Skip to content

Media gets the picture

February 15, 2012

From Brewster to the Berkshires, medical doctors, public health defenders, experts in numerous fields, and ordinary citizens spoke up in Boston to object to using findings of the DEP/DPH “health” study to set public policy on industrial wind turbines. The hearing on February 14 was one of three, with the next in Bourne on February 16th.

Kyle Cheney, reporter for the Massachusetts State House News Service was picked up in the Boston Herald on Tuesday

Wind turbine critics question panel’s report on health impacts

Massachusetts residents insistent that the drone, flicker and vibration of land-based wind turbines can shatter the health of nearby communities invoked Tuesday the onset of the United States’ HIV/AIDS epidemic to reject a recent report debunking their claims.

Malcolm Donald addresses state officials in DEP/DPH Hearing

Falmouth resident Malcolm Donald addresses state officials. His T-shirt reads, “still waiting for comprehensive health study.”

R-L Suzanne Congdon, MassDPH; Alicia McDevitt, MassDEP; Ken Kimmell, DEP Commissioner

Bob Salsberg, reporting for the Associated Press was picked up by the Boston GlobeMass. wind turbine health study debated at hearing

Neil Anderson says the headaches, dizziness and palpitations began shortly after Wind One, a 400-foot high wind turbine, began operating about a quarter mile from his Falmouth home. So did sleep disruptions, ringing in his ears and elevated blood pressure.

In contrast to claims of wind developers that opponents are holding up transition to renewable energy, Ben Luce’s recent presentation in Shelburne demonstrated that 30 Massachusetts ridge lines would be sacrificed to develop the 1 gigawatt estimated capacity of wind resources–acres of trees removed, water supplies disrupted, and habitat lost all for the sake of the equivalent of one conventional power plant.

The WWLP Channel 22 coverage by Christine Lee  Wind farm opponents reject study; Say DEP study ignores evidence has produced a robust conversation in the comments.

A. R. Michka says of pro-wind people who think “’Harnessing wind energy resources will allow us to actually shut down coal plants….'”

Not so fast. The latest ISO New England Regional System Plan predicts that New England’s existing coal plants will be replaced with natural gas generators. The wind for coal exchange exists mostly in the minds of those promoting wind energy to New England. It’s a great pitch, and a lot of people fall for it, but it’s patently false. Coal is a base load generation fuel. Wind has no appreciable capacity to contribute to base load generation.

One Comment leave one →
  1. Chris Kapsambelis permalink
    February 15, 2012 10:20 pm

    Wind energy is not a replacement for fossil fuel. It’s an add-on. The addition of wind energy into our system of power generation only serves to decrease the efficiency of our fossil fuel power plants to the point where little or no fuel is saved.

    The most we can expect to gain from wind is the replacement of coal for natural gas. While that may result in a less polluting system, the cost will skyrocket and the coal will be shipped to China, India, and elsewhere, where it will be burned without scrubbers increasing pollution worldwide.

    The Chinese will use our cheap coal to make wind turbines and solar panels that will be exported to us so we can satisfy the artificial market created by the many mandates for renewable energy.

    China wins. We lose!

    At this stage of development, wind energy is not worth the annoyance of anyone who is forced to live within a mile and a quarter of a noisy wind turbine.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: