) for acknowledging the benefits of the $1 billion investment made by wind power development in Maine during the past five years.”
“As a supporter and spokesman for the wind community, I work hard to ensure that the facts I use are solid and backed up by data and analysis. There is too much to lose if even one point is called into question. Opponents, on the other hand, seem emboldened by the power of creating doubt and fear by any means necessary.”
I’ve got to give Mr. Payne credit. He’s got a lot of brass. Even wind developer Angus King is recorded as publicly admitting that the standard and oft-quoted statistic of “$1 billion investment in Maine” is NOT completely factual. It’s a script, for sure, because Mr. King still mentions the 1 billion dollars; knowing the power of suggestion, he still puts that grandiose figure in the minds of his audience--then he chuckles sheepishly and goes on to say that he has to be honest and disclose that the ACTUAL dollar figure funneling into Maine is approximately $380 million, instead. And much of that money has been SPENT here, but it is not what most business people would call an “investment”, with long-term benefits and lucrative returns. And of course, even then there is no mention of how much of the $1 billion is tax-payer subsidized, either--rather than private investment funds. (Think... approx. 2/3!)
Mr. Payne maligns those he calls “opponents”. While distorting the truth as he did in this letter to the editor, Mr. Payne insinuates that people whose opinions differ from his own are the ones twisting the facts. While there is no doubt that opponents of Maine’s current wind energy plan are passionate about this topic, that is not indication of the presence of false statements as much as it is indicative of the great frustration felt by citizens who have done their homework and discovered that the paltry benefits of wind can never outweigh the negative impacts; whether environmental, social, financial or health-related.
Opponents aren’t creating doubt. Opponents are attempting to educate their peers. Citizens aren’t the ones who are becoming fearful—they are the ones who are getting irate. They have sifted through the rhetoric and tag lines about how wind will save the planet from global warming, how it will increase our national security and bring our soldiers home, and how wind will ‘get us off foreign oil’. Many opponents were once strong supporters of wind development—until they had to confront the harsh reality regarding the scope and scale of mountaintop development and they began to see past the propaganda designed to gain support for the failed technology and economics of industrial wind. Like many other Mainers, they accepted the 'spin' that the wind industry produced--until they took a few moments to research the issue.
And THAT fact is what is making the wind industry and lobbyists like Mr. Payne ‘fearful’. They know their free ride and their domination of the topic of energy is coming to an end. That is a frightening prospect.
Mr. Payne doesn’t want wind opponents ‘emboldened’ because bold opponents speak up. Bold opponents educate others. Bold opponents don’t let themselves or their neighbors get steamrolled by corporate interests. Our anger at the process and our justified distrust of many wind proponents may make us more vocal than the wind industry would like–but...that’s too bad. As caring individuals, as stewards of our natural resources, and as Americans who believe we have the right to speak out and be heard, we will continue to hold the wind industry’s feet to fire. When they utter statements like “$1 billion investment in Maine”…we will demand to see the proof.
If they spoke the truth more often, they would have no reason to get antsy when “opponents” are “emboldened” to speak.
Finally, Mr. Payne states: "We are quite willing to talk with anyone who has legitimate questions and concerns about impacts..."
I'm curious as to who Mr. Payne considers "legitimate" for I have personally witnessed him snubbing those with the temerity to publicly state a differing opinion from his own. There are no obvious lines of communication open between Maine Renewable Energy Associates and the public--not unless that public tows the windustry's line.
That is unfortunate. This is a critical subject, and one that warrants open dialogue between trustworthy individuals.
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
SJ--Misinformed or misleading?
Newspaper editors have a lot of power. Readers very often back an editor’s opinion, believing that an editorial board knows the issues inside and out, so they MUST have their facts straight.
As we’ve seen over and over again on the topic of ‘wind’, this simply is not true. The SJ certainly SHOULD be able to separate the wheat from the chaff and they should give this issue the importance it deserves.
One example of a misleading statement in this op-ed: “In Maine, the wind power industry has invested $1 billion in recent years.”
Once the wind industry got caught out making that statement, even wind developer Angus King changed his story. The fact is that the wind power industry has SPENT $1billion. The fact is that a large percentage of that billion has gone overseas to countries like China, Denmark, Germany and Brazil, where the turbines’ parts and piece are manufactured. Add to that, the fact that—due to tax-payer subsidies like cash grants, Production Tax Credits, DOE loan guarantees, TIFs, accelerated depreciation, etc.—much of that ‘investment’ came from our pockets and our children’s pockets...and that “$1 billion investment” begins to be seen in a different light.
I don’t know what is worse; to believe that the SJ editors haven’t ever done any research or given this topic the serious attention to detail it warrants, or to think they are attempting to mislead readers and sway opinion by using the power of the press.
Money
This referendum initiative is about money. Money and wind.
Due to the fact that most people who are asked to sign the petition won't take the time to learn the realities of what would happen if the referendum were to pass, it's probably safe to assume that enough signatures will be gathered to put the question on the ballot. After all, the question sounds very benign. Few people would refuse to sign unless they were already engaged in or well-educated regarding the history of Maine's current energy plan. I do find it curious that they are down to the wire with just 10 days to go, and their goal hasn't been met, yet...
See, I believe in the Maine voter. And I believe they will look at this initiative with an open mind. Mainers are independent thinkers and we know that any time something is MANDATED, there is a real downside that deserves scrutiny.
The referendum's wording is designed to be ambiguous. Maine citizens are researching wind development and finding out that the negative impacts far outweigh its negligible benefits, but don't be fooled. Even though wind isn't singled out, rest assured that this is a referendum designed to benefit one sector--wind development. It is the only 'new' renewable poised and ready to be built in the massive numbers which would satisfy this mandate.
The members of Maine Citizens for Clean Energy are hiding their avarice behind a cloak of green. If Maine citizens wish to pay out of pocket to fund a few corporations selling a low-value product, then they will approve the ballot intiative. But I think we're smarter than that. I think we're beginning to see beyond the feel-good hype and the scare tactics straight to the heart of the matter. WE are handing over our rights to make decisions for ourselves, and are destroying a free market society whenever we pass laws which REQUIRE us to purchase an over-priced, under-producing product.
The wind lobby can spend their millions of dollars (MCCE's CPR shows they've invested over $200,000.00 in this initiative already) to push for this initiative, but I think it will be in vain. Mainers won't be hood-winked by this coalition anymore.
I'm pleased that we have a governor who won't be intimidated into making decisions designed to cost Maine residents and businesses more money unnecessarily.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
First Wind's Bubble
This story is important for so many reasons, one of which is that DEP (just this week!) approved First Wind's Oakfield wind project--if built, it will be the biggest in Maine, thus far.
One of the criteria a wind developer is supposed to meet before receiving a permit is proof of financial capacity. And yet, in the BDN article about DEP's permit approval, First Wind's Alec Jarvis said, "The project's financing is not yet assembled."
Huh?
It appears this company has a bit of a cash flow problem, and yet Maine regulatory agencies are approving their projects. I guess I'll go read the Oakfield permit and see what kind of decommissioning fund DEP required. It would be too bad to have the townspeople of Oakfield on the hook for a multi-million dollar bill if FW (or its Oakfield-specific subsidiary, Evergreen Wind LLC)goes belly up.
The wind energy plan needs some serious scrutiny. This recommendation from PUC staff is a great start and bringing common sense back to the table--and ethics, too. Unfortunately, the cynical side of me wonders what 'incentives' and 'tangible benefits' and 'mitigation' tactics will be put on the table for PUC's commissioners, prior to that Jan. 31st vote.
Thank goodness Ms. Schalit and Mr. Christie aren't afraid to ask some pointed questions and do some honest reporting.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Perhaps...
Perhaps wind developers Angus King and Rob Gardiner, whose new wind project in Roxbury is already the subject of news stories about NOISE, would willingly purchase a top-of-the-line sound meter for the DEP.
It's the least they can do.
Here is a small bit of what Angus King has told US about his proposed Highland Wind project. These are direct quotes. Does any of this sound familiar to the people of Roxbury?
"The third thing is--- how close are the neighbors? That's a big factor and one of the great things about the Highland site is that-- there are 2 camps....summer cottages on the side of one of the mountains that are about 1/2 mile from the nearest turbine. Other than those, NOBODY is within a mile or a mile and a half of the turbines,... except for those two camps, the closest people to Highland at 6,000 feet. The people at Mars Hill are 1,000 feet. That's the difference--- a huge difference! The issue about sound. It's just like a truck going by on 201. If they're 100 yards away, they're louder than hell. If they're a mile away-- you're not gonna hear them. That's how sound works. It's a question of distance. The simplest way to think of it that I've come up with... if someone builds a turbine today in Seattle, Washington, I think we'd agree that no one in Skowhegan would be bothered by it. If we put one right by where the basketball courts are-- you'd hear it. So that means the only question is-- what's the right distance between Seattle and the basketball courts? And the answer is, based on Mars Hill and wind projects around the world is-- about 1/2 mile. Depending upon the wind, topography.... 2-3,000 feet, you're not gonna hear them.
"And by the way, what you hear from these things.... somebody wrote in about "The roar of the turbines" Come on! There's no noise at all from the machine. The machinery, the gears and stuff are all enclosed in this sound-proof box. You could stand from here to that wall and not hear that.
"There's not a sound issue, there's not a health issue, there's not a bird issue, there's not a wildlife issue-- if you want to see the effects of wind turbines on wildlife... on animals... go to... google image...put in 'wind turbines cows' and you'll see hundreds of pictures of wind turbines and cows sitting around underneath them... completely unconcerned, doing whatever it is cows do..... No issues of wetlands.... we're not 'removing' anything-- we're MOVING...when you build a road, as I say, when you build roads, you cut out the high spots and fill in the low--we're moving alot of earth, but nothing's being taken away from the mountains..."
Did anyone video-record Mr. King and Mr. Gardiner as they made their sales pitches for Record Hill Wind? If so... hold them to their words.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Deja vu
This isn't a new story. It's a sad repetition of an ancient one.
Smooth-talking salesman comes to town with a miracle cure for what ails us...
Need cheaper taxes? They can do that!
Cheaper electricity? They've got that covered, too.
The 'tangible benefits', however, simply cannot mitigate that which has been lost... and what WILL BE lost in community after community if Maine citizens don't sit up and pay attention to common sense and economics and science.
Angus King and Rob Gardiner aren't out to save the planet--or even Roxbury. Their goal in life is not to 'get us off foreign oil' or 'bring American soldiers home'. The wind development in Roxbury was not a work of sacrifice on their part. Maine's 'foreign oil'?? It is imported from Canada and Mexico. American soldiers are not at risk from our friendly neighbors to the north and south.
Wind energy is a scam. It is hard to admit that--especially when I used to be in favor of it. But that was before I began to study the facts pertaining to this issue, and before I dealt with wind developers first-hand.
I encourage Roxbury residents to protest (loudly) the reduction in your quality of life. If you are lucky, you will not suffer the debilitating health effects of high and low frequency noises and infrasound. If you do, please give serious consideration to speaking out. For far too long, the wind lobby has bought off--or intimidated--its victims.
No more. We can't allow this to go on any longer.
For more information about how you can get involved, please contact me at roomtomove@tds.net.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Experts and such...for Bob
Hey, again, Bob!
Experts: Yep. I agree. Experts are a dime a dozen—and will usually say whatever they need to, in order to earn their dime.
And that’s why I urged you to do independent research. I don’t want you to believe me. I am a vocal opponent of Maine’s current wind energy plan. That may make me appear to be biased, even though I don’t stand to gain financially if wind developments are delayed or derailed. But neither should citizens look to the wind industry or its avid supporters for the facts. The wind lobby has an agenda—and that includes amassing as much money from tax-payer subsidies as possible and by taking advantage of government mandates which MAKE rate-payers purchase electricity which is more expensive-- simply because those “in authority” decided wind was benign, beneficial and ‘green’.
Sound: I can’t tell you, sir, how many times people have said the exact same things you have. Heck… I’ve been to several wind facilities and I could echo your words, myself. Many people say “I stood right under them and they didn’t bother me at all!” or “I was just a couple hundred feet from a wind turbine and it wasn’t that bad!” But there is far more to this story than most people think, and if you read the studies at those links I provided, you’ll begin to understand. Wind turbines of such massive size emit high and low frequency noises, as well as INFRASOUND. Infrasound is noise which the human ear cannot hear, but which the human body reacts to, nonetheless. I personally know people right here in Maine who have abandoned their dream homes because they were suffering very negative health effects once the nearby wind turbines came online. I know others who don’t have the option of moving, and have built bedrooms in their cellars where the whole family sleeps just to get away from the turbines’ adverse impacts. Please, if you have time, read the McPherson Study. Two experts who were contracted to study a wind turbine became unexpected victims. Their story is compelling. If you really want the scoop, contact the scientists who authored the study. You can contact them from the link provided. I can also connect you with the author of Wind Turbine Syndrome if your interest is sincere. These are real people with no stake in the game who have gone out on a limb to publish information which they know the wind industry will condemn. That is because they were convinced by data, rather than rhetoric, and truly believe what they say.
Bird and bats: Ooh, that’s a hot button topic. Many people are firm believers that wind developers under-report kills. Conventional wisdom says that scavengers dispose of many of the kills—especially during the night-time hours-- and other people swear that project owners hire people to remove carcasses on a regular basis. But we want proof and not hearsay, don’t we? We want real numbers. Something we can hang our hats on.
To start, I urge you to look up the Journal for Nature Conservation’s article titled “Adverse Impacts of Wind Power Generation on Collision Behaviour of Birds, and Anti-predator Behaviour of Squirrels” by Ryunosuke Kikuchi. I also suggest you contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) for their ‘take’ on this issue. This Agency is finally beginning to give the topic some serious attention, and they also encourage citizens to weigh in with their opinions.
As I said, though… don’t take my word for anything. There are hundreds of studies and reports available, and to make an unbiased and informed opinion, you must research this without depending on people who seem to be “pro” or “anti” industrial wind. I’m confident that if you look at this issue objectively, you will find that your perspective will change.
Best of luck to you.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
P.S. As far as “NIMBYism” being a problem, I don’t see it that way, at all. It is inherent in all living creatures to protect their homes and their families. Who else will look out for us, if we don’t protect our own loved ones, neighborhoods and communities? The government won’t protect us. Corporations surely won’t. No, I see NIMBY’s not as selfish elitists whose only concern is about a view (which is how we’ve been labeled)—but as individuals who’ve felt threatened to the point where they’ve finally taken the time to investigate the threat and decide upon an appropriate response or course of action. We aren’t backyard-specific, either. We say “Not In MAINE’S Back Yard”!
Naming one.. or more
Hi Bob,
I appreciate that you want facts. That's incredibly important in this debate. The following is taken from the official agreement made between Trans-Canada and the AMC, NRCM and Maine Audubon:
“As a result of extensive field studies and its ongoing consultation with Maine Audubon, NRCM, and the AMC, TransCanada has agreed to include the following additional measures to protect mountain and other environmental resources in the State:
“Contribute $500,000 toward the permanent conservation of approximately 750 acres of ecologically significant high elevation habitat and important backcountry recreation lands in Maine’s Mahoosuc Mountain range, as part of the Grafton Notch-Stowe Mountain acquisition.”
Other environmental groups have been compromised. Maine Audubon lists as "corporate sponsors" wind developers First Wind ($10,000.00) and Patriot Renewables ($1,000.00) as well as Reed & Reed, a major contractor which has been involved in the building of the current wind facilities in Maine. See this link for your proof: http://lynx.maineaudubon.org/sslpage.aspx?pid=372
Wind developers are famous for their 'sponsorship' and charitable donations. There is evidence of their payoffs and bribes in communities where wind developments have been built in Maine. The Arnold Trail, which runs adjacent to the Kibby wind project, was the catalyst for Trans-Canada 'donating' $100,000.00 to the Arnold Expedition Historical Society. That organization chose NOT to oppose T-C's Kibby project, and yet-- they were intervenors for the Highland Wind project. Why did they take a different position on that one?
Regarding wind turbines noise and the adverse health effects caused, please read "Wind Turbine Syndrome" by Dr. Nina Pierpont, or the report released by Carl V. Philips, PhD, or the recently released McPherson Study, conducted and written by two respected acousticians and noise control specialists here in Maine. That can be found at this link: http://randacoustics.com/wind-turbine-sound/the-bruce-mcpherson-ilfn-study/
What I find most disturbing is the fact that on October 19th First Wind hosted a fundraiser breakfast ($1000/plate) for Sen. Olympia Snowe at Charlie Palmer Steakhouse in Washington. When people like the Senator are poised to vote whether or not to extend cash grants and Production Tax Credits (the lifeblood of the wind industry) and a wind developer is throwing large amounts of money at them, Maine citizens are at a huge disadvantage. And I believe such donations compromise a candidate's ability to make common-sense and ethical decisions that are in the best interests of their constituents. I hope I'm wrong, but the fact of the matter is that the wind industry is 'courting' those who can help them, and participating in state-sanctioned bribery with those who can cause them problems.
THE FACTS ARE OUT THERE and easy to find, Bob. I agree that 'creepy' and 'ugly' are opinions, not facts (although I agree that they are 'ugly'!) but 'dangerous' may very well stand as fact. I encourage you to research electro-magnetic fields and the health impacts attributed to being in close proximity to high-voltage transmission lines.
The whole topic is really quite fascinating and I hope you'll dive in and do independent research, and then take an active role in this issue.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Wolves
Thank you Sally, for having the courage to stand up to--and question--powerful corporations and organizations.
I'm disappointed but not suprised that NRCM hasn't responded to your letters. Last year I asked Dylan Voorhees if we could meet and discuss mountaintop wind development and he adamantly declared "No!" He expressed the fact that he knew all he needed to know, and a frank exchange of ideas appeared to threaten him. I'd never witnessed a professional with such a closed mind or an unwilligness to admit that the position the NRCM had taken might be the wrong one. I don't know if egos are getting in the way of common sense within the NRCM, or if they simple can't see beyond the so-called 'green' cloak they've enveloped themselves in.
I continue to hold out hope that some within that organization will begin to stand up for the natural resources of Maine as well as its citizens before it is too late.
It is ironic that NRCM has thrown so much into its efforts to stop the Plum Creek development around Moosehead Lake. It's as if development in the form of homes and resorts is 'dirty' and unacceptable, but 'wind' is touted as 'clean'. Would NRCM oppose putting 2,000 or more 400-500 foot tall wind turbines all around the 'Jewell of Maine'? Their "Ballad of Moosehead Lake" scorns Plum Creek for wanting "money, money, money". Make no mistake-- money is what the wind energy plan is all about, too. The wind industry stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars--much of it from tax-payer subsidies and mandates--from building high-impact, low value wind developments.
I truly hope the NRCM will stop playing favorites. Wind won't save the planet, but it stands to destroy Maine as we know it. I urge NRCM leadership to respond to Sally and other citizens who are still looking to them for advocacy of our natural resources--both human and wild.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
No!
No, Ms. Cox.. these projects did NOT go online without a sound! Residents in both regions have been fighting these wind developments for years.
You do your readers a disservice by reporting only one (biased) side of this story. I urge you to contact locals in Roxbury and Woodstock for their true impressions. There is far more to this story than meets the eye.
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Home Rule
Dan, I agree that home rule is very important. While the state and federal governments have roles to play, over the years they have stepped far outside the boundaries set for them in the Constitution.
However, it is also important to be involved at the basic level in town government, too. As you saw in the SJ story last week, Patriot Renewables donated $10,000.00 to Eleven Circles, which is co-owned by the daughter-in-law of one of your selectmen. And PR wants to build a wind turbine project in your town. While I am sure Eleven Circles is a worthy organization, payments like that--made to a close family member of a person in authority in your town, raise alot of questions about ethics. PR has no business bribing its way into towns with donations to libraries, snowmobile clubs and fuel assistance funds--but the State of Maine has sanctioned such payoffs.
Shame on us. It's time we all took a more active role in the direction and future of our communities.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., ME
Considering hydro
It would be refreshing to see reporters interview private-sector energy and economics experts for their perspectives, instead of relying on the pro-wind players on the State’s Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee. The current policy of getting the opinions of the same people--huge supporters of the wind lobby--for these stories is guaranteed to keep the people of Maine from obtaining factual data and unbiased information.
Fitts and Bartlett were on former Governor Baldacci’s fabled Wind Power Task Force, the cabal responsible for pushing through the policies supporting the current expensive and unnecessary built-out of industrial wind facilities on our mountains. Hinck is married to the wind industry’s preeminent attorney, Juliet Browne, who (along with others in her firm) represents Trans-Canada, First Wind and Highland Wind. In my opinion, these gentlemen can no longer be considered objective.
In speaking to attempts to purchase Canadian hydro in the past, the article states “But those efforts hit a series of roadblocks, including concern from Maine's wind power lobby that Canada's cheap, heavily subsidized electricity would halt a state initiative to become a regional provider of renewable energy.”
So, Canada is subsidizing “cheap” hydro power. OUR our policy makers decided we would subsidize wind—the least reliable, most heavily subsidized (per megawatt) energy source there is.
What is ironic is that one of the strongest arguments used to kill legislation allowing Quebec Hydro to build a transmission corridor through Maine was that such unsightly transmission would have a negative impact on Maine’s fabled “Quality of Place”.
The Expedited Wind Permitting Law effectively removed “scenic impact” as an acceptable reason to oppose wind development, though--and we are now watching the construction of the 450 mile long MPRP, and the 39 mile long Wyman Station-to-Benton transmission upgrade. And this is just the beginning. Maine rate-payers are footing the bill for this transmission—even though the electricity is not needed in Maine and is destined for the New England grid.
“"Hydro-Quebec is interested in making profits," he (Fitts) said.”
Trust me on this. Wind developers are making profits. And you and I are picking up the tab at the federal, state, and sometimes even at the local levels (if TIFs are granted). Of course Hydro-Quebec is interested in making profits. Perhaps if Maine negotiates some less-expensive electricity, our own small and large businesses will be more likely to make profits, too.
Our elected State Representatives and Senators would do well to look out for the Maine people as a whole, and not for their own favored special interest groups. Rather than attempting to thwart this Administration’s attempts to negotiate a good deal for Maine with our neighbors to the north, they should be asking “What can we do to help?”
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Douglas Rooks: Writing without researching, first...
I was disturbed by the venom spewed by Mr. Rooks regarding the LePage Administration. Surely he doesn’t believe an economy which has been corrupted and broken for decades can be repaired in ten short months?
Rooks said: “(Y)ou’d expect LePage to embrace any and all private sector job prospects, but he hasn’t. He’s developed an odd and unsettling bias against “green” jobs, beginning with the wind turbines that have produced Maine’s one undeniable recent success story in industrial development.”
The corporate wind lobby couldn’t have said it better. Such rhetoric is straight from the wind industry’s playbook. These “private sector jobs” Rooks speaks of are supported by public money and only exist because of it. Our hard-earned dollars are being spent to subsidize an industry which admits it cannot stand on its own. “Success story”? By what standards? Every single wind development in Maine has faced serious opposition at the outset, or has become embroiled in litigation once the project went online.
Perhaps the Governor recognizes that it is not economically feasible to encourage an industry that cannot support itself and isn’t competitive. Perhaps he understands that lowering the cost of electricity is one of the most helpful initiatives in our repertoire if we want to entice businesses to Maine which CAN stand on their own two feet. Maybe he even believes that science and economics should drive our energy policy, and not politics or corporate pressure. I encourage Mr. Rooks to ASK Governor LePage these questions instead of assuming he can read his mind.
There were sufficient assumptions and false conclusions in Mr. Rooks’ column to warrant scrutiny. Mr. Rooks--while sounding as if he’s got the inside track on this issue—didn’t do his homework before spouting the wind lobby’s vitriol.
As one of many examples; Rooks stated “In November, LURC, now including several LePage appointees, voted to deny First Wind’s Bowers Mountain project in Washington County – even though the project was completely within the expedited permitting zone. Bowers is the last leg of a series of already approved windfarms in the area, with two on Stetson Mountain and one on Rollins Mountain, all within the industrial forest.
Print space doesn’t allow me to address every misleading or downright incorrect word in these sentences but I’ll point out a couple.
LURC did not vote to deny First Wind’s Bowers Mountain project in November. In October, LURC Commissioners took a straw vote, directing staff to draw up a ‘deny’ decision document to be presented for a vote at their upcoming December 7th meeting. And incidentally, the Bowers project straddles Washington AND Piscatiaquis Counties.
Mr. Rooks implied that the reason LURC ‘voted to deny’ was due to the fact that the Commission “now includ(ed) several LePage appointees”. How incredibly misleading. The fact is that the only member to express an inclination to approve the Bowers project was Commissioner Hammond—the solitary LePage appointee included in that straw vote! The other two LePage appointees who came on board this autumn showed great integrity. Commissioner Dunphy recused himself, stating he didn’t feel he should vote when he hadn’t been a part of the process prior to the October meeting. Commissioner Carle commented that he wouldn’t cast a preliminary vote, and he would only vote at the December meeting if he felt he’d been able to study the record sufficiently to give him confidence that he was up to speed on the project.
Mr. Rooks’ column was full of similarly deceptive comments or instances where the “rest of the story” was conveniently omitted.
It is this type of propaganda--fed to the public for years—which has set Maine on a path of high-cost electricity, environmental damage and intimidation tactics when the public has had the audacity to oppose these developments.
If newspapers would insist on printing facts instead of rhetoric and reconstituted fiction, they would be doing this state a great service and they would make progress in restoring the reputation of “journalism” in Maine.
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Maine’s greatest asset is our
Maine’s greatest asset is our “Quality of Place”. Our natural resources and our pristine environment are what bring people to our state from around the world. Maine’s tourism brings in BILLIONS of dollars to this state—to every sector. And these billions of dollars are not subsidized by American tax-payers. Tourists rent motel rooms, stay in B&B’s or stop in at L.L. Bean for camping supplies and then rent a campsite in one of our state parks—one of which is Mt. Blue. While here, they fill up their cars with gas and buy soda and pizza and beer at our convenience stores. They go sight-seeing and purchase souvenirs in our gift shops, or collectibles in our antique stores. They eat in our restaurants. Buy fresh vegetables at our farm stands. Visit our sugar shacks and purchase maple syrup. They ski at Sugarloaf and Saddleback, which employ hundreds of Mainers. And while they are driving around enjoying the wonders of this state, they often see “For Sale” signs on our real estate. And they think, “Wow… maybe WE could own a piece of this heaven!” And often, they do exactly that. They buy a year-round or vacation home--which spurs the real estate market; helping brokers, attorneys, appraisers, bankers, building inspectors, mortgage companies, surveyors and home owners.
It is a wondrous, self-supporting industry. This symbiotic relationship is founded on our natural resources. We have the market cornered for nature-based tourism, east of the Mississippi. We have the only remaining dark night sky. No light pollution. We have segments of the Appalachian Trail (and other trails) where one can actually still view wilderness without development. We can actually hear snow falling. We can hear snow falling! That is a gift. Mainers benefit from this special place and these rare qualities, and it is essential to our soul. We give up many things to live in the country, and we give it up willingly—because the trade-off is worth it. More than worth it.
Industrial wind’s paltry benefits do not come close to offsetting the enormous negative environmental, health and financial impacts these developments will cause. Our energy policy has to change at the state level, and funding policies have to change at the federal level. In the meantime, BEP has the opportunity to do what so many Mainers are already doing. People like those 100+ folks who stood up to speak at the Dixfield 'meeting' (because a public hearing was denied) and who drove from all across Maine on a rainy winter night just to make their voices heard.
In May 2011, Department of Conservation Commissioner William Beardsley stated that his Department “would not be the recipient of any tangible benefits from wind power projects”. And yet, the Saddleback Ridge Wind permit refers to a $60,000.00 payment from the applicant to Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands (BPL), and an email from the Assistant Deputy Director stating “DOC would be happy to accept any contributions from the developer for land protection efforts in this area.”
It is evident that there are discrepancies between State policies and the actions of State agencies. These 'tangible benefits' are nothing more than state-sanctioned bribes... a policy promoted and supported by the Baldacci administration. It is hoped that the current administration and the Commissioner of the Dept. of Conservation will hold the state (and wind developers) to higher moral standards.
Thank you.
Thank you, Dr. Aniel, for this letter.
There isn't much chance any of the wind lobby or its supporters will take you up on your offer of a debate, though. We've seen, time and time again, that when they come up against people armed with scientific and economic facts rather than rhetoric, they have no defense. All one needs to say to them is "Prove it!" when they make their sales pitches... and watch them stumble and stammer and change the topic.
No, the good people of Maine will have to do independent research on the topic of indstrial wind. We need to be proactive, instead of swallowing the line the corporate wind industry has been feeding us to gain our support. Once they know the facts, they see this folly for what it is. Only then will they stand up, step forward, and demand an accounting.
Thank you for your courage, integrity and tenacity.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
State Police
One hopes that King and Gardiner are paying for our state troopers to escort each of these transports, and that the Maine tax-payer isn't footing the bill. One also hopes there are no serious crimes requiring the expertise of our troopers, who have been relegated to the role of traffic cops.
Of course, whether King and Gardiner shell out for state services or not, once they get their 1603 cash grant of 30% of the project's value, tax payers will be paying for it, anyway. Our money is just doled out in a more circuitous route.
What exactly is 'impressive' about these wind turbines? Yes, they are huge. Gigantic. Colossal and completely out of place in our rural state or atop out mountain ridges. They're more than twice as tall as Maine's tallest skyscraper.
These turbines have been 'sold' to Mainers using arguments alluding to global warming--as if this almost-useless generation system, abandoned 100 years ago for good cause-- will save the earth. Folks have been assured that wind turbines will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and directly offset the use of coal and oil (but ask them to prove it and listen to how their arguments change to how wind has added 300-350 construction jobs to Maine's economy!) Most Mainers aren't that naive, and we've done our research. The wind energy plan for Maine will cause far more negative impacts than the paltry benefits produced by these turbines powered by undependable, intermittent and eratic wind.
How many American stimulus dollars are being shipped overseas to Denmark (and other countries) for this one project of King's?
The Siemens turbines proposed by Angus King for this project weigh 304 tons. More than 6,600 tons of steel must be smelted and forged to build the 22 turbines proposed for that 50-megawatt wind project, which will actually produce about 12 megawatts at the 25 percent capacity factor achieved by land-based wind turbines in Maine.
To make that steel would require about 3,000 tons of “coking” coal and 9,000 tons of iron ore. Steel production requires the use of coke, which is a byproduct of pulverized bituminous coal. Coke production is a major source of pollution in the production of steel. Air emissions such as coke-oven gases, naphthalene, ammonium compounds, crude light oil, sulfur and coke dust are released from coke ovens.
But King and Gardiner preach about how 'environmentally friendly' wind turbines are. Do they ever mention selling RECs, which enable coal plants and other dirty polluters to pollute more? And how long before the parts and pieces need to be replaced on the turbines? These massive machines are under such tremendous stress that in less than a dozen years, they will wear out. Become a useless, unprofitable drain on the developer. What happens, then? The tax credits will have run out. The American people will have finally put down their collective feet and said a resounding "NO!" to the wasteful subsidies. Will King and Gardiner dip into their own pockets to replace the turbines (causing a repeat of that high-polluting manufacturing process)? They won't build the project NOW without tax-payers footing the bill... what do we expect will change in 5, 10, 12 years? Do we really believe that they would create Limited Liability Corporations registered in Delaware for their Maine wind facilities if they expected to stick around and be in this business for the long haul? Does anyone truly buy the sales pitch that they are building industrial wind projects to save the planet?
This is about money, it's that simple.
I won't be surprised if King and Gardiner make a deal to sell their project to Iberdrola. If we don't pay very close attention, there will be ONE corporation controlling Maine's energy system... and it's not a Maine company, nor even an American one. When Mr. King wrings his hands and talks about needing wind to 'get us off foreign oil' because 'those people don't like us very much' he should be reminded that those Iberdola execs that he's been flying around in helicopters with as they tour Roxbury are from a company based in Spain, and partnered with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.
It's time we stopped drinking the Kool-aid that powerful and once-popular men like King and Gardiner hand us. These turbines rolling across the Maine countryside aren't impressive. They are evidence of corporate control and wasteful spending... and they showcase a disaster in the making.
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. Maine
King and Gardiner
These gentlemen are very adept in the art of 'spin'... whether for the Roxbury project, or their proposed project in Highland. Their published comments raise questions, though...
“King and Gardiner said the $102 million is a loan and not a grant. Repayment starts when the project goes online, which is expected to be in November or December.
““This is a loan guarantee,” King said. “This is money that has to be paid back. This isn't a grant.”
Ah, but who’s guaranteeing this loan? The DOE is actually the American tax-payer, right? What is the DOE’s lending criteria for Section 1705 loans such as that approved for Independence Wind? In effect, the DOE has NO quantifiable lending criteria for lending to wind projects. Their two main objectives are to get a primary secured position (first lien) on all of a project's collateral, and get an independent evaluation of the project's forecast economics from a rating agency. Since the rating agencies (e.g. S&P) have no historical experience in wind power projects; their opinion is essentially based upon the developer's "projections"--assuming the project is successful. The DOE (i.e. the American tax-payer) is taking on very high risk energy projects by default because the commercial markets ARE NOT WILLING TO TAKE ON THE SAME RISKS. If the borrowers default due to poor performance--what does the DOE (American tax-payers)get for collateral?
And speaking of grants: Will Mr. King and Mr. Gardiner take advantage of the 1603 cash grant? Yes, it’s a GRANT, from the Federal government (which is also supported by tax-payers) for up to 30% of the project’s cost. A $30 million dollar, no-strings-attached gift is quite a sum for a man who said, “There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.”
http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/energy-choices-and-the-no-free-lunch-...
And then, there are those other subsidies such as Tax Production Credits, Renewable Energy Credits, Accelerated Depreciation, and in some cases, TIFs. Let’s not gloss over the facts.
“Since April, more than 150 employees of several Maine contractors have been working at the turbine sites, preparing them for the turbines.”
“Record Hill “will provide sustainable power to the state while funding 200 construction jobs,” Chu said.”
““We're looking forward to starting to generate some local electricity,” Gardiner said.”
So... what is it? 150 temporary jobs--or 200? Could this be another example of ‘weighting’ the numbers? Somewhat like claiming a wind development will power “X” number of homes, while omitting the fact that the ‘rated’ capacity is far different from actual production numbers... at best 32%, and more realistically, 21% of rted capacity, here in Maine.
And...is the electricity generated by the Roxbury project NOT going into the New England grid, but powering Maine homes and businesses, instead? Let's see proof of that, please. Since Maine already produces more power than we consume, what will this sporatic, unreliable product be displacing? As a state with one of the highest percentages of ‘renewables’ in its portfolio in this country already--one would hope erratic, undependable wind won’t replace a storable, reliable renewable like hydro.
“In the four and a half years it took to reach this stage, King said he and Gardiner held about 40 public meetings in Roxbury, and meetings with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection for permitting.”
When was the last time Mr. King and Mr. Gardiner had a ‘public meeting’ with the citizens of Roxbury? I think they’d find that earlier perceptions of the project don’t square up with the current reality. I urge the developers to hold another ‘informational meeting’ in the local area.
“Clean energy is a major driver of American competitiveness, and investments like these are essential to secure our position as global leader.”
While it always seems nice to be a leader, I doubt the Pied Piper’s first lemming was enamored of that designation. Countries in Europe who were ‘leaders’ in wind energy are now seriously rethinking their positions, and cutting or eliminating government subsidies such as that offered by the DOE and other Federal, State and Local agencies. The wind lobby refers to Europe often, when touting the benefits of wind. But a quick search on the internet will show far more negative reactions to the effects of grid-scale wind proliferation on that continent than it does, high praise.
“Chu said the turbines will be installed with innovative Turbine Load Control technology, a system of sensors and processing software that allows the turbines to continue to generate electricity under turbulent conditions rather than be shut down completely.”
“Turbine Load Control technology.” “Operating under turbulent conditions.” ??? Before this new innovation is foisted upon the citizens and environment of Roxbury, let’s see the science behind this, and the safety studies. And the economics. Just as in the case of Noise Control Operations mode (NRO) let’s make sure this 'technology’ is viable and safe before allowing this change. Early reports say that NRO is actually more bothersome than standard operations mode, due to the luffing of the blades in the wind once they are feathered.
Denmark... and Vietnam. How many other foreign economies are OUR tax dollars keeping vibrant and viable, while Americans struggle?
“the tower sections are made in Asia, because that's where the new efficient steel mills are,” Gardiner said.”
Well, of course the “efficient” steel mills are in Asia! How stringent are Asia’s emissions standards? (Not very.) And what is the going pay-rate for Asians holding down manufacturing jobs? We are shipping American dollars overseas, and in effect, promoting dangerous, toxic pollution and sub-standard wages for our foreign neighbors, while hard-working Americans look for jobs.
I am a Mainer who opposes the current wind energy plan for Maine. There are no two ways around that fact. I’m sure there will be commenters who take advantage of this opportunity to discredit me.
Nonetheless, I comment under my own, true name. I urge the opposition to do the same.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Kudos to the residents of Sumner
I commend you for taking a pro-active stance on this very important issue.
Organizing informational meetings is a great way to start, to get the whole community involved and educated.
One thing that caused me to pause... You were told by MMA that you could NOT ban industrial wind projects???
Did you challenge that statement?
I thought home rule was one of the most basic tenets of our American liberties.
I think that deserves some 'looking into'.
Best of luck. Feel free to visit www.highlandmts.org for some resource material or email us at highlandmts@gmail.com if we can help.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
From an old gal...
Hi Robert,
No matter what your age, I love that you care enough to weigh in on this important issue.
I just wanted to say one thing. You and I ARE paying for these wind projects, in many, many ways. 60-70% of the cost of these developments is picked up by the American taxpayer; thru 1603 cash grants (not loans--it's free money to developers) of up to 30% of the cost, and then the developers make use of a multitude of other tax-payer provided perks. TIF's. Tax Production Credits. Renewable Energy Credits. Accelerated Depreciation. One small, $200 million dollar project can reap $120 million from you and me.
And that's just one small part of a very big story. I appreciate your interest, and I hope you will do independent research on this topic.
Have a great day.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Signs of the Times
It was distressing to read "an act of the some of the opposition that were probably upset or concerned about First Wind's placing the signs out.”
While I hope it's not the case, I suppose it's only natural that opponents of mountaintop industrial wind are some of the first suspects people think of, but to have Puiia state that is of great concern. Surely he knows better than to throw out statements like that? I hope that before making similar statements, Mr. Puiia takes a moment to consider the weight of his words. Has he taken a 'position' on industrial wind?
The fact of the matter is-- everywhere wind developers go, they divide communities. It would be one thing if their product had real value. But it doesn't. There are a few land-owners who will make a fast buck... but the only real winners are the developers. On a $65MILLION project such as this, the 1603 cash grant FW can obtain is upwards of $18MILLION. A no strings attached gift from the federal government-- which doesn't HAVE that $18MILLION, of course... so it will borrow it from countries like China. And it will be up to us-- and our descendants--to repay the loan. Not only that, but up to 60% of the cost for the development is spent in places like.... China. Where the turbines are manufactured.
Add to that the accelerated depreciation (another tax-payer subsidy), TIF's (tax-payer subsidy), REC's (tax-payer subsidy) Tax Production credits (tax-payer subsidy) and other rate- or tax-payer gifts, and First Wind walks away with a pretty good chunk of change in their pockets. All provided by Rumford citizens, Maine citizens, American citizens.
And yet.... wind is the least valuable energy source we have.
Please think about this, people of Rumford. Please invest a few hours in independent research. All is not as the wind developers like to have you believe. Europe is saying 'no' to industrial wind in a big way, after 15+ years of giving it a try. Let's learn from their mistakes before making the same expensive and catastrophic ones here at home.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Recurring Success Story
Mr. Haggan,
Your letter was thoughtful and well-written. I certainly empathize with your plight, and I don't know of anyone who begrudges a hard-working Mainer his or her job.
You state: "Opposing wind power is supporting Maine’s highest growing unemployment rate and supporting Maine being ranked 50th as a state to have a business or career.
"There are only two positions here. You can be part of the problem or part of the solution."
The question must be asked: Are jobs worth ANY COST?
I don't believe there are only "two positions". I believe that it is dangerous, in the long term, to create a false economic upswing when the only reason that upswing exists is due to massive subsidization. "Wind" is a house of cards. IF a wind facility produces a product of value, then it will stand on its own merit. If Mainers wish to buy renewable energy, they will. But they should not be forced to by a government mandate.
America is in big trouble. We are borrowing money from countries such as China to support industries like wind. Not only that, but those subsidies (a huge portion of which is "American Recovery and Reinvestment" funds) are being sent--in large part--BACK to countries like China, where turbine components are manufatured. A look at non-biased scientific and economic data will show you that the paltry benefits of wind energy are far outwieghed by the negative impacts--whether economic, environmental, or health-related.
I do not minimize the significance of your employment. And I understand your desire to do what you can to protect it. I only request that you ask yourself if such jobs are worth it, at any cost? I know of Mainers who are losing income (as well as losses in their real estate investments) BECAUSE of industrial wind. I'm sure you agree that your tax-payer supported job has no more significance than their livelihoods which were created (and exist)based purely on their hard work and ingenuity, and the value of our natural environment.
Citizens who oppose Maine's Wind Energy Plan are not selfish elitists or a part of any 'environmental fringe'. That is demeaning to those of us who are standing up for what we believe is right, after researching the facts concerning industrial wind. I will not put you down for working in this industry, and I hope you will attempt to understand that just because many Mainers oppose mountaintop industrial wind, we aren't the 'bad guys'
We're just brave enough to stand up to oppose a plan which we feel is wrong on many levels, despite opposition from a powerful and well-connected corporate lobby.
I wish you all the best.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Working for Wind?
Stories coming from Rumford and other towns across the state are disturbing. They show select boards with serious conflicts. Do they work for the people in their towns (who hired them and can fire them)... or do they work for wind developers?
If wind facilities were given tax-exempt status, would ANY town want them? If they were not allowed to bribe citizens with their mandated 'tangible benefits', would citizens be entering into these debates?
Please don't let the wind industry divide your town. That's what they want. Their ability to have their way depends on the weakness of the communities they target. As long as ONE resident of your town is worried about their health and well-being, the selectmen should put those concerns before those of First Wind, or Patriot Renewables, or any other developer who is in this for money, and money only. Please remember that-- they aren't in this for any reason except to get rich from tax-payer subsidies, grants, and other incentives.
Hold your selectmen to their oaths. Remind them of their oaths... read them back to them. Did they promise to look out for the well-being of the citizens of Rumford? If they did, hold them to their oath, or remove them. It's that simple. They work for YOU, the citizens of Rumford, and not the wind industry.
Protecting the town
The townspeople and their representatives would do well to remember that First Wind is not there to help them or make them rich. They want to develop their hills in order to make money-- gobs of it, subsidized by tax-payers--and their concerns are not about residents' health, property values, or anything else.
And speaking of property values--Rumford will be placing an encumbrance on tax payers by making wind turbiner setbacks from residences rather than property boundaries. They are specifically 'taking' value from real estate by restricting what property owners can do with any land that falls within that setback range. What if a property owner wants to break off a lot to sell? Or give to one of their children to build on? If that portion of the property is too close to a turbine, the town has reduced its value-- possible by 100%.
Please think about all the ramifications of taking advice from a developer. They are not in this to be good neighbors, and to design an ordinance to suit them is dangerous and naive.
TIFs and wind
I am glad that the Dixfield selectmen are doing their best ot gather all information possible about TIFs so that they can help the townspeople understand this form of subsidy.
I would remind them, however, that TIFs were designed to entice businesses to a certain town... to give it the advantage over others when a business bringing JOBS was hunting for a location in which to settle. A TIF is another tax-payer subsidy, and let's face it... a wind development in Dixfield will not provide long-term jobs to locals. Additionally... Patriot Renewables came to YOU. You don't have to entice them-- you have the mountain they want, and they are not going to walk just because you don't give them another hand-out. Or... maybe they will? If they do, what will Dixfield have lost? Not an industry which will help support your townspeople. There may be a short-term upswing in business during construction at a few of your local stores and such, yes. But when the construction is over, what will you have gained?
I encourage you to speak with your counterparts in Freedom and Danforth and Mars Hill. See how much their taxes went down, and for how long.
I urge you to think long and hard about what you might give up if this project is placed atop your mountains. What will happen to the value of the real estate in the vicinity? Reports from other places show that real estate within 2 miles of wind projects can expect to see a reduction in value of 25-40% or more. There are many facets to these developments which people don't stop to think about. I hope you will continue to look closely at this issue. All is not as it appears on the surface.
Thanks for being proactive.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Maine's Mountains
Thank you, Penny.
And thank you, Sun Journal, for printing such a thoughtful commentary.
And now... I would like to see the wind lobby and our legislators answer every one of the questions she posed.
Every single one.
Maine people deserve the same consideration which was given to the corporate wind lobby when the Governor's Task Force decided Maine's mountains were expendable.
In a December, 2010 LURC commissioners meeting, former Senator Peter Mills stated clearly to the commissioners that he and his colleagues in the 123rd legislature made the decision of “sacrificing our mountaintops” as a contribution to the “greater good.”
I find it hard not to resent that statement, and I take exception to the legislature deciding to sacrifice our natural resources, without input from the people who live here, for a 'greater good' which has not been proven.
So, it's simple.
PROVE IT.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Thank you
Thank you, Lisa, for your 'voice of reason'. Mr. Carroll was clearly in panicked 'damage control mode' when he wrote that commentary, throwing out wild accusations because he is worried that the winds are changing. Apparently he was unprepared for such opposition to his wind project, and he was attempting to sway the public-- not with facts, but with more wind industry innuendo and rhetoric.
If that sign-up sheet existed, we would have heard about it that night, by those who supposedly signed up to speak.
If his life were being threatened, he would have reported it to the police with specific details.
Instead, this businessman insulted the locals who were standing up in true, American fashion and telling a state agency which works for them, what they would like it to do.
Mr. Carroll works for Patriot Renewables... the same company which recently offered a bribe to the citizens of Woodstock, saying PR would 'donate' $120,000.00 to save teaching positions (for one year) if they did not have to spend more on legal fees in regards to their Spruce Mountain project. They were attempting to use neighbor against neighbor-- hoping pressure from the town residents would persuade those who are appealing the DEP's approval of the permit to drop their appeal. Shameful.
Corporate interests are trying to poison the River Valley. It's time the wind lobby realized that their scare tactics and behind-closed-door deals and wild accusations are no longer working. Locals have seen through their aura of benevolence.
I hope the residents will continue to show good judgement and strength of character.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
"Bargaining tools"--how very civilized...
It's an out-and-out bribe, and I don't believe the good people of Woodstock will fall for it. Patriot Renewables had one goal-- they hoped their offer of $120,000.00 to 'save' teachers' positions would convince some townspeople to pressure those who are opposing the wind development to cave in and stop their court appeal.
That is despicable. PR is not some benign new neighbor wanting to be 'part of the community'... they are a for-profit entity whose only goal is to get their development permit application in hand, build their industrial wind facility, and take their millions in tax-payer subsidies.
Common sense Mainers know the score, and we can see blatant bribery for what it is.
Did PR also offer to continue that $120,000.00 for every years for the life of their project? Because a band-aid won't fix the problem, and folks know that. All it would be is a quick fix... with a bit of shame on the side.
Community members support one another, even if they don't agree. I hope the good people of Woodstock see this bribe for what it is-- and I hope it infuriates them. We aren't some back-woods yokels who will take hand-outs and then turn a blind eye to this sort of corruption. What saddens and maddens me the most is that our legislature sanctions bribery in this form, and for this particular industry.
This has to stop. If a wind development brings value to a town, the developers would not have to bribe residents. But they do-- and they have, in every single town they've approached. I find that appalling, and I believe it's time to put a stop to it.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
"Bargaining tools"--how very civilized...
It's an out-and-out bribe, and I don't believe the good people of Woodstock will fall for it. Patriot Renewables had one goal-- they hoped their offer of $120,000.00 to 'save' teachers' positions would convince some townspeople to pressure those who are opposing the wind development to cave in and stop their court appeal.
That is despicable. PR is not some benign new neighbor wanting to be 'part of the community'... they are a for-profit entity whose only goal is to get their development permit application in hand, build their industrial wind facility, and take their millions in tax-payer subsidies.
Common sense Mainers know the score, and we can see blatant bribery for what it is.
Did PR also offer to continue that $120,000.00 for every years for the life of their project? Because a band-aid won't fix the problem, and folks know that. All it would be is a quick fix... with a bit of shame on the side.
Community members support one another, even if they don't agree. I hope the good people of Woodstock see this bribe for what it is-- and I hope it infuriates them. We aren't some back-woods yokels who will take hand-outs and then turn a blind eye to this sort of corruption. What saddens and maddens me the most is that our legislature sanctions bribery in this form, and for this particular industry.
This has to stop. If a wind development brings value to a town, the developers would not have to bribe residents. But they do-- and they have, in every single town they've approached. I find that appalling, and I believe it's time to put a stop to it.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
The High Cost of Wind
Wow.
Wow.
Here we see it, in print and online... proof of bribery.
In essence, this is the deal: IF Patriot Renewables is allowed to build their wind project on Spruce Mountain, and IF they don't have to spend any more money on legal fees fighting appeals of their permit, then they will donate $120,000.00 to 'save' three teaching positions. For one year. What heroes.
But what happens then? After that $120,000.00 is spent? Will the developer commit to saving those three teaching positions for the life of their project? Say... for the next 20 years? Highly doubtful. And in all reality, Patriot Renewables won't be the owners of this project for more than a few years before they sell out to a larger energy company. Ask them straight up, and see what they say. Watch their eyes, their posture, when you ask. They are not in this to be good, long-term 'neighbors'. They are in this because it's a 'get rich quick' scheme paid for by our tax dollars. Let's take THOSE to save our schools.
I'm sorry, but this is sick and shameful. I don't believe that the good people of Woodstock would even consider taking this bribe. What this company is doing is so obvious-- pitting neighbor against neighbor. For will there not be a few who are woo'ed by this offer who try to urge those who are opposed to the wind development to cease their opposition? The company is surely hoping citizens will try to coerce the wind facility's opponents into stopping their appeal--laying the blame for those lost teaching positions squarely at their feet. I hope the folks of Woodstock will see this for what it is-- and rise above it.
Similar things have happened at other wind developments-- Vinalhaven, for example. George Baker has publicly laid the blame squarely on those 'few' on the island who are suffering from the excessive turbine noise if any loss of electricity (and higher electric bills for islanders, because of it) results if Fox Island Wind is forced to comply with the DEP noise standards. It takes moxie to stand toe-to-toe with powerful corporate interests. It takes pluck to say 'no' to bribes and coersion. It takes courage to oppose a scheme which is touted as being 'green' and good for the economy.
Science and economics--sound science and economics-- numbers produced by unbiased experts with no stake in industrial wind, tell us that developing our mountain ridges for an undependable, intermittent and very expensive energy source is a colossal mistake. Wind will not 'get us off foreign oil'. However, we WILL have Maine's very wind owned by foreign companies such as Iberdrola, a Spanish and United Arab Emirates conglomerate. Or First Wind, which has as some of its excutives men who were arrested due to suspicions of having ties to the Italian mob and bilking the government of millions in wind subsidies. Other FW executives were formerly employed by Enron.
It's time to take a stand. If you don't have the facts about this wind plan at your disposal, they are easy to obtain. If you need help to begin your education into this very important topic, feel free to email highlandmts@gmail.com. We will give you access to links, books, experts--and we can connect you to folks here in Maine who are already living in the shadow of industrial wind.
Mainers don't cotton to being bribed. And Mainers are known for standing up to do what's right. I hope the good people of Maine will look wind developers in the eye, say 'No, thank you' to their bribes, and show them the way to the Kittery Bridge.
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Tone and Tactic
Like Alan Michka, I was also stunned by the harsh tone taken by the SJ editorial staff in their "Red Tape" op-ed. Not only was the paper denigrating the legislative process by which citizens attempt to have a say in their own government, but they didn't verify their facts before giving Angus King their full support. I listened to a video recording of Mr. King again last night to make sure of my own facts, and that stack of permit application paperwork they quoted as having cost the former governor $5Million, he stated on that recorded SECD meeting as costing him $2Million. He wanted the attendees to see for themselves 'what $2Million looked like'.
Granted, he has had to make some adjustments to his permit application due to the fact that it was submitted incomplete and had to be taken back off the table, and the 'expedited wind clock' had to be stopped. He has also adjusted the number of turbines in the hopes of appeasing the Appalachian Trail Clubs, but it's a stretch to believe that those adjustments cost another $3Million.
Readers deserve to have statements like that verified. Is there not a journalistic code of conduct or ethics that comes into play?
I hope the SJ will do a better job and tone down its seemingly biased rhetoric in the future.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
P.S.
There were other subtle changes to my letter, also, which I didn't specify up above...
Just thought I'd say... I'll try to post it to http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/ if I can find the time, and readers can compare the two, for themselves.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Choosing to disagree-- and then being edited
While I am pleased the the SJ chose to print my rebuttal to their op-ed, it is rather frustrating to have that disagreement edited. My rebuttal came in under the word limit. My letter was MY opinion. I did not have the ability (or the right) to edit their opinion last Sunday, and yet, my complete words were tampered with.
This IS stil America, right?
In my rebuttal, I did not write "Maybe even a scam". There was no "maybe" in my letter.
In talking about our educational attempts, I wrote: "Regular citizens have been trying to educate our fellow Mainers through informational meetings, LTE’s and by sharing resources, distributing literature and talking to our neighbors. Don’t believe US, but do your own research. Knowledge is power–and power is something our industry-controlled government is taking away from us."
And this was my final paragraph:
"The wind lobby and its media supporters are getting worried. Mainers are known for staring down bullies and doing what is smart. Doing what’s RIGHT. Please educate yourselves on the topic of mountaintop industrial wind. The truth will blow you away.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
www.windaction.org, www.windtaskforce.org, www.highlandmts.org, www.stopillwind.org, www.realwindinfoforme.com, www.windfarmrealities.org ... and more."
Why would the SJ NOT want Mainers to become educated about this important topic? Why would they NOT include links to resources? When a citizen such as myself is encouraging Mainers to be proactive and study this plan which will impact us for decades, why would this newspaper not wish to contribute to that effort?
This, added to the troubling editorial last Sunday, is worrisome, and I hope it is not indicative of the direction this state and country are headed. What is happening to our freedom of speech?
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Township, Maine
P.S. See the links above to begin your own research, please.
Wow.....
This is one of the most biased and offensive op-eds I've read on the very serious topic of mountaintop industrial wind. And it shows exactly how worried the wind lobby is.
Wow.
Yes, John Baldacci wanted to get rid of red tape for his wind lobby pals. It was job security for this former governor who hopes to keep his 'hand' in the renewable energy field. It was protection for his friends who make millions from our tax dollars. It was self-protection, all the way. They'd suffered a loss at Redington, and the wind lobby wanted to make sure that that did not happen again.
It worked, too, didn't it? Has a single wind developer been denied a permit since that time?
I find it unconscionable that this newspaper expects us to feel bad for Angus King. And has Mr. King really, honestly spent $5 Million dollars? I'd like to see proof-- for just a couple of months ago, he was quoted as having spent $2Million. Could the $5 Million be the triggering number to ensure he receives our subsidy money? Before the editorial board uses figures in the millions of dollars, they owe it to their readers to require proof. And besides... are we seriously supposed to NOT oppose a mis-guided and terribly expensive plan simply because one developer made a poor judgement call and invested in something which is ONLY a good investment due to the government's largesse with tax-payer money? OUR money? Mr' King's partner, Rob Gardiner, stated himself that wind energy could not exist without huge subsidies, and would not support itself. Sorry. I can't raise a lot of sympathy for wealthy individuals who are not, in reality, trying to save the planet, but who are selling Maine's quality of place in order to fill their pockets. I don't intend to sound mean, but that is the honest truth. Mr. King should have thought ahead and considered the independent thinking and common sense of those people whom he led for 8 years.
Why the venom and vitriol in this op-ed? Why would the editorial staff or the publisher have a problem with Mainers trying to work within the system established for us? We were not allowed to have a 'say' before our government decided to foist an expensive and dangerous wind energy plan on the state of Maine. The wind lobby has been brainwashing the public for years. When citizens decided to look into the FACTS about industrial wind, we were stunned. The paltry benefits this plan would provide are greatly overshadowed by the huge negative impacts. Regular citizens, without the wind industry's money for media blitzes and advertising campaigns, have been trying to educate our fellow Mainers. We have few options and outlets. We speak in meetings. We write letters to the editor. We share resources and distribute literature and talk to our neighbor. We ask people not to believe US, but to do their own research. We believe that knowledge is power, and power is something that our industry-controlled government has slowly taken away from us.
Why would this newspaper castigate Mainers for trying to change a policy which we truly believe to be one of the biggest mistakes-- and yes, scams--to come along?
The staff is attempting to sway our new governor, without a doubt. By taking his own desire to cut 'red tape', they are hoping that he and the new Legislature will disregard these protective bills which will be coming up for vote. In my opinion, this is a low blow, eespecially coming from a news medium.
Billions of dollars are at stake. The wind lobby is scared, and they will be stepping up their PR and attempting to scare Mainers into supporting mountaintop industrial wind. Expect to see ads saying that 'wind' will counter the effects of globla warming... something which experts are showing to be a misleading claim. Expect to have them say that wind energy will increase our national security. Poppycock. When does a nation need the most power, and the most reliable power? Where there is an emergency! Increasing our load of unreliable and intermittent and very expensive electricity will certainly not help America protect her borders. Expect the wind lobby to try to make us feel guilty. Frightened. Irresponsible if we don't support their plan, and brave, 'green' citizens if we do. Expect them to tout jobs... temporary construction jobs, and short term local 'booms' during development. Those same 330 construction workers would be kept gainfully employed in repairing our infrastructure, which is needed to bring millions of people to Maine to spend their tourism dollars. Once our iconic mountains are covered with 350 miles of 40 story turbines, those tourist will go elsewhere. This wind plan is self-perpetuated loss for Maine's economy in the LONG-term.
This op-ed is just the beginning. As Mainers see more of these types of anger-filled articles, they can rest assured: the wind lobby and its supporters are getting worried and desperate. Mainers are known for staring down the bullies and doing what is smart, and what is RIGHT. I urge you to educate yourselves on the topic of mountaintop wind energy. The truth will blow you away.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
www.windaction.org, www.windtaskforce.org, www.highlandmts.org, www.stopillwind.org, www.realwindinfoforme.com, www.windfarmrealities.org ... and many, many more.
Being safe, not sorry
The state's wind development plan is sure to be the leading story in Maine in 2011. I am saddened when I see neighbor pitted against neighbor, when the only 'plus' side to this industrial wind plan is that folks believe that the short-term jobs brought to the region and the temporary reduction in property taxes might make the whole thing 'worth it'. I also can understand why townspeople might get antsy about receiving input from people who aren't residents or tax-payers. We're territorial and proud.
But realistically, we ALL have a stake in this game. Rumford is only one of dozens upon dozens of communities and UT's which are targeted for wind development. And citizens who are concerned about the long-term financial, and environmental health of this state, as well as that of its residents, have put in countless hours researching the facts about industrial wind. Not the hype or rhetoric given by the wind lobbyists, but facts garnered from unbiased experts... scientists, doctors, economics experts, physicists, accoustics engineers, utilities experts... and on and on. As frustrated as citizens become over the conflict spurred by wind development projects... imagine how frustrated Mainers get who have dedicated months or years of their time and thousands of their own dollars, as they try to educate fellow Mainers about the vagaries of industrial wind.
I commend those who have the desire to learn more. But I urge you to get your data from those who have no financial stake in wind developments.
The facts show that wind is an unreliable, intermittent energy source which will cost tax-payers and rate-payers far more in the long-term than any short term gains a few might realize.
The facts show that properties within two miles of industrial wind developments can lose 25-40% of their value... with some properties showing a complete loss.
The facts show that unless the full amount for decommissioning these projects is collected up front and held in a third party escrow, developers often sell off and/or abandon their projects (once the government subsidies and tax production credits and renewable energy credits expire and they've made their millions in profits) leaving it up to the host community to deal with the rusting and abandoned equipment.
And right here in Maine, the facts show that many of our neighbors are suffering from a loss of their quality of life. They are miserable in their homes... homes which, for many, are their only real investment.
And for brave citizens who have had the courage to stand toe-to-toe with a powerful corporate lobby, the facts show that there are no depths to which the wind industry will not stoop to convince Mainers to support this ill-advised plan.
I've witnessed proponents of 'wind' use scare tactics.. saying that wind energy will reduce carbon emmisions, counter the effects of global warming, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring our soldiers home. And yet... when they are challenged on these statements, they retreat, quoting 300 temporary jobs and a short-term boom for local shops and restaurants.
When they are confronted with scientific data showing they tell untruths, they hide behind statements like: "Well, that study was paid for by the oil industry!" Never mind that independent scientists verified the data, never mind that many oil companies like BEP are ALSO invested in wind energy-- that statement is intended to negate the validity of such studies.
On the opposite end of the spectrum-- wind proponents like to quote a survey which says that 80% of Mainers support industrial wind... but that survey was paid for by Reid&Reid, one of the major wind development contractors... and the questions asked haven't been made known to the public. Without full disclosure, how are Mainers to know what was asked in that survey? If people were asked: "Which would you prefer... electricity produced by coal, which pollutes and which entails the complete degredation of Appalachia's mountains--or electricity produced by 'windmills'?", many would most likely say they supported wind energy. I'm not saying that is what the questions were... I'm saying, if you expect to be believed--then give full disclosure. That is only fair.
But the wind industry works hard to maintain their 'proprietary information'. That is why we see very little production data made public. That is why they can still quote 'capacity' figures rather than real production rates.
I've witnessed the wind lobby talking about national security being tied to wind energy-- until they are challenged on it. I have seen them try to make Mainers feel guilty about coal mines in Appalachia... when we do not get our electricity from coal. There is no end to the tactics they try, or the spin they create..
So, yes. Please learn all you can about industrial wind, But remember where your information comes from. Take it with a grain of salt. Don't believe me, and don't believe the wind lobby. Do your own research. If you truly want the FACTS, you will find that the paltry benefits of 'wind' are far, far outweighed by the enormous negative impacts.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Dangerous Noise...
Ms. Willard is to be commended for attempting to do some independent research into the unique sounds produced by industrial sized wind turbines. I don't, however, believe she looked far enough. 130db of sound would certainly be 'dangerous' to humans-- in the immediacy. Wind turbine sounds, from what I understand after speaking with experts and reading literature, is completely different. While a short term exposure to the sound would be, to some, only mildly annoying, it is the long term effects which are causing health problems.
Some people cannot escape it. For as long as the wind blows, they are assaulted by high, low and ultra-low frequency noises... some of which cannot even be heard by the human ear-- but rather, they are 'felt'. I have spoken to neighbors here in Maine who are suffering. I have corresponded with doctors who are studying this. And I have been exposed to the sound in the short term, and can imagine what ceaseless exposure might do.
I listened to an informational talk by an acoustics engineer who has studied the wind developments in Maine extensively. He played a recording of the actual sounds produced while he spoke. It was not hard to hear him over the noise, and yet, when he turned it off without warning, the reactions of the listeners was amazing. Almost everyone of them expressed a great feeling of 'release'...they hadn't even realized how their body was reacting to those sounds, until those sounds ceased. Tension, anxiety...we didn't know we were experiencing them until the cause was taken away. It made a great impression on me. And that was after only ten minutes of exposure, and the db's were set at a realistic level, not exaggerated for effect. I had no problem believing that long-term exposure surely must produce sleeplessness, anxiety, hypertension... and all the health problems related to those conditions.
I urge the citizens in communities where wind developments are proposed to move with caution. Set moratoriums while you gather FACTUAL information. Don't be taken advantage of because you do not have sufficient data. I hope you will look at this issue from many different angles, and not make it solely about any financial benefits promised by the wind developers. Please remember-- they are 'in' this for one reason, and one reason only... to take advantage of the huge tax-payer subsidies available to them upon completion of their projects. Our taxes are paying for their wind plants, and without those government hand-outs, they would walk away. This isn't about saving the planet, and studies are showing that adding wind to our energy mix does NOT significantly reduce carbon emissions. In some cases, these turbines do not even have to produce electricity for the developer to profit, as they can sell their carbon credits or use them to offset carbon produced by their fossil-fuel subsidiaries.
Let's work together on this. Let's be respectful of our neighbors, many of whom are suffering, or who may suffer--if turbines are erected within a mile or two of their homes. Let's consider the irreversible damage to our mountains, and our tourism-related livelihoods, and to the habitat of our wildlife. If the concern is global warming, let's think about the thousands and thousands of acres of carbon-sequestering trees which will be permanetly removed from our high-terrain regions. Let's not forget the 400+ mile long high-voltage transmission corridor with its attendant health risks which will necessarily cut a swath through 75 Maine towns due to the fact that our existing infrastructure is not designed to handle wind's erratic nature and wild fluctuations. There is so much about this wind plan which Mainers are not aware of, but the truth is out there. Please be cautious and open your minds to hear the facts. Thus far, the wind industry has had years to sell their products with 'spin' and without opposition. I urge citizens to listen with an open mind to the 'other side'. The truth will blow you away.
If you would like to speak with experts on sound and health as pertains to wind turbines, please contact me, and I will do my best to get you in contact with some. You can also get some good information at these sites: www.windaction.org, www.windtaskforce.org, www.stopillwind.org, www.windfarmrealities.org, www.realwindinfoforme.com, www.highlandmts.org
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Me
highlandmts@gmail.com
On Patriot Renewables' Payroll
Wind developers routinely demonstrate their largesse by offering to towns and counties a neutral and unbiased consultant to look at their finances for them. Wind developers offer to pay for that objective, independent counsel. And then... they recommend a firm like Eaton Peabody.
Of course they do.
If a representative from Eaton Peabody states that they are a neutral facilitator which doesn't represent industrial wind companies, please be very suspicious. They need to remember who their clients have been... and who they ARE. They need to think about what documents they might have signed and sworn to. What documents might be 'on record'.
I agree that wind developers SHOULD pay for consultants and attorneys if they are coming into a town and causing expense as those communities deal with proposals for wind energy plants. But I urge all towns to seek their own independent counsel... an attorney or consultant who has not been tainted by industrial wind. If Patriot Renewables, First Wind, Highland Wind LLC and others are on the up and up-- then they won't mind if a town hires a firm or individual who has no ties-- NONE-- to industrial wind.
Don't put your faith in Eaton Peabody. Not in this instance. In some capacity, they've already represented wind developers in Maine. Don't take guidance or advice from wind developers, or from me. I urge all townspeople to seek out truly independent advice. No matter which way you lean on the topic of industrial wind, your townspeople deserve unbiased, expert counsel.
Well, if that doesn't beat all...
Reading that article actually made me ashamed... if that's not blackmail, I don't know what is.
God Almighty, this is what we've been reduced to by these wind developers, who have sanction by our state government to legally bribe Mainers in order to get their way. And while I've dreaded this day-- knowing it was coming-- still... to read it in print was a shock. And it is heart-breaking.
Well... shocked, saddened, or ashamed... I've never been one to fold when threatened. If I know my fellow Mainers, that will get their backs up, as well. I hope residents stop and think carefully about this situation. The areas around these wind developments WILL be posted. Perhaps not the whole parcel, but surely, the ridges surrounding the turbines will be. No matter how many times residents might hear "We don't INTEND to post the property", developers cannot afford to allow the region surrounding these developments to remain open to the public. There is too much danger-- too much liability. They know it. They just don't want US to know it until they've received their high-priced permits. It costs alot to buy the integrity of a portion of town, after all.
I understand that times are tight. I understand how a family can feel desperate. But what this land owner is doing is wrong. They have a right to post their property, yes. They do NOT have the right to coerce a segment of a population to capitulate to their demands-- or else. They have other options to obtain income from their property. Those ways may not be as 'quick and easy' as the dollars offered by the wind industry, but they would surely be obtained more honorably.
To try to intimidate others or to coerce them into supporting something--or else!-- is wrong. And reading that made me ashamed.
Will we let the wind industry do this to us? By God, I won't. I only own a pitiful 70 acres. I'm not nearly as poor as are these people who are burdened with 4,500 acres. But I don't post my property. If you'd like to come and smowmobiles across my north forty, you're more than welcome to. If you want to enjoy 'pristine Maine' though, you'd better do it quickly. I've got two developments proposed for my front and back yard, too.
Respectfully-- but very saddened,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Hello again, Candiceanne
Good morning.
I was saddened to read your comments in this forum, Candiceanne-- and as an anti-bullying advocate, I was also distressed to see tactics usually employed by middle-schoolers being used in a public arena such as this. Please, please stop these personal attacks on those who oppose your views.
You've mentioned as candiceanne and as commonsense that you would like to see an educational forum on industrial wind, and yet, each time one has been organized in your area, you have maligned the people who organized it, the people who spoke, and the actual topics discussed. You've inferred that these educational meetings were biased, but at least three wind developers were asked to attend the last one in Rumford, and they all declined the invitation to send their own experts to speak. I encourage YOU to take the lead, just as those good citizens have done previously. YOU can arrange the speakers, the venue, the topics. It is every bit as much YOUR right as it is the right of those others who have worked tirelessly on this topic in the past. You cannot wait for others to design something of which you would approve-- but you have it in your power to do it, yourself. You could have it arranged within a week. I know, because I've done it, and I would be happy to help you with any logistical details, if you need help.
It's not okay to defame others. It's not okay to complain about something unless you are willing to give an equal or better effort to change that which you are dissatisfied with. It's never okay to resort to the type of bullying which you do here online, protected by a screen name and not looking your opponents in the eye. Please, candiceanne. This is a serious topic, and it deserves to be dealt with in a mature and reasoned manner. Whether you are a resident of Florida who comes 'home' to Maine on a part-time basis, or a former governor who was born in New York but who chose Maine as his home, or whether you are a native, born and bred-- we are all human beings, and we are Americans. We all love this state. This issue deserves a thoughtful and factual discourse. I believe you owe several people a sincere apology for bringing their personal lives into the spotlight. Especially when you are unwilling to do the same.
I would love to sit down with you and have a candid conversation. I believe two women, working together, can solve all kinds of problems. I'll even come to you, and take you to lunch. What do you say? Can we stop this vitriol and have a meaningful discussion and/or respectful debate? We women should be peace-keepers, even when we are at odds. You may email me at home at roomtomove@tds.net or call 628-2070 any time. I'd appreciate the opportunity to speak to you personally.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. ME
Protesting Mountaintop Industrial Wind
Hi Queenhoneebee.
I was impressed by what you wrote under your profile, and admire you for wanting to participate in discussions free from personal attacks and some of the other misbehavior which is sometimes present on these forums. That's why I was surprised by your 'wasting time and spitting on their children's futures' comment.
I assure you that by participating in Saturday's protest, those Mainers were doing just the opposite: they were--WE were-- doing our best to PROTECT our children's futures.
I encourage you to do just what you admonished us to do, and research the issue of mountaintop industrial wind. I have no doubt you will be shocked by what you learn, as I was-- and as I continue to be, as new information is discovered daily. I was once in favor of wind energy-- until I truly learned the facts.
I have been reading, listening and learning about this topic for a year. I have spoken to soils scientists, wildlife biologists, environmental engineers, a physicist, acoustics engineers, economists and doctors, as well as Mainers living in the shadow of industrial wind in Freedom, Vinalhaven, Stetson and Mars Hill. When one has the opportunity to listen to the facts from unbiased experts, and the eye- and ear- witness testimony of those on the ground, one's perspective changes. Most citizens have only been exposed to the rhetoric and tag lines, to the hype about 'wind' saving the planet from global warming and 'wind getting us off foreign oil', and that is what they believe. But please don't believe everything told you by the wind industry and the current administration. They have a massive 'stake' in the game, and it comes in the form of your tax dollars, and mine. Wind energy is NOT the panacea they would have us believe it to be.
I would be happy to provide you with information regarding industrial wind, accumulated over the past several months, or send you contact information and links to experts in various fields who are standing up in opposition to this mis-guided plan. Please don't dismiss ordinary citizens who are doing everything within our limited power--and within the legal limits set by our Constitution--to 'have a say' as we attempt to do what we truly believe to be the RIGHT thing to do.
The facts will blow you away. Thanks for taking the time to comment.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
highlandmts@gmail.com
Two Maines
What is ironic is that the "Maine' which people fall in love with is the Maine which is struggling to survive. The backbone of this state is-- and has always been-- the working-class man and woman. Those who go to work, pay their bills, fret over how to send their children to college... or even, how to heat their homes or pay their taxes.
JDwight made a single reference to the 'wind power elite'... and yet, that struck a chord. So many Mainers-- and Americans-- do not understand how much power and influence this single industry has over the citizens of our state and country. Sadly, the average American... busy struggling to survive and raise a family and make ends meet... has bought in to the rhetoric spouted by the wind industry and our administrations. They believe that wind power is 'green'... that it will reduce our carbon emissions, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and reduce our electric rates. The facts--scientific and economics-based facts-- state that this is NOT TRUE! We are being sold a 'line'.. and the facts says this: Industrial wind is not economically feasible, not beneficial to the global environment-- nor for the environment and ecosystems wherein the projects are located. There are health concerns, decreased property values, bird and bat deaths, fragmentation of wildlife habitat, loss of 'quality of place' and 'quality of life'... all for an energy source which is intermittent and unreliable and is not compatible with our grid-- thus the need for a $1.4 BILLION upgrade, which will cut a swath through 75 Maine towns. Towns which do not need the power produced (Maine already exports electricity) but towns which will find this corridor to be a detriment to Mainers--whether through increased instances of leukemia--proven to be an impact of living close to high-tension wires-- or simply through higher monthly power bills-- for CMP customers will have to pay for a portion of this transmission project, as decided by Maine's PUC.
There are no positives to land-based industrial wind in Maine. So.... why are we allowing the 'wind elite' to have their way?
We should NOT give in and bow down before 'industry' as our administration is doing and has done. This country was fashioned to be run 'by the People and for the People'.... let's not bow before the 'wind elite'. We have the power of our voices and our votes. Let's use them .
Thank you, JDwight, for voicing what so many of us are coming to realize is the truth.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. , Me
For access to the FACTS about industrial wind in Maine, contact me at highlandmts.gmail.com
Ms. Adams IS kind and professional
Hi Common Sense.
Please see my other comments regarding Ms. Adams' coverage. While she is a faithful reporter, she did get a few facts wrong. As did you.
Those who followed the dialogue you mentioned are aware of your identity. Several Rumford residents came up to me last night to say they were aware of who you are, as-- apparently--your invective is as evident in your prose as it is in person. However, I will remain polite and leave it up to you to 'come out'.
This is not a contest to see who can spout more vitriol. This is a serious issue. At least three wind developers were personally invited to atttend the forum to give their 'side' and we looked forward to the opportunity to challenge their statements. In my opinion, they do you and your community a disservice by not taking every opportunity to educate.
You have made it clear that you support these developments by all the comments you've made under at least two different screen names over the past few months. And frankly, I would be beating my head against the wall to try to convince you to listen to 'the other side'. I wish you would be open-minded, but until such a time as you are willing to be polite and fair and not defame people whom you don't know, there is not much point in trying to talk to you. Still, I once more extend an invitation to you to contact me for access to the dozens of documents I have which convinced me to take the position I have taken, or for access to experts who will speak knowledgeably to you on this subject.
If you understood me to say that no property was for sale in Mars Hill, I apologize for the misconception. I will go back and re-read that exchange when I have a few moments. My intent was to say that those homes in Mars Hill which have been adversely affected by the wind development are not on the market, as I believe they are involved in litigation with the wind developer. Thus, we have no comparable sales data from that local market to use when as we try to discover what effect there will be on the value of Maine residences.
Now is not the time for personal atacks. Now is the time for community members to work together to shape their own destinies. People sometimes disagree, and the sign of true 'community' is when you can disagree without being disagreeable. Don't take it from me. Angus King told me that.
If you wish to continue this conversation, please be a responsible citizen and contact me for a calm and mature discussion. I wouldn't be surprised if the other panelists would speak to you personally, as well, despite how you maligned them. Personal attacks are not allowed in these forums, but you have repeatedly decided to ignore the rules. I hope you will change your behavior, as it does not add anything but a 'side show' quality to a very serious debate.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Some minor points
As one of the panelists a the forum last night, I would like to add/correct a couple of points Ms. Adams made. I live in Lexington Township, not Highland Plantation. Independence Wind has a proposal for a grid-scale wind energy plant for Highland Plantation, the community which is adjacent to Lexington, and I did mention that project last night, as it ios the one I am most familiar with. In the last month, however, Iberdrola has submitted an application to LURC to put met towers in Lexington and Concord.
And I did not say that property values would decrease, I quoted a comprehensive report by McCann Appraisal Services which studied the effects of wind developments on homes within two miles. His conclusion was that property values drop by 25-40%, with some total losses within the 'footprint' of a development. In Maine, we do not currently have comparable sales data to make that conclusion, yet, so we are relying on the expertise of others across the country to help us in our decision-making process.
The forum was only 'decidedly one-sided' because wind developers chose not to attend. I know for a fact that Angus King was personally called and invited, and First Wind and Patriot Renwables were also asked to come and present their 'sides' of the issue. There were also articles in newspapers inviting the wind industry to attend. It was a wonderful opportunity for some open and honest conversation, and wind developers who wish to become part of those communities did them a disservice by brushing off the opportunity to educate residents. Over the past year, I have discovered that the industry does not like to attend any meeting where they aren't in charge. When they quote a 'fact' and are asked to prove it... they can't. And when they are asked if they will put their promises in writing... they won't.
In regards to the Counsins Island reference... that plant is only used to supplement our electrical needs on a half-dozen days a year when New England is at peak usage, such as during an extended heat wave. I also believe the oil is piped to the plant, not trucked in.
I counted 69 in attendance, excluding the panelists.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., ME
Better...
Hi Common Sense...
Husband is picking up daughter, so here I am, again.
Thank you for the calmer tone. I appreciate it.
I was asked to speak about real estate values. I have been a licensed real estate broker for 22 years, and I have owned a small real estate company since 2001.
In my brief presentation (for we were asked to be brief, so that people could ask questions at their leisure, and that is an excellent way to engage and learn) I will be talking about industrial wind's effects on real estate values. We in Maine do not yet have 'comparable sales' from which to judge the exact effect wind turbines will have on homes within their sound- and view-shed. Mars Hill is the only wind development which has been operational in Maine for an extended amount of time, and those homes which have been affected by this development are not currently for sale. Therefore, we have to rely on experts from other parts of the country, who have studied this. I will be sharing a comprehensive report completed by McCann Appraisal Services in Illinois, which was done at the behest of county officials prior to their consideration of a wind turbine development. I would be happy to share that 80+ page document with you, if you do not wish to come to the meeting tomorrow. I believe it is in our best interests to learn from others' experiences and mistakes. If we looked to countries like Denmark and Spain, we would not be considering this proposal... and they have been heavily invested in wind for many years. If you are interested, I will dig up some of the articles I have and email them to you.
There are many other reports and studies which have been done on this issue. The wind industry likes to quote from a Department of Energy study which was completed last year, but which has been refuted by others. We have to take all the data given us and determine who we will believe... and why. Do the studies come from people who stand to gain or lose, based on the outcome of the study? Are they independent sources, with no stake in the conclusions? These are hard questions. I sense you have a genuine desire to know the facts, and that you've been extremely frustrated by 'the process'. So am I.
So am I.
I will do my best to answer questions tomorrow night, and if I do not KNOW the answer, I vow to do my best to discover one.. from experts who are unbiased. I hope you will keep an open mind and heart. Just because a group of people shows passion about an issue does not make them 'nut jobs'. Some of our biggest heroes in history were passionate about what they believed in, too.
And some were just nut jobs. :o)
I'd like to meet you. I think we could have a very productive-- and pleasant-- conversation.
Respectfully,
Karen
Oops! I missed this...
Sorry, Common Sense... and I really do have to run to get the girl.
But let me ask this...
What are your qualifications, that you can so easily dismiss these people? It's too easy to hide behind a screen name. I inderstand it, but if you are going to put others down, you should not be allowed to do it with impunity. There are consequences for our actions, and each of these people are speaking out without hiding. If you are going to be insulting, please have the courage to put your name behind the slur. It takes courage, but you'll be respected for having some.
And.... how about Warren Brown, the DEP consultant, who two weeks ago determined that Fox Island WInd was, in fact, creating noise above the DEP's night-time limits, even though FIW had been claiming they weren't? Is he one of the experts you would respect?
Please, Common Sense... don't be nasty. There's no place for it here in such an important topic. You can blast me all you want, but you should really come to the forum and do it to my face. I might cry, but that's okay. I'll go home afterwards and relax to Mr. Rand's CD. Don't knock it until you've tried it.
I'm off! Wow! Talk about an adrenalin rush!
Still respectfully,
Karen (you know the rest)
Hello, again!
Hi Common Sense.
I am really glad to see you engaged in this topic. But are you open-minded? I hope so. Trust me... it's a hard way to be and it takes a humble spirit. When I first heard about the governor's plans to install 2700 MWs (nameplate capacity, not actual production) of 'wind mills' on our mountains, i thought perhaps it was a good idea. I was not opposed. But then, you see, I started researching the issue. And Common Sense, I've gotta tell you...the facts scare the dickens out of me.
Now...it's hard to speak to somoeone who's a mystery to me. Here I am... real name. No hidden persona or agenda. I am a mother, wife, owner of a small business, part-time writer and farmer. Just a native Mainer who cares. Cares about alot of things... but what engaged me in this battle was the fact that there is so much that is simply WRONG about industrial wind. And I've read information from experts around the world, not just here in our corner of Maine. Unfortunately, we don't have them personally at our disposal for forums such as the one being hosted in the River Valley. But truly, Common Sense.. if you have your own expertise to add to this debate, you are welcome to come and give it at tomorrow's forum. We are doing our best to present factual information and to hear from all sides of this issue. You will, however, have to state your real name. This is an open and honest debate and there will be reporters there who may want to interview each person who speaks. That is what we ALL want... nothing under cover... everything exposed to the light of day. (You won't have to disclose your screen name, of course, so no worries there.)
There is no doubt that there are people who will benefit financially if industrial wind comes to their town or township. Landowners who sell or lease to developers are sure to make a handsome profit. I have never been opposed to getting a return on an investment... but that investment can not have deleterious effects on others. And it is a fact-- many impacts on a parcel of land do not cease to exist once a blazed line or a piece of rebar is met. It doesn't work like that. Just ask folks living near a pig or chicken farm. :o) (Full disclosure... I have five pigs here at The F.A.R.M. Thus far, my neighbors haven't complained, but we have an awesome set-back from other property lines.)
And then we have those temporary construction workers. I think of them all the time. They are hard-working men and women who are doing a job and trying to pay their bills and raise their families. But how many more, full time, year-round jobs could we create if we took those millions and millions of tax-payer dollars (the lion's share of which goes to the developer and overseas to places like Denmark and China, where the turbines are manufactured) and used them to make our aging housing stock more efficient? That would be a win-win-WIN! Contractors, electricians and plumbers put to work... old furnaces and water heaters replaced with more efficient and cleaner burning models... that would not only reduce our use of fossil fuels, but would reduce carbon emmissions AND keep more money in Mainers' pockets. All without the loss of a single ridgeline, and without the worrisome health and environmental impacts of industrial wind.
We have to look at real impacts, REAL numbers (not what developers 'sell' but what experts with no stake in the game tell us) and real, long-term solutions. These projects have, at best, a twenty year life span. They are heavily subsidized. They aren't compatible with the grid, and because of that, we need 500 miles of new high voltage transmission corridors cut through this state (please thnk of herbicides, and increased cases of leulenia when you consider some of the impacts). And CMPC rate-payers will bear a good portion of the cost, even though we don't need this wind power and it won't stay here in Maine.
My friend, I could go on, but I invite you to come to the forum tomorrow. Whether we agree or not, or whether we choose to disagree, we each deserve an opportunity to hear and to speak. That's what being an American is all about... open dialogue and nothing covert-- not laws and decisions made in back offices and without Mainers' input. Please come.
I'd write more, but there's a teen needing a ride home from Driver's Ed. Have a nice evening, Common Sense. Thanks for the dialogue.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., ME
Hello again, Common Sense
I suppose the answer to your question depends on who you consider to be a 'nut job'. Out of all those invited for the panel, I probably am the one most qualified to wear that honorable title, as I am a part-time humorist and the writer of a light-hearted, folksy newspaper column. I also have two teens still at home (who drive me nuts) and I work with my parents (who drive me nuts... but please don't tell them I said that as I'm still a bit scared of my mother.)
In all seriousness, the other members of the panel are, yes, experts in their fields. JDwight is an economist and investment advisor. Robert Rand is a leading acoustics engineer who has been working on wind-related sound issues for a long time. I do not know why you disqualify Dr. Aniel, but unless you, too, are a doctor, I think perhaps that is unfair. Attorney Chris O'Neil is, I believe, particpating as a moderator of sorts. I've spoen to him at length and found him to be wise and stable and very knowledgable.
If there are people whom you can think of who would be qualified to speak on industrial wind-- scientists, economists and other experts-- wildlife biologists, soils scientists, environmental engineers, etc.-- people who have put months or years of their time into studying this topic, please share those names with me. I would love to make their acquaintance. We are interested in the facts. Period.
Take care.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. ME
P.S. If you'd like to email me for a flyer with the pertinent info, please do at highlandmts@gmail. com. I'll do my best to forward that info to you.
Resistance
As a woman living in the western mountains a few miles north of Dixfield who is facing two wind turbine developments close to my home, I hope the residents of Dixfield will understand if I weigh in, here.
I wonder if you realize how lucky you are? I wonder if you can fathom the countless hours and the many dollars which residents of your town have put into making sure Dixfield is protected. It is much, much easier to loosen restrictions on a zoning ordinance 'after the fact' than it is to tighten them... especially if development is allowed to be built under those laxer regulations. What if, after all this, the residents vote down the zoning ordinance, the turbines come (and I hear the River Valley has up to 100 of them proposed for the mountains surrounding you) and you can't abide them?
What if they DO cause health problems? What then? The developers don't have any incentive to take the turbines down once they have the ability to collect subsidies and tax production credits. So... maybe they'll tell you they can turn back the speed at night... would that not prove that this plan is NOT about generating as much clean, renewable energy as is possible? Would it be okay if you discovered that you'd lost your iconic ridges for a false promise?
What if having 400 foot tall turbines marring the horizons and producing disturbing sounds and shadow flicker reduces your property values? Or causes a loss to your tourism trade?
What if they don't work????
What I am saying is... it's better to be safe than sorry. You folks have the opportunity to take control of what happens to your mountains and you have the ability to keep your quality of place and quality of life. Many of us here in Maine don't have the opportunity and the freedoms which you have. Those of us in unorganized territories in the "Expedited Wind Permitting Zone" do not have the power to determine siting for such intrusive developments We can not ban them. We are at the mercy of an over-worked Land Use Regulation Commission which is constantly being inundated by proposals for wind turbine developments all across Maine.
Please play it safe. Please remember that wind developers are in this for our tax dollars, which are up for grabs to whomever can get their turbines placed first. No matter what they tell you, science and economics prove that these are not the panacea which the industry and our current administration tout them as being. Please keep your sense of community and don't get angry at those who are simply trying to do what they believe is the RIGHT thing to do. Be proud that there are still people who will stand in the face of big money and big power and try to protect the little guys, against all odds.
You're really lucky, and I wish I had the same opportunity which you have to protect everything that's special about rural Maine.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. Me (in close proximity to Highland Wind LLC's and Iberdrola's wind development proposals.)
Please take the opportunity to attend the wind forum at Mt. Valley High in Rumford tomorrow night (09-29) from 6:00-9:00 p.m. Experts will be available to answer your questions, and if they don't know the answers, they will find them out for you. This is another excellent opportunity to become informed.
Property rights
Hi Common Sense
Property rights... that's a very sensitive issue, and with good reason. I understand your perspective, but the fact is-- all governing bodies have restrictions on what an owner can and cannot do with his or her property. Where I live in LURC territotry, for example, I cannot build a building more than 25 feet tall. LURC has been charged with protecting-- among other things-- the aesthetic quality of our rural areas. So if I decide I want a four-story building... I'm out of luck. Because LURC has the right to tell me what I can do on my own property. When you think about it, a four story building-- say 40 feet tall-- is much less intrusive on my neighbors than a 400 foot tall windmill would be. And my building wouldn't produce high, low and ultra-low frequency noise, nor would it kill migratory birds and bats. It wouldn't need miles of new roads blasted and built, no wetlands would need to be filled in, and no clearcuts need be made in order for me to build it. I wouldn't even expect any of my neighbors to subsidize it for me. :o)
I understand your point (although I know Freemont and Dan, and I don't expect them to get quite as radical as you predict any time soon... they have loads of common sense, for sure!) Please try to understand the perspective of others. I see you in these forums on a regular basis and I can't quite understand why you are such a proponent of these mountaintop wind developments, when daily, more facts are emerging proving what an ill-advised plan they are for this state-- in every way. If you work in some sector pertaining to these projects, I suppose you are protecting your job, and I 'get' that. But let's stick to the facts if at all possible. Towns and states have historically been able to tell us what we can and can't do on our property. And occasionally, they also decide to come in and "take" it so that they can do what THEY want to with it. Sight, sound and contamination don't recognize property borders or town lines. What we each do on our property affects others, and since we don't seem capable of taking our neighbors into consideration when we decide to make an impact on our land, governmental bodies are charged with doing it for us. It is up to Common Sense citizens to decide what is best in their own corner of Maine.
Please come to the wind forum in Rumford on Wednesday night (Mt. Valley High, 6:00-9:00) to listen to scientifically and economically based information about these projects. You won't be sorry, and you just might understand where folks like Freemont and Dan are coming from, and why they are working so hard to do what they believe is the RIGHT thing to do.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp. , ME
Home rule at its best...
This is a wonderful testament to how citizens can work together to direct the future of their town and protect their natural resources and their residents. I know that hours of hard work went into the drafting of this ordinance, and those involved should be commended, as should all those who came out to vote on Thursday night.
Mr. Trafton will do a great service to all when he speaks to AVCOG on Planning Day.
Congratulations to all for showing Mainers what can be accomploshed when we work together.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Temporary Financing...
It's no wonder wind developers are finding it hard to procure financing for these wind energy plants. With more Americans learning the facts about these projects every day, there has been a groundswell of opposition to them. We must direct our government to halt the subsidization of this mis-guided plan until science has found a way to reduce the high, low and ultra-low frequency noise they produce. In addition, we must be intelligent when deciding where to site them. It's been shown that stringing them out along ridgelines is a mistake-- both from an environmental and an economical standpoint.
Without huge tax-payer subsidies, these would never find investors, for they can't produce a return on the investment. People are discovering facts like this, and when a state is threatened with large-scale destruction of many of its iconic mountains for a plan to produce expensive power which we do not need, but which is, for the most part, destined to be shipped out of state on new high-voltage transmission wires (which we also wouldn't need if it were not for the wind power) then those citizens should, and will, stand up and say "No!"
Confusion and dissemination...
This is good. One small step in the right direction for the PUC.
What's next?
Getting smart...
Hi, CommonSense. :o)
I 'hear' your frustration, and I understand it. But there are several things which must be taken into account when considering wind generated power-- one of which is its exhorbitant cost... Wind power is many times more expensive that renewable hydro power which we could purchase from Canada--if, in fact, we needed additional electricity. Currently, Maine does not. I do not believe manufacturers or retailers will move to Maine if they are forced to pay for super-expensive electricity. That has been a sticking point in the past, and is one of the reasons towns occasionally offer TIFs-- because they hope to entice companies which cannot afford the high cost of doing business in Maine. Industrial wind power and new transmission corridors will not help lure businesses...not from an economical standpoint, and probably not from a 'quality of place' perspective, either..
In addition, if jobs are a concern of yours, wouldn't it be much, much wiser to take the billions of dollars which the government is prepared to hand out to wind developers and use those tax-payer subsidies to make Maine's aging housing stock more efficient? Hundreds of builders, electricians and plumbers would have jobs if we concentrated on conservation... we would have a win-win-win situation. Mainers put to work. Less fossil fuels burned to heat our homes (thereby reducing pollution, AND our dependence on foreign oil). And a unique environment kept safe from high voltage transmission corridors with their attendant Electro-Magnetic Fields, and high-mountain terrain protected from erosion, herbicides, fragmented wildlife habitat, and potential water quality issues.
I'd love to speak with you in more depth, if you truly have concern about this issue. Feel free to contact me at highlandmts@gmail.com
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Keeping the Mountains Safe...
I encourage residents to approve the ordinance, and if they decide it needs to be tweaked or altered, to THEN rewrite it... keeping the mountains safe from development in the meantime. Two or three months could see a new, improved ordinance on the table... one which makes all residents feel that their natural resources AND their livelihoods are safe.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Township, Maine (another beautiful area that is being targeted by industrial wind.)
Protecting the Mountains above the Canyon...
I understand residents' concerns about the possibility of restricting traditional uses of the land, and I'm sure the planning board can tweak any ordinance to make it workable for the town. My fear would be that if this ordinance is voted down, a wind developer could submit a permit application before a new ordinance is enacted... and I believe (though not sure...) that the town would have to apply whatever zoning was currently in place when it considered the application.
I'm not familiar with whether or not a moratorium is in place in Byron which would protect the town until a new ordinance could be drafted? I hope so, for their sakes.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease, Lexington Township, Maine
"Best Interest of the Town"
What is, really, in the 'best interest of the town'. Does it always come down to a quick buck? Is that what determines what is best for a town... or for an organization, or for a family or individual? If 'tangible benefits' and short-term lease payments and a temporary reduction in taxes were all removed from the equation, what, then, would be in the 'best interests of the town'?
Would it be best for the town to have hundreds of thousands yards of bedrock and earth blasted and relocated on the beautiful ridges above their homes? Would the high, low and ultra-low frequency noise produced by turbines be unnacceptable to the townsfolk and their neighbors, then? Remember, acoustical engineers are beginning to tell us that people living within 2 miles of turbines can suffer adverse health affects. And less cautious experts are advocating for setbacks of up to five miles in mountainous regions and up to twenty miles when turbines rise above open water. If money wasn't involved, would we be more likely to defend our friends and neighbors from the negative health affects of turbines? Would we care more about them, then?
If the monetary benefits were removed, would we be concerned about the miles of new roads which will fragment wildlife habitat and disrupt animals' hunting and foraging trails? Would we be outraged at the bird and bat deaths which will occur, instead of shrugging the fact off with inane coments about how house cats and automobiles are just as apt to kill them??
And what about economics? If the town was not going to receive those tangible benefits, temporary lease payments and short term tax reductions, would we be more likely to require that wind turbines be self-supporting and produce affordable electricity before they could erect their massive machines? Would we question the economics of a generation system which, at BEST, produces 35% of its rated capacity, but more often produces between 10-25%? Would we welcome a power plant whose product is up to four times more expensive an already-established renewable hydro source in Canada? Would we encourage development of an industry which we knew had a life-span of only 20 years? And which would be expensive and time-consuming to remove when its useful life was over? Would we allow them to be built, knowing that the money for decommissioning them had not been set aside at the outset, and understanding that it could very well fall to the tax-payers to foot those future bills?
Would it be best for the town's economy to lose open land for hunting, hiking, bird-watching, and the like to hillsides and ridgelines which will be posted against trespassing? Would we be more likely to protect the integrity of the wilderness experience for which tourists from around the world travel to Maine, if the almighty dollar wasn't being waved in front of our faces?
If the state of Maine had not sanctioned this form of bribery, and if our legislators had not approved it, we would not be facing these issues. There is no way in the world the people of Maine would allow such an ill-advised, misguided, destructive and economically unfeasible plan to move forward on our iconic summits. If money was taken out of the equation, Mainers would be shouting "NO!" from these mountaintops. If the money was gone, then--we would really, really be working in "the best interest of the town".
All is not lost. I am encouraged. As more and more Mainers become informed on the true facts about these projects, the wind is shifting. People are standing up. People are speaking up. People are exercising their rights and calling for a stop to this foolish plan. Money isn't the be-all, end-all that the developers believe it to be. Some people care about the whole picture, and not just the short-term monetary gains. I hope the town of Carthage will recognize that there is much more value in its resources-- both human and 'natural'-- than there is value in being the temporary recipient of hand-outs from a for-profit company who is reaping its rewards from American workers' hard-earned tax money.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., ME
Mainers won't be fooled...
The only merit I could find in Mr. Payne's letter was that he discovered a website which hadn't been updated for some time. He used that outdated information to his advantage, and that's not surprising. When the facts aren't on your side, you have to try another tack to try to fool the public.
Mainers are finally getting the true picture. Many dedicated people are working hard to educate the public about the realities of industrial wind and it's beginning to pay off. One result of that is that those in the wind industry and the 'renewable energy' field are hustling to come up with new propaganda, new half-truths, new ways to try to gloss over what it an incredible-- and very nearly successful-- scam. Those in the 'wind' business have had long-term access to the same facts which we are now discovering, and they are panicking... worried that their houses of cards-- supported by our tax dollars and NOT by good science, economics or stewardship-- will come tumbling down.
It will, if only the good people of Maine continue to hold accountable those who are responsible in the industry, as well as our governor and legislature... the latter of whom happen to work for us. Let's do what's right. Let's have the facts, instead of tag lines and feel good propaganda. Let's listen to the unbiased experts instead of those who stand to profit from industrial wind.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., ME
Investment???
After Wednesday night's meeting at Dirigo High School in Dixfield, there can't be any doubt in the minds of the people of the river valley and western mountains that industrial wind is ANYTHING but a sound investment. Acoustical engineer Rob Rand gave an excellent, well-researched, fact-based presentation on wind turbine sounds and how they travel, what their properties are, and how they affect people living within 2 or more miles. And economist and financial advisor J Dwight explained the financial aspect of industrial wind. Where the money comes from, where it goes, how IW will affect electrical rates, and why the push to install hundreds of miles of wind turbines along the mountain ridges of Maine is nothing but a scam. A government sanctioned scam to misappropriate tax-payers' hard-earned money and redistribute it among a few wind energy companies-- Independence Wind (i.e. Highland Wind LLC), Trans-Canada, First Wind, Patriot Renewables, and the like.
The "investment" must not be allowed to go forward. The more I learn, the more appalled I become at what we are allowing to happen here in our state. I urge every reader-- every citizen-- to become informed. Get the facts. Speak to and listen to experts... scientists, economists, environmentalists, and your friends and neighbors whom you trust to have common sense. This "investment" will not benefit the people of Maine, nor will it be good for this land which sustains us in every way imaginable. Industrial wind is not the panacea the wind industry touts it as being. This is all about the money... scads of it. Scads of OUR money. Please, get the facts and then exercise your right as an American to say NO! Before it is too late and we find we've done nothing to protect our land, our homes, our health and OUR investments. It's time WE, the tax-payers and the people with common sense, stop buying the propaganda that wealthy corporations (or in First Wind's case, not so financially stable corporations, perhaps?) feed us. We need to resume control of the direction in which this state should go, and look out for each other and our future. If science and economics say "NO!", then what are we waiting for? Please, make a stand and take back your power.
