Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cape Wind is dealt a setback

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 04:00 AM
Original message
Cape Wind is dealt a setback
(Boston Globe)
Cape Wind is dealt a setback

Bill would give Romney final say

By Stephanie Ebbert, Globe Staff | April 7, 2006

Governor Mitt Romney, an opponent of the wind farm proposed for Nantucket Sound,
would gain the authority to kill the controversial project under a tentative agreement
reached yesterday in the US Senate.

After days of closed-door talks, members of Congress agreed on a measure that would grant
the governor or his successor the right to block the wind farm proposed by Cape Wind
Associates, Senate aides said. The break came yesterday when US Senator Gordon H. Smith,
an Oregon Republican, switched sides and backed the measure giving the governor the
authority to block the project, environmental advocates and Senate aides said.

The amendment is now expected to be attached to a broad Coast Guard authorization bill
that would face floor votes in the House and the Senate, where its future remains unclear.
Some expect the measure to generate a battle in the Senate, where Senator Pete V. Domenici,
a New Mexico Republican and chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, sharply
criticized it this week as contradicting Congress's commitment to producing more renewable
energy.
<snip>
Cape Wind aims to build 130 wind turbines on a 24-square-mile area of Nantucket Sound.
During average winds, Gordon says, the project could provide three-quarters of the
electricity needs of the Cape and Islands, without generating pollution.
<snip>

Full article: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/04/07/cape_wind_is_dealt_a_setback
(Boston Globe - free registration may be required)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 04:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. Oh, for fuck's sake. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EST Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well said...
The array of self indulgent, arrogant sub-normal intellects is frustratingly astonishing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Savannah Progressive Donating Member (272 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 04:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. What really pisses me off about this is that Senator Kennedy is behind it
Apparently, the proposed wind farm is located in one of the Kennedy Family's favorite yachting locations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 04:43 AM
Response to Original message
4. Good.
Nantucket Sound is not the place for a wind farm. I don't live there, but where I live, the wind farming debate rages hot and heavy, and I'm willing to see a wind farm built on one of my favorite mountain tops. It makes sense to put it there, but I don't think the same is true for Nantucket Sound.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 04:51 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Any particular reason for thinking this?
Or just a case of spoiling the view?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfkrfk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 05:19 AM
Response to Original message
6. the oceanbed is federal or state jurisdiction?
where the windmills would be placed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. State - I think...
State territory heads out to sea until it hits the continental shelf, as far as I can tell: I think this is the bit of legal gibberish that governs it, and if you understand it, let me know!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
One_Life_To_Give Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Federal
Actually all Navigable waters are Federal.
The stataes have some influence up to the three mile territorial limit. Which is why Cape Wind modified it's plans to keep the project outside the limit. And away from Romney's veto.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
9. It is really tough to get rich people to accept energy development in
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 08:06 AM by NNadir
their area.

A little known fact is that the anti-nuclear movement in the 1960's got funded when LILCO, then the power company on Long Island, proposed building a nuclear plant in Lloyd's Neck, a wealthy enclave. This ultimately led to the Shoreham disaster, which prevented out country from getting what it needs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soothsayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Wind power makes sense to me. Nuclear, not one iota.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. You must like candlelight. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. How much sense do you have?
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 08:57 AM by NNadir
Nuclear power is the safest continuous load form of power known. It is not quite as safe as wind power - but it is close - and wind power is only safe depending on the type of back up.

Wind can displace gas, but it cannot displace coal. Coal is currently known to be the most dangerous form of energy known, by far. It kills broadly and widely and constantly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfkrfk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
13. I'm tired of 'extra-jurisdictional' BS
childish crap and cowardice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
14. Does this group try to work with the people who live there?
"Cape Wind aims to build 130 wind turbines on a 24-square-mile area of Nantucket Sound. During average winds, Gordon says, the project could provide three-quarters of the electricity needs of the Cape and Islands, without generating pollution."


Seems like a bunch of smaller turbines on land - individual ones even - would not be so "in your face".

I wonder what solution the people who would be looking at these want. Seems to me there could be a different style that would go with their mostly 100 year old looking architecture. Are the Cape Wind people looking for a solution or just to "win" (IOW - force whatever they think is best)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. I'm sure they could go with this classic design...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Well
I think they could use a design like that and modernize how it works. And if it fits an area better - why not?

I think it's kind of bulky looking, myself - it needs a slimmer look (but not as slim as what is proposed). It's not JUST about technology when the plan is to put them in a visible area.

If the things were being put on top of factories and skyscrapers - on the edges of airports - the aeronautical/industrial look would probably work better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. It's an interesting idea to combat nimby-ism, but...
the laws of aerodynamics are fairly uncompromising. Any effective wind turbine is going to look pretty similar to the kind they make now, for the same reason that all airplanes follow a fairly similar bodyplan. Color strikes me as a parameter they could vary freely. I've noticed that fences with dark colors are less obtrusive than fences with white colors. It might be the same for wind turbines.

My understanding of the NIMBY reactions is that they simply don't want any tall structures polluting their view. Tweaking the style of the structure won't really address their complaints.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I think the Holland look
would do better on land. Heck - if they were marketed right - they could probably get people clamoring for them - IOW - they WOULD want them in their backyards.


And if they were to put the industrial looking ones somewhere in the water - it would be nice to paint them blue or or gray or something. Of course - if they are too well disguised - a plane might run into them.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. It's just that the "holland" style is too inefficient.
It won't provide cost-effective energy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. I think that the Holland look
could be combined with modern technology. Nobody's saying it has to be built our of wood (though they could make it look like it was) or that the shape of the turning things couldn't be adjusted - at least the part that works. I don't know that anyone has tried to make a more compatible design.


There is too much ugly stuff that people are expected to look at. Just because some people don't care - doesn't mean that nobody does - or that nobody should.


Or put ugly ones in the backyards of the people who don't care. :shrug:


I mean really - haven't any of these people taken a marketing course? Thought about how to sell an idea - make the thing desirable instead of merely functional?


All I ever hear is that the Cape Wind people are mad because other people don't want ugly things in their backyard. Well who does? I don't. And if I had to choose - I would rather have it in my front yard than my backyard - because I don't look at the view from the front. Are the Cape Winders really trying to come up with a solution that people want to live with - or are do they just want to be clueless to people concerns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. One person's ugly is another person's beautiful.
Edited on Fri Apr-07-06 01:57 PM by NNadir
Given the stakes, I could imagine few things more beautiful that the Cape Wind project off the coast of Massachusetts.

What could be ugly about saving lives and saving the Earth's atmosphere? I note that most of Cape Cod and Nantucket is low lying. That wind project will make it more likely that there will still be a place to stand and enjoy the view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. If they are dirt cheap...

...the efficiency won't matter much. It's all about ROI.

I think it's a fun idea. Outside a dutch windmill, inside, out of view, a modern generator.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
One_Life_To_Give Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
24. Wind is not as steady on land
The reason for putting these offshore is to increase the capacity loading. The wind does not blow as frequently and as strong on the Cape as it does on the Sound.

And leasing the sites on Horseshoe Shoels costs less than leasing on Million $/Acre Cape land.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YankeyMCC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-07-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
15. We've got to keep it out of the Gov's hands until after Nov
and get Deval Patrick elected, he's the only candidate to support the project.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC