5 Comments

Who knew that the late Senator Kennedy was part Indian!

THE CAPE WIND PROJECT MUST BE RELOCATED TO A DEEP WATER VENUE TO PRESERVE NANTUCKET SOUND

As a colonial-rooted Cape Cod native who firmly believes in the sanctity of our maritime heritage, I am writing to ardently express my steadfast support for the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound. Based upon sensible logic, data and reasoning, I am also conversely opposed to the controversial Cape Wind Project which seeks to despoil and rob us of the pristine nautical legacy bestowed by our forefathers. As a result of the likely profound damaging regional financial, ecological and public safety consequences Cape Wind would wrought upon us all, it should not be allowed to proceed forward to fruition.

The project poses a cogent danger to essential air and sea navigation.
Siting the project in Nantucket Sound is a breach of the public trust.
Contrary to their sham claims, the cost of the electricity which the
project will produce would not be cheap or competitive. It would be an
unbearable fiscal burden hoisted upon us without our sanction or consent. Furthermore, it will represent a deleterious local economic blow by it’s absconding of undeserved taxpayer-funded subsidies, forced real estate devaluations, and lost revenues from commercial and tourism activities. The proposed one hundred thirty wind turbines will perpetually cause unsightly visual contamination and distressing noise pollution. Finally, Cape Wind will unnecessarily endanger a critical marine and wildlife habitat.

Off-shore deep water wind has surfaced as a cost-effective and
technologically feasible option in lieu of the Nantucket Sound situated
Cape Wind Project. Cape Wind has chosen a location which possesses
countless expenses as well as hazards to public safety, the marine
environment, and the local economy. Deeper-water sites offer more powerful winds and the advantages of clean renewable energy without surrendering the irreplaceable natural beauty of Nantucket Sound.

More distantly sited off-shore locations guarantee the advantages of clean wind power without many of the harmful effects of close-shore siting. Furthermore, there would be little harmful impact upon air and marine navigational safety and local tourist-based economies.

In 2007, the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) estimated a total off-shore wind energy resource of over 1000 GW. The potential for deep water locations greater than 30 m (or 100 feet) is enormous. Approximately ninety percent of the off-shore wind potential in the United States resides in deep water.

With the aforesaid thoughtful rationales in mind, along with the
inherently unfair and inequitable nature of the proposed Cape Wind Project itself, it must not become a reality which will forever doom our children and grandchildren to a ghastly socially inhumane legacy.

Ron Beaty
West Barnstable, MA

Some anthropologists have pointed out (referring to Kennewick Man) that we have no way of knowing much at all about Indian tribes before the arrival of Europeans; the tribes themselves, which were probably just a few hundred people and rather fluid, might have only come into existence briefly before that time – perhaps even after. Even more-so for the so-called “spiritual rituals”. That said, the windmills interfere with my Traditional Spiritual Belief That I Just Made Up about the government wasting money on boondoggles.

Thanks Ron for your NIMBY (Not In My BaY) response. However, Le Mur got it correct. If the government is so concerned about CO2 and Global Warming, why don’t we build nuclear power plants that can actually produce the energy we need 24/7/365 instead of wasting money on wind farms that can only serve to supplement our energy needs?

The turbines would be 5 (count them 5) miles out to sea. One would have to squint hard to see them from shore. Mr. Ron Beaty reminds me of the lawyers in the 1995 OJ trial.