Industrial Wind is a terrible mistake, and the only "investment" is that we are spending OUR money and sacrificing OUR mountains and quality of place and quality of life to make wind industry executives wealthy. When our 'investment capital' stops coming their way, they will be gone-- moving on to greener pastures. And we will be left with hundreds of massive rusting relics to remind us of our folly. See http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/wind_energys_ghosts_1.html for an example of one state which had to learn the hard way. Let's learn from their mistakes. Let's be proactive. Let's be brave. And let's make IW PROVE what they say, rather than swallowing every line they feed us. There are many more financially sound ways in which to invest our tax dollars and make our environment healthier. Let's make Maine a state that leads in COMMON SENSE. All other benefits will follow.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease, a native Mainer and a proud NIMBY. Not In Maine's Back Yard!
Lexington Twp., Maine
Mainers Seeking Knowledge
It was uplifting to see so many residents turn out at the Dixfield forum last night. Hard work and a desire to educate the People of Maine is truly making a difference, and we are lucky to have people like Dan McKay and organizations like the Friends of Maine's Mountains and the Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power helping to accomplish that goal. I urge anyone with questions about the true impacts of (and the real push behind) industrial wind to take every opportunity to get informed. There is a world of information available from unbiased experts, and many good folks prepared to help Mainers find it.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., Maine
www.highlandmts.org
A Selectve View
“It's all about that view,” Baldacci said, staring out over the tops of trees at Mooselookmeguntic Lake and the Bemis Mountain Range.
“That view says 'Maine,'" Baldacci said. "It gives people an inspiration and it's going to be that way forever.”
But... it's NOT going to be that way forever. Not if Governor Baldacci has his way. The governor is directly responsible for LD2283, the "Expedited Wind Permitting Law" which removed the public's right to object to a wind turbine development based on its scenic impact.
This law can be view in its entirety at : http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/bills/bills_123rd/billtexts/SP0908...
It is unconscionable that our administration has sold our mountaintops to the wind industry, which had a direct hand in writing this misguided law. One example of how a wind developer contributed to the fashioning of this law can be found at: http://highlandmts.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/comments_rob_gardiner_...
These two documents tell a story that few Mainers are aware of. And that is only the tip of the iceberg...
Governor Baldacci is selective in what bit of view says "Maine". When he wants money for a scenic turn-out, then the view from there of Mooselook and beyond is priceless, and has value--not only in its beauty, but in its economic draw. But if he wants money from industrial wind (or 'energy'... the field in which he hopes to work once his term is up in January) then the view of mile upon mile upon mile of 400 foot tall turbines and mile after mile after mile of high voltage transmission corridors must also say "Maine".
Governor Baldacci needs to stop being so selective and make up his mind. Or better yet, since he's proven over and over again to the people of this state that he does not have the desire to put that mind to work for the betterment of the citizens and the natural resources of Maine, he should resign now. Please, sir. Do us a favor. Resign... while this is still, "Maine... the way life SHOULD be".
Wind Developers Direct Selectmen on Ordinance?
I don't understand why First Wind was given a soap box at a meeting between Rumford's selectmen and its planning board. And I certainly don't comprehend why the town's selectmen are not TRUSTING in that board-- which was charged with drafting a protective ordinance for the citizens of Rumford.
Anything drawn to protect residents and tax-payers is bound to be labeled 'anit-wind' or 'anti-business'-- especially by Industrial Wind execs and Big Business. It is hard for town governors to see past the promised, short term financial benefits promised by wind developers-- especially when times are so hard. But I encourage Rumford selectmen and anyone truly interested in learning the facts about industrial wind to contact me. I can put you in touch with experts from around the world who are unbiased-- with no stake in the game. No matter your question, they can answer it. Please heed the advice of the people with whom you charged to find the common-sense answers. Please do not believe a biased source such as a Wind executive, when you are looking for facts. They have millions of dollars at stake, and are versed in giving standard arguments designed to sway the public. There are some things worth keeping, no matter the short-term gain. Quality of life, quality of place, health, money... these are all up for grabs, if Rumford kow-tows to Big Wind.
A 'Friend' speaks up about Big Wind and Health
Aw, doc. You're doing it again. Do you have any idea how many people ask, "Why doesn't Dr. Jennings get it? Why won't he LISTEN to people... to PATIENTS? " That' sir, is the sign of a true doctor, a good doctor. A doctor who adheres to his oath. He listens to the complaints of the people he's sworn to try to heal and nurture.
Surely, you can not reasonably ignore the many, many people who have legitimate complaints? Have you ever actually SPOKEN to any of them? If you are TRULY interested in being a friend and a doctor, please contact me. I can put you in direct contact with many people whose health is being adversely affected by industrial wind. No human being could listen and not be moved... not be concerned. No matter how often you say it isn't so, the facts don't change. You do the people of Maine a disservice by using your degree to try to sound like an expert in the area of industrial wind and its associated health risks without first treating the patients affected. We are inclined to believe the words of a man with an MD after his name. Please do not take advantage of the PEOPLE by speaking on this topic until you have interviewed a host of individuals who are suffering from maladies associated with industrial wind turbines.
You did your best to disrupt the forum I spoke at in Brunswick. I allowed you to have your say, even though a true gentleman would have gone to the trouble to arrange his OWN forum rather than try to take over one which was put together by hard-working activists who BELIEVE what they are doing-- who BELIEVE they are right. Because, you see... we listen to the experts... those who are unbiased and have nothing to gain (and often, much to lose) by speaking out and sharing the FACTS they have discovered. Your 'silver buckshot' reference, sadly, makes me wonder if you have a stake in Angus King's projects, as that is one of his standard tag lines when trying to sell his product. I hope that's not the case. I hope it is simply that you are too set in your ways, or too stubborn to listen to opposing views and give them credence... For a stubborn man can relent, and will gain the respect of his peers by admitting he was wrong. Some of our legislators have done that very thing.
You belittle your fellow citizens who have spent months researching industrial wind by pretending to know what our motivations are. While scenic impact in this beautiful mountainous region is certainly an important factor to take into account, due to the potential economic fall-out and Mainers' hard-sought 'quality of place', the 'view' is simply NOT the issue of paramount importance to many of us. If it was proven to you that IW was NOT economically feasible, if we could show you research done by scientists and physicists that shows IW does NOT reduce dependence on fossil fuels or reduce carbon emissions-- would you then begin to question the intelligence of destroying our high terrain and fragile ecosystems? If we could show you that property values in the vicinity of IW plummet-- sometimes as much as 40% or more, would that convince you to stop touting Big WInd as 'silver buckshot'? Seriously, sir... we have access to FACTS-- facts that the people of Maine deserve to know. If you are a caring man and professional, surely you will avail yourself of the resources we can provide to you. Surely you can then put your title of 'doctor' to its best possible use, and begin to help heal the wounds this misguided plan has created across this wonderful state.
I urge you not to be stubborn-- not to be too set in your ways to consider information from sources other than the wind industry. They have millions of dollars at stake-- they are biased and have a huge conflict of interest. Please give heed to those who are selflessly trying to educate a public which has been misled and taken advantage of. Simply tell me what specific topics you would like to learn more about, and I will put you in touch with experts and reference materials. You will grow in the estimation of many if you keep an open mind and disseminate the facts rather than the Industry's propaganda. I look forward to working with you on this issue, if you so desire. I am not an expert, and have no title with which to garner respect. But I am an American and a Mainer who is committed to taking care of my native state and those who call it 'home'
Respectfully Submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME
Cathage and the Wind
It breaks my heart to see small towns divided by Big Money. Because property tax-payers are struggling, any promised 'relief' sounds too good to be true. That's because it is.
Carthage residents are at a disadvantage. They are without a comprehensive plan or the ordinances designed to protect its citizens from questionable development, or from unscrupulous developers.
I attended the most recent meeting that Carthage held with Patriot Renewables, and I was amazed to see how many questions the industrial wind company dodged. They constantly used excuses like "That's privileged infomation" or--even more ridiculous-- they'd not give ANY answer to the hard questions. They'd simply frown, turn away, and say "Next question!"
If I was a resident of Carthage, I would want solid answers. I would REQUIRE them. And if I was a developer who truly BELIEVED the bill of goods I was selling, I would proudly shout out the answers to the folks I was attempting to make a sale to. Carthage residents believe industrial wind will be a boon to them. But Carthage residents should ask their neighbors (in towns which are already experiencing the results of IW's false promises) exactly what might be in store for them. Have all the promises made to THEM come true? And what negative impacts resulted from IW's intrusion into their peaceful villages? I hope they will not let the promise of instant and short-term cash convince them that any development is good, especially when it has been proven to be a misguided and expensive proposal. Industrial wind is not a panacea. It is a scam to put government subsidies (tax-payer dollars-- yours and mine) in the pockets of a few IW developers . The benefits to Carthage are but a drop in the bucket, and the bucket has a hole.
Please look out for your neighbors. Please do not let promises of economic development, road contracts and cheap taxes keep you from demanding the answers to hard questions. Our citizens-- our neighbors-- are natural resources, too. Let's be good stewards and take care of each other.
Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME (for answers to questions and to find great resources, please check out www.highlandmts.org)
Earth First
It is very unfortunate that Earth First chose to demonstrate the way they did. I assume their purpose was to get publicity for the causes that are dear to them, but the publicity generated was mostly negative, as evidenced by the opinion of the SJ editorial board.
When such things happen, there is an unwarranted backlash against people and groups who are working hard to affect change through legal avenues and by old-fashioned 'hard work'. Other concerned citizens who are active in promoting the environmental health and economy of this region are here to stay, and have to suffer from the poor image generated by more 'extremist' groups. I applaud First Earth's courage and conviction, but I believe that common sense and a reasoned plan combined with long-term goals would have been a more valuable legacy to leave for the folks in northern Franklin County.
My Friend, Jay
I have nothing but the greatest respect and love for Jay Wyman. He has been a friend of mine for more than two decades, and we were co-workers on a rescue service in the early 90's. One of the things I love about living in Maine is our ability to disagree on issues while remaining friends. I'm not part of an 'environmental' group, which is what Jay references in his guest column, but I AM a member of the Friends of the Highland Mountains; a group of diverse citizens who have come together to oppose the wind turbine development proposed for Highland's five mountains.
While I am not an 'environmentalist', I do try to do my part to live responsibly. I try to take care of our natural resources, which give us so much bounty. And until I took the time to research the topic of mountaintop industrial wind, I was a proponent of 'wind'. I believed what the government and the wind industry told us: I thought wind energy was good for the environment... that we would be making great strides towards slowing climate change and stopping global warming if we used electricity harnessed from the wind. And for the record... while I believe that the Highland Mountains are a very poor choice for wind development due to its proximity to the Bigelow Preserve and the Appalachian Trail-- one of the few remaining places in the eastern Unites States where it's possible to have a 'wilderness' experience-- I personally do not oppose mountaintop industrial wind in general because of its scenic impact. If these generating plants did what they are purported to do, I would not oppose them due to visual impact. But that negative visual impact has many far-reaching consequences, and one of those is tied to Maine's economy, which is driven by tourist dollars. While I might swallow hard but adapt to the site of 400-500 foot tall turbines peppered across 350 miles of Maine's ridges, I don't believe that tourists looking to find a pristine wilderness would do the same. If we have nothing special to offer them, I believe many will choose to stay home or go elsewhere for their vacations.
I oppose MIW for many, many more important reasons than the change they would make in the view, however. I didn't become active in the opposition of the Highland project without giving it serious consideration. I knew this battle would be time consumming and that it would have me doing things that I would never, in other circumstances, be doing. I prefer a quiet life, and I abhor controversy. But there come times in each of our lives when we have to stand up and do what we believe is right... or when we must stand up to prevent something we believe to be wrong. I believe the plan to place wind turbines along Maine's mountain ridges is misguided. I believe it is detrimental to our environment and our economy. I believe many Mainers are having their health negatively affected by the high, low and ultra-low frequency noise these engines produce. I think our wildlife is and will be impacted by that same noise, which is so foreign to our quiet forests... and which does not come and go like other man-made intrusions into their habitat, such as skidders and log trucks. As long as the wind blows, that invasive noise is unnatural and pervasive. Instinct tells me that, but I would not publicly state my thoughts if scientists and biologists with nothing to gain and much to lose weren't saying the same things and raising the same questions. As well, my experience in the business world might lead me to believe that MIW would be bad for our tourist economy and our real estate values, but I wouldn't be so bold as to venture that opinion if experts in the field weren't saying exactly that. Those same economists are saying that wind energy will never be competitive... that we will pay many times the price for wind as we would pay for renewable hydropower-- something we could purchase from Quebec if we needed it and if we desired to electrify our homes with a power source that was not fossil-fuel dependent.
The fact is, Maine already exports power. We don't need what these wind tubines will produce. And yet, it will be our mountains which are altered and our high terrain ecosystems which are injured and our wildlife which is affected, and our residents who can be harmed if the Governor's plan moves forward. In addition, it is our money which will be paying the lion's share of the cost for these developments, in the form of government subsidies and and tax production credits. Yes, there is money flowing into the 'host' communities, which the developers and the state call 'tangible benefits'. Of course there is, for without it, the government and the industry know that Mainers would not permit these developments. Unfortunately, we all have a price. Every one of us. And the developers are working to discover just what price our mountains and our way of life are worth. Because we are a poor state, on the whole, they know that we citizens are desperate for relief. Many of us can barely make ends meet, so when someone comes along and offers the promise of that needed relief, it is very tempting for us to allow ourselves to believe their glossed-over version of the benefits of their projects and take what they hand out. The know for a fact that wind turbines don't reduce carbon emissions... that's why we are hearing very little about their 'green' factor these days. They know that even though they tout their wind generating capacity, these turbines produce only 10-30% of that capacity... and that's why they say their actual production numbers are 'confidential'. If they did what they are purported, the developers would be shouting those numbers from the very mountaintops they are altering.
If we took those same billions of dollars and invested them in conserving power rather than generating more, our economy would flourish, and for much longer than the temporary construction phases of these projects. Homes could be insulated, windows replaced, heating systems upgraded and made more efficient. Building, plumbing and electrical contractors could be put to work and kept busy, year-round. We would be reducing our greenhouse gasses. The difference would be... no 'tangible benefits'. No big, temporary infusion of money for the town coffers or to the civic groups which are the current beneficiaries of the wind companies. But we would have something else, instead. We would have wild mountains, and a viable workforce, and less pollution, and less controversy and maybe even... more pride. We'd REALLY be doing the responsible thing, in my opinion. You may disagree, and I do respect your own opinion. (But I'd like to reserve the right to try to change it!)
Jay, this is about so much more than what it appears to be, on the surface. I know that as a selectman, you are trying to look out for the best interests of your town, and I laud you for that. But please remember this... not every business in Stratton agrees with your assessment. You might be surprised to discover that some of them are appalled to find that they believed Trans-Canada and 'sold out'. Some of them don't believe it behooves them to say that publicly... and how sad is that? In America, we aren't supposed to be worried about what we say publicly. But we sometimes are. I know I am. For better or worse, I choose to speak my mind, anyway, even when I am on the side opposite those with all the money, power and influence.
I invite you and any others who are interested to take advantage of some of the many resources which are out there regarding the issue of mountaintop industrial wind. It is an issue that is gaining attention world-wide, as many of our friends in other states and countries learn the facts behind the hype and propaganda, too. I have promised to do my best to deal in facts... science and economics tell the story better than I can. I hope you'll avail yourself of the knowledge of experts other than those who are selling a product and mitigating their damage with 'tangible benefits'.
Happy Independence Day, my friend.
Karen
News bytes on Industrial Wind
It is a common misconception which you have, CommonSense, but I am pleased to see that you are getting involved in the dialogue regarding moutaintop industrial wind. Mr. Carter freely admits that he once supported the concept of wind power. Most Mainers did and still do. But the concept and the realities are very, very different. Most people believe that because the wind blows free and doesn't have the negative issues of radioactive waste like nuclear, or the pollution and supply issues like fossil fuel, that it must be good... and "green". And our government and industrial wind developers use that misconception to their advantage, selling their misguided energy plan to an unquestioning public.
If industrial wind power actually DID what the developers say it does, and if its positives-- to the environment, the economy, the energy situation-- outweighed its negatives, we would ALL support it. We would be foolish not to. But once we took the time to research the issue and learn the FACTS-- not the hype or innuendo and not the feel-ggod tag lines that King and other developers throw out-- we realized that there is, in all honesty, very little that's redeemable about mountaintoip industrial wind in Maine. From the state's official wind maps, to the biologists, to the economists to the scientists...they all say the same thing. Those with nothing to gain and much to lose are stepping forward and telling us that mountaintop industrial wind DOES NOT DO what the industry says it will do. And the numbers they consistently quote are based on RATED capacity, not actual production. The two are far, far removed from one another. No, CommonSense... once Mainers began to do research into this topic, the cover was blown off the wind energy plan. It is a subsidized feel-good plan to create unreliable and intermittent power which Maine doesn't need and which will not stay in this state. It will be many times more expensive than the hydro power we could purchase from Canada-- if we needed it, which we don't. It will have long-lasting environmental and economic impacts.. from tourism to real estate values to wildlife to erosion and water quality issues. The list is long. So please, don't discount citizens' concerns without knowing the facts. It takes a brave man to admit when he is wrong, and I've seen many friends change their stances on wind energy once they learned the facts... and admit that where they once supported the concept, they now vehemently oppose the realities of industrial wind. The truth is out there, and hundreds of Mainers are learning of it every week. I hope you'll take the time to have a serious look into the topic. And I'd be happy to provide you with resources to do exactly that. A good place to start is www.highlandmts.org. Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp. P.S. The Friends of the Highland Mountains are NOT against responsible wind generation, but on an individual or community-based level... where the turbines are smaller and have little or no 'footprint' or sound issues, and where the electricity generated is used by its hosts.
