Comments on: ‘Not in my backyard’ attitude ruins wind power prospects

By: Brian

Brian — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:44:15 +0000

This is becoming a catch 22 situation. Alternative energy is needed to reduce the carbon footprint by decreasing the use of non renewable resources (oil, coal and gas). As the demand for energy continues to increase we will need to replace that demand with alternative energy instead of non renewable’s. USA must stop the large demand for foreign energy as conflicts with the middle east will continue to get worse. As for wind energy the problem is having it to close to communities. Here’s the problem. The lack of transmission lines going to remote area’s to feed the windmills. This is where the NIMBY comes in. No one wants transmission line close by. But to have Wind farms away from communities you need to have lines in remote area’s passing through peoples homes. This is the catch 22. Something has to give or war will continue. USA is to wind what oil is to Saudi Arabia.

By: Susan

Susan — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 04:40:46 +0000

Lisa, you are correct that the issue of human energy usage requires us to make some hard choices. However, there is an old saying, “two wrongs do not make a right.” We need to focus on energy efficiency and conservation instead of trying to find new ways to depredate nature to extract electricity. The spatial footprint of wind energy is very large, and the actual output is a relative piddle. The industry themselves say they need 60 acres per megawatt.

If you consider yourself an environmentalist, I ask you to think critically about a development scheme before accepting it just because someone says it’s “renewable.” Wind developments harm wild areas and make them “non-renewable” to the species that inhabit them.

Contempt for “NIMBYS” is also contempt for people who are actually attached to their places, their eco-systems. We ALL need to be attached our places. That is the only way to truely “save the earth.” Save where you live.

By: Ron

Ron — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:45:37 +0000

Oh if it was JUST a wind farm… It so much more complex than that, and as a environmental studies major, I would expect that you would be informed of such. The NIMBY issues are really the tip of the iceberg. Wind farms tend to be remotely located, and have serious impacts on the flora and fauna. The remoteness requires transmission lines, to connect to the grid. The Intermittency of wind will require increasing ancillary facilities
as more of the wind farms are developed. These are not benign developments, and typically, the impacts are to rural,undeveloped areas, and amount to sprawl. If this was the ONLY effective way to reduce the pollution and GHG impacts of energy generation, it would be one easier to digest, however it is NOT the ONLY or best approach. There is no ONE Size fits all application for energy. However, Localized Renewable Energy development is a model that reduces the sprawl affects and would return more benefits to local communities.
Energy-Electricity issues are incredible complex, this complexity has created many of todays problems…

By: Cheryl

Cheryl — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:00:36 +0000

Lisa, Just curious how long you have lived in close proximity to a wind farm? You seem to have an opinion that they are harmless and have very little impact to our environment. Sadly, I used to be just like you and called people nimby’s. After all we must save our planet right?

Now I will share my reality. Three years ago our neighbor was granted permission to put up a wind turbine in our neighborhood. Welcome to the last two years of my life in hell. Loud doesn’t even touch the noise this turbine made. The noise was so bad we had to leave our home at times just to get a good nights sleep. And most of the wildlife left as well. Except for the rabbits that multiplied as there were no predators to be found.
Luckily for us the turbine was removed. Deer and other wildlife are starting to return. For our family though we will never be the same. It was so much easier being “green” before we knew the tremendous impacts these things cause. And I can back up all statements made here with absolute proof.

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:57:36 +0000

If you ever got a good look at a old windmill from up close, it could make the case for NIMBY. Oil oozing down the sides of the tower, unrepairable turbines left standing as an eyesore blades dangling in the breeze, explosions in the underground cable systems, and the grind of poorly lubricated bearings echoing through the valleys are problems that could be fixed with enough money, but aren’t for many windfarm operators in this valley despite the obvious violation of their contracts.

By: Gabriela Salvidea

Gabriela Salvidea — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:59:52 +0000

“I would argue”—avoid phrases like this. Rather than telling us you plan to argue something, just argue it. “Show” not “tell” is a huge aspect of strong writing.

I think I understand what you mean by “XX” in the fifth paragraph, but will you make it even more obvious to readers. Remember you’re shooting for middle school reading comprehension.

“The main problem that Whitman professor and rancher Delbert Hutchison has with the project is that “the money is coming from the outside and will be going outside” because Gaelectric is an Irish-based company.”—how does this express a “not in my backyard” viewpoint?

“Gaelectric’s developer of research and development”—developer of development? That seems kinda awkward.

“In 1990, the U.S. had 75 percent of cumulative installed wind power capacity worldwide. By 2003, the U.S. share was reduced to 16 percent, as markets in Germany, Spain, Denmark, and even India surged due to electricity feed-in policies and active support by governments.”—This paragraph has lots of technical jargon that is inaccesible to us reader unfamiliar with these issues. E.g., “cumulative installed wind power” and “feed-in policies.” Please explain these.

“ENRON wind”—wow, please explain. What year are you referring to? Does ENRON wind still exist?

‘Now that American wind energy is finally starting to get on its feet again”—is this happening now because policies have changed? A word here about this turnaround would be good.

“Another concern with the Lincton mountain project is the potential impact on wildlife. But biology professor Hutchison doesn’t believe”—this is a little confusing. For whom is this a concern, then?

Your last paragraph is excellent, but it really needs to be WAY closer to the beginning. Remember that most people don’t get to the end of new articles. Will you work it in so that it’s your third or fourth rather than last paragraph?

Great work!