NIMBYs, hypocrites and other normal humans...
Aw, Ed. Respectfully, sir...you're going about this all wrong. I am a proponent of land-owner rights... but to a point. We ALL are. But because the effects of what we each do on our property sometimes reaches beyond those property borders, we have, as a society, implemented governing bodies to regulate--to some extent-- our land use practices. Just as I (in LURC territory) can't build a home above 25 feet high, or build near a stream, or paint my roof pink, so are industrial developments regulated. We do not have all-encompassing rights, because many things we do impact those other property owners and residents in the same vicinity. Our actions can affect-- not only our human neighbors, but those wild animals and native plants and ecosystems in the neighborhood, too.
I understand your point. We all feel the desperation of knowing we depend on foreign countries for a vital resource, and we have been inundated with warnings about global warming, too. But scientists with nothing to gain and much to lose by taking a stance are stepping forward and saying that there is a very good possibility that the environmental impacts of industrial wind may actually be detrimental to climate change, rather than having the positive effect we once thought. In fact, if you listen to IW developers as of late, you will see that they, themselves are getting much quieter about wind's 'greeness' when they tout their projects to the public. That's because we NIMBYs-- those of us who feel it is necessary to protect our natural resources (since those charged with the job are dropping the ball)--we NIMBY's are having some limited success in educating the public regarding the FACTS about mountaintop industrial wind. We're not fanatics. We're not looneys. And we're not selfish. We are normal human beings who have courage... courage to stand up and try to stop what we feel is a terribly misguided plan which could have long-term consequences for short-term and negligible gain. I hope you will keep an open mind. And don't feel like a hypocrite... you are honestly expressing your opinion. We're both lucky to live in a country where we can (and should) do exactly that. Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/
Room to Breathe
Hi Candiceanne. I hear your pique, and I understand it. However, I believe if you think about what the Carthage vote is for, you'll give the townsfolk who are pushing for a moratorium some understanding. A moratorium is not a NO vote. It is simply a means of protecting the town and its people. Small towns often don't have planning boards, and their comprehensive plans might not be all that comprehensive. When the state mandated those 20 years ago, industrial wind developments didn't exist in Maine. So, now we are playing catch-up. There are many, many facets to IW, and most Mainers do not know the full scope of their impact, nor are they educated on the 'greeness' or the economics of these developments. It is simply a case of being proactive to institute a moratorium, so that all residents (and property tax payers in general) can have some input. Home rule is a GOOD thing, and the more people who stand up to make their voices heard, the more we participate in this free society which we are so proud to be a part of. Breathing room... it's a good thing! For more factual information on IW, please visit www.highlandmts.org. From there, you can find many helpful links. Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Twp. http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/
Having Faith in Our Friends
Mr. Lee, I commend you for rising to the defense of your friend, Kurt Adams. No one wants to believe that a friend can do wrong, or be bought, or lose their ethics. I cherish my friendships, and count myself a pretty good judge of people... so I understand your desire to stand up for a man whom you have trusted. In all honesty, I hope your personal judgement is right. However, it's a sad fact of life that we ALL have our price. It may not be money; I hope that, more often than not, it isn't. But there is always something that we human beings will compromise our principles for; be it our family's welfare, our longevity... something. If we feel threatened in some way-- whether financially, physically, or emotionally, we do what comes instinctively... and that is: Whatever we have to, to survive. I don't know if Mr. Adams is guilty of compromising his principles, or not. I only know that things look pretty fishy. It was up to him to avoid all APPEARANCES of questionable behavior, and not just the questionable behavior, itself. And given the Wind Industry's track record, it certainly seems like the 'fix' was too easy... all they did was file an amended report, and voila! Their 'word' about what happened was accepted. That wouldn't have worked in my house. Not after the fact, not ONLY when there was a huge public outcry! We all make mistakes, but if they are truly innocent mistakes, we fix them IMMEDIATELY, once we discover them. We don't wait until we are caught in the headlights of scandal. I hope you are right about your friend. But sometimes, even the best of friends make mistakes.
Saddleback Wind
I was at Patriot Renewable's presentation last night in Carthage. I was not surprised by the fact that the developer dodged each and every pointed question, and I was distressed that more residents did not insist they answer their simple queries. Some of the questions which were side-stepped were these: When Andy admitted that one close neighbor to the proposed development had signed an 'easement', he was asked if that included a confidentiality clause. Would that person who signed it be prohibited from opposing the development, or complaining about any negative impacts, should they become apparent? I'm sorry, that's confidential. Next question. How much of the granite and ledge atop the mountain will be blasted away? It's a 'move and fill'. Nothing will leave the mountain. How much of the project is subsidized? There's a 2 cent per kwh tax production credit. (Period... no mention of tax-payer stimulus funds or other subsidy dollars.) When asked how they KNEW that noise wouldn't bother anyone in the valleys and surrounding communities? There are computer models which tell us. (Aren't they the same developers who put the turbines in Freedom? Those folks could testify as to how good those 'models' are.) When asked if the developer would provide free electricity: We can't. That comes from CMP. When asked how much power their turbines are currently producing: That's confidential. Why is is confidential, if you want people to believe these achieve what they are touted as achieving... Next question, please. ........... In small towns across Maine, residents are hurting from high tax bills. The promise of huge amounts of money from developers is like a life-line, and many aren't able to see the forest for the trees. But the tax benefits are fleeting, and in other towns they have rarely, if ever, approximated their first blush promise. I believe one Freedom resident told me his taxes actually went UP the very first year after PR put their project online........ At one point a resident complained that there were outsiders in the audience with an 'agenda', and I wish now that I'd responded. If any of us from other towns had an 'agenda', it was to try to help and protect the residents of Carthage. We don't want to influence votes, we want to offer our resources and experence, so that each resident votes from a position of knowledge and strength. We were invited because we've been through this before, and we want to help bring the facts to the people of Maine. I wish the people of Carthage well when they vote next week. Remember that a moratorium is not a 'no'... it is a 'please give us breathing room so that we can do what's best for our town, our natural resources, and ALL our citizens.' Who can argue with that? Respectfully submitted, Karen Pease, Lexington Township
A chance-- before it's too late...
The people of Carthage have an incredible opportunity to be the designers of their own destiny. They have the chance to do what's right and what's intelligent, rather than what is forced on them by a greedy developer or a misguided administration. People living in unorganized territories in the Expedited Pemritting Area do not have that right and that privilege, so I urge you to take advantage of this wonderful opportunity and enact a moratorium. Take that breathing space a moratorium will aloow, and research the FACTS about industrial wind. Don't listen to rhetoric, don't believe what the developer says... everyone is clouded by their own desires and potential gains. Research the facts. Listen to the scientists and the economics experts... those who have no stake in Industrial Wind. And THEN... then do what common sense and integrity and a sense of stewardship tell you to do. This is a great opportunity to behave as an American citizen, by being involved and having a 'say'. Let your voices be heard. I wish you the best of luck. Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., ME http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/ or www.highlandmts.org
Patriot... what's in a name?
"One who loves and supports his country or its interests". That's the definition of 'patriot'.
Industrial wind turbines are not the way to go if one is dedicated to doing what is in the best interests of one's country. In the beginning, we all thought that wind power was going to save us... that it was 'green' and would reduce carbon emissions and affect climate change. But with knowledge comes power; and the people of Maine are becoming educated on the realities of "Big Wind". We are also regaining our strength and our power, as we stand together to do the right thing. The patriotic thing. The harmful environmental and economic impacts created by grid-scale industrial wind on our mountains far outweigh the paltry benefits. Only a few with financial stakes in these developments are now promoting these megaliths. All others who learn the facts are coming out in opposition.
I'm very proud to be an American and a Mainer. I saw first-hand what we, the 'little guys', stand for-- and what we can DO-- when I was at the Big Wind Regatta on Saturday night in Freeport. I'm proud of the residents of Carthage for being proactive and taking a stand. You are true patriots. I've called us many things over the past year: patriots, Nimbys, Wind Warriors, Mountain Defenders... whatever label suits, you are doing what Americans are SUPPOSED to do.. you are taking charge of your own destiny! Good for you!! Karen Pease, Lexington Twp., Me http://karenbesseypease.blogspot.com/ or www.highlandmts.org
Sisk... and Other Vulnerable Mountains
After attending the Trans-Canada/Sisk Mountain public and technical hearings, it was brought home to me just how much corruption we have allowed to bloom and grow in this state and in this country. State sanctioned bribery-- its legal term "tangible benefits"-- was not only admitted to, but it was the focal point of a Power Point slide show. So-called environmental agencies publicly admitted to being open to "mitigation"... another state approved manner of paying off those who might stand in the way of what our government wants. And currently, what the government wants is the folly of industrial wind.
Steve, thank you for speaking up. Thank you for being a voice of reason in Franklin County. The Land Use Regulation Commission will find cause to deny Trans-Canada's permit within the state laws and guidelines they are charged with applying. We've given them a hard task, but there are myriad issues which the commissioners can hang their hats on. We've got to have faith that these folks who are sworn to protect our natural resources will come through for us. As you have, time and again.
The Proof is in the People
Dr. Jennings, I don't know what your motivation is in writing this article, but I wonder... do you listen to your patients when they explain their symptoms to you? If you can not immediately find a cause for their pain or discomfort, do you dismiss their claims that something is wrong?
Dr. Jennings, have you interviewed people living in the shadow of Big Wind?
I have spoken with our fellow Mainers in Mars Hill, Vinal Haven and Freedom. I believe them when they tell me how these massive machines affect them. The low and ultra low frequency pulsing and the jet whine of the nacelles are more than just an irritating sound, to them. It is an invasive and unceasing presence in their body... one that causes sleeplessness, dischord, anxiety... and many other symptoms.
I cannot casually dismiss such testimony. And I am thankful that there are people like Monique Aniel who do care enough to put themselves and their reputations on the line in order to affect change. Please take the time to listen... really LISTEN.. to our neighbors who are suffering. Remember your oath. You are sworn to it for a reason.
NIMBY and proud of it!
That's right. It's time for the citizens of Maine to recognize that being a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) is a GOOD thing. No... it's a GREAT thing! If we Mainers do not stand up and defend our quality of life and quality of place... if we do not protect the natural resources of which we are stewards, then who will? NIMBYs across this state are refusing to 'fly under the radar'...we take our jobs seriously. When we extensively research an issue and discover that it is NOT economically feasible, NOT environmentally friendly, that it is NOT going to significantly reduce carbon emissions (as it is purported to do), and that industrial wind developers are NOT being forthright about the negative impacts or forthcoming with the scientific data needed to make responsible and intelligent decisions, then heck, YES! Of course we're going to stand up, put our feet down, raise our voices and say "NO!"
It's all about the facts. NIMBYs are not about rhetoric or propaganda. Unlike industrial wind developers, we don't give Mainers pat phrases or standard tag lines about 'silver bullets or silver buckshot' or about industrial wind saving American lives. No quips which state that turbine noise will not be a problem beyond a half mile or so, and we won't point the way to a photo of a happy cow standing under a wind turbine and state that these developments on our peaks will not affect the wildlife... See, we've done-- and are still doing-- our homework. We WANTED to believe that wind power would do what it was purported to do. We care about this land and its inhabitants. And it is exactly for that reason that we are proudly wearing the label of "NIMBY" and refusing to fly under the radar.
Take away the money and the developers will blow away on the breeze. That money is mine, and yours, and my 94 year old grandmother's and my 27 year old son's. I don't know about anyone else, but I was not consulted prior to my government deciding that a disastrous plant to install 350 miles of wind turbines on our mountaintops was the best use of those hard-earned dollars. The wind is intermittent. The power generated can not be stored. Additionally, the power generated will not be kept in the state of Maine, for we do not need it. We are already an exporter of power, and should we need more, there is an abundance of renewable and affordable hydro power available from our neighbors in Canada. Science and economics. Both prove this plan is not feasible and should not be implemented.
So... hype and rhetoric aside, I choose to listen to the facts. And when my government does not do the same, but proceeds with a plan that is reckless and dreadfully expensive, I will stand up and, within the bounds of what is legal and ethical, do my utmost to stop it.
I'm a NIMBY, and wicked proud of it!
Finally--Wisdom on the Wind
Mr. Powell, I thank you for standing up and stating the obvious... the TRUTH. As a worker in the industry, you are one of very few to come forward and state the realities of Industrial Wind.
Once Mainers have received the facts about the governor's and the wind industry's plan to develop Maine's mountain summits, they will stand together and put a stop to this disastrous scheme. You are right. If tax-payer monies-- those things labeled 'stimulus funds' and 'government subsidies'-- were not available in the billions of dollars to fund these projects, I am positive that we would not hear another word about how 'green' wind turbines are. We'd hear nothing of how they will stop foreign wars and bring American soldiers home. Nary a word would be spoken about silver bullets or silver buckshot, or how one small, 48 turbine development will power the city of Portland. Portland, and the rest of our state, already has its power supply. If more is needed, we can purchase renewable hydro-power from our good neighbors in Canada at a fraction of what it would cost us to purchase the Maine Wind power back from the New England grid.
Thank you for standing up and doing what is right. Thanks for caring about the truth. There is a multitude of people like me--NIMBYs proud and free--who are standing there beside you... proud of protecting our home turf, free to voice our objections, and determined to put an end to this scam. If the good out-weighed the bad, things would be different. But the facts show the opposite. Industrial wind on Maine's mountains is a foolhardy plan... and we Mainers aren't fools.
You're a brave man, Mr. Powell. Welcome to the club.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Pease, Lexington Township
www.highlandmts.org
Wind Power Backlash
It's obvious that the wind industry is getting nervous, and well they should. The public is slowly but surely becoming educated on the realities of industrial wind. With knowedge comes power... and the industry does NOT want the citizens of this state to retain or regain that power which was granted us when this country was founded. If we assert our rights and say 'No!', then their multi-million dollar 'windfall' blows away on the breeze.
Mr. Rooks thinks Maine should 'lead the way'. Well, sir, there is 'leadership', and there is 'going off half-cocked'. Being a leader doesn't always mean one is FIRST. A good leader is cautious, reasoned, and listens to the words of his advisors. An exemplary leader learns from his mistakes and does not repeat them. Just because a leader CAN storm a fort, doesn't always mean that he should.
We are lucky. We have the experiences of many other countries which we can learn from. When others who have been experimenting with industrial wind for two decades finally say, 'Enough! No more wind! No more government subsidies! It isn't working, and until we can come up with a plan that PROVES it will, we aren't investing more money, aren't sacrificing more land, will not disrupt the lives of animals and people any longer!' Enter... many of our European friends.
We can learn from their experiences, and we SHOULD. We simply must not allow the government and the wind industry to push forward with their plans to desecrate more than 300 miles of Maine's mountaintops for a power source that is unreliable and intermittent, and which Maine does not need. We must not allow the raping of our natural resources for a power source that we can not store, and which we do not currently have the capacity to transmit. The recent approval of CMP's new infrastructure upgrade has 'wind' written all over it. How many Mainers will now have those dangerous high voltage lines in their backyards? We are already an energy exporter. Why must we be the ones to sacrifice for another region's electric needs?
If ever there was a time to be a NIMBY... if ever there was a time to boldly stand up and say 'No!', this is it. At the very best, this scheme has a life-span of 20-25 years. The impacts to Mainers and to this land will be long-lasting. Maybe permanent. Mr. Rooks attempts to show that we who oppose mountaintop industrial wind are spoilsports, or selfish, or unreasonable. But what are we, really? We're brave. Full of common sense. Tired of being scammed and taken advatage of. Tired of being lied to and taken for fools.
When Mr. Rooks and his wind industry friends can PROVE that the benefits of industrial wind outweigh the negative impacts, then perhaps I'll give his words credence. But we don't need any more of his brand of legislation. We've got enough of that, already. If he wants to worry about laws, he ought ot take a look at some of the ones on the books concerning 'conflict of interest'. There are many in this Big Wind game who are abusing those laws to the maximum extent.
For links to factual information about industrial wind, please visit www.highlandmts.org.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Pease