« The Genocide of the American Middle Class | ~flowerchild~'s Blog | Seven Tiny Miracles Leading to One Veteran »
A Case for Wisdom to Decide
Man, I am so glad I'm not in the Wisdom Dispensing business. Especially not with a dilemma like this one facing several groups in and around Nantucket Sound.
So, we have windmills on one side, local businesses on the other, and Injuns in the middle facing east.....and everybody is right!
So who gets to be righter?
Like I said, I'm glad I'm not in the Wisdom Dispensing business and I have to admit, in this particular instance, I have no idea which path I'd take.
- Windmills. It's getting hard to find a place where they are welcome and if we want to keep the lights on, wind energy is one beautiful thing. Green tech. How can something that benefits in so many ways be considered a pariah?
- Local economy. With the high national unemployment rate, retaining jobs is imperative. Folks gotta eat and pay rent. The local businesses are concerned new regulations, that would result if Nantucket Sound was turned into a Traditional Cultural Property, will hamper the economy. They have a point.
- Wampanoag. The four directions, north, south, east and west, are traditionally significant for a good many Native American tribes. Facing east figures prominently for the Wampanoag who need an unimpeded eastern view in a particular area of the Sound to carry out their religious ceremonies. But, the proposed windmills are gonna be in the way.
So, we have windmills on one side, local businesses on the other, and Injuns in the middle facing east.....and everybody is right!
So who gets to be righter?
Like I said, I'm glad I'm not in the Wisdom Dispensing business and I have to admit, in this particular instance, I have no idea which path I'd take.
Advertisement
One problem with wind turbines is that they insist on locating in pristine forests, and then clearcutting large circles around each structure. Opening up the wood like that is very bad for deep forest critters.
They also like to locate along ridges where the wind is stronger. But they seem to kill a lot of winged critters there.
But the most depressing thing is that while wind sounds all fuzzy and green, the companies behind wind have the same mentality as any energy/utility company.
November 3, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's a tribe nearby - a Kumajaay band - who put in a row of wind generators with their casino proceeds. Right on top of a mountain. They are very proud to go green.
Up in the San Joaquin valley, the Santa Rosa Rancheria (Yokuts, I believe), boasted that their casino sign is the largest neon sign in the world.
That said, I always liked John Stuart Mill's "greatest good" arguments. "the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people."
So the better the local economy is, the better it is for the Wampanoag casinos.
November 3, 2009 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry folks, this one looks to me like maneuvering in relation to the True & Greatest God - money. Wind-farms tend to get happily sited, IF the local people share substantially in the cash. I've seen it time and again, where opponents throw every argument in the sun at a particular project, while an almost precisely similar project down the road - but which has the locals as financial beneficiaries - faces no such opposition.
As for the Cape Wind project, let's face it - the opponents have been the wealthy. If the band is getting wound up NOW about a project debated for years, then yeah, I'd say it's money at work. The wealthy opponents to the project have always struck me as perhaps the most hypocritical group of individuals I've heard from in recent years. My favourite being their emotional rants about the destruction of their view by these "industrial" products (windmills), which move on the horizon, and thus, destroy the magical view. This, said by rich dumbfucks OUT SAILING, with absolutely NO awareness that their own boats are equally products of industry, which move across everybody else's sightlines.
So.... not sure I'm gonna bite on the unimpeded views bit. Not sure that argument was raised for the tens of thousands of ships, fishing boats and yachts which have gone through the area, not sure it was raised for coastal development of commercial and residential properties.
My cynical side even says, if someone built an offshore floating Casino, owned by the band, would they protest?
Hmmmmm.
November 3, 2009 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Given the enormous potential of wind energy to replace fossil fuels and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions, what is your opinion on the best means of exploiting this potential while at the same time minimizing lethal consequences to birds and bats? Judicious siting can help, but the more wind turbines we set up, the harder it will be to ensure that the siting is always appropriate.
November 3, 2009 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm a bat fan, so am keen on reducing these deaths. Fortunately, there's increasing research on what kinds of bats are dying, when, how, ways to vary windfarm's operations etc. - all in addition to basic siting requirements. Some studies are showing that by not operating the turbines during a very few times during the year, bat fatalities can be cut 50%-80%, with output losses of just 1%-3%. Some studies here.
That said, it irritates a lot of us working on renewables that genuine "information" gets amplified beyond all sanity. Yes, wind turbines kill birds, for instance. But the #1 bird killer, by a long stretch? Cats. Domestic cats. Now, you can SAY that 1,000 times, and people will still think bird deaths are a good reason to oppose wind-farms. Same for people who drive cars and live in houses or work in offices with windows. They're not REALLY concerned about bird deaths, they're searching for reasons to oppose wind.
As a side note, I think there's too many greens that are naive in accepting "reasons" to oppose wind-power or biofuels or electric vehicles. They seem to think that THEIR favourite technology (solar PV or cellulosic ethanol) is going to be completely free of negative environmental impacts, and that the utilities and energy companies are going to simply stand aside when their magic panels come to market. Grumble grumble. ;-)
November 3, 2009 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the informative links. Data from the National Wind Coordinating Committee review in 2004 implied that the threats to bats might be greater than to birds, and so remediative measures you cite could be very important. I also believe that design modifications have been proposed that would reduce harm. These include substitution of helical turbines (without blades or sharp edges) for conventional blade-based wind turbines, but whether that would be practical is uncertain, because they would be less efficient.
November 4, 2009 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
There should be something in here about chasing after windmills.
I live in an old mining community and up on the hills...we have no mountains in Minnesota...there used to be five windmills and now there are eight.
That is an increase in three years. And I find them personally to be a thing of beauty.
By the way, there is just a great scene in the last Mission Impossible of a helicopter chase in a wind farm.
I think Q is right. Where there is money to be made....
November 3, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why not in the water ?http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/27/nyregion/39-ocean-windmills-are-planned-to-expand-power-on-li.html
C
November 3, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought you meant "under the water." That's been proposed, huge turbines powered by ocean currents. Out of sight.
November 4, 2009 1:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
The ocean.
C
November 3, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
There once was a man from Nantucket....
November 3, 2009 10:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
who carried elephant shit in a bucket
November 4, 2009 1:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
To places down south because the north said fuck it.
November 4, 2009 5:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
So how many bats and birds do we suppose will perish due to global warming? How many bats and birds commit suicide each year flying into glass buildings? Or windows? Don't get me wrong, I'm an animal lover, including bats, but this "argument" seems like a non-argument to me (teabag-inspired rationale, I'm guessing).
I'm fairly certain that if we truly considered bird deaths a set-back to building wind farms, we'd come up with a way to keep the birds away. It seems to me that a windmill would have the effect of a giant scarecrow...
As to where to situate the windmills? I've read of ranchers signing on to such projects (open spaces; no need to clear forests), permitting windmills on their property in exchange for a cut of the profits).
BTW, I'd be okay with a windmill in the back yard. The view inside most cities of moderate to large size is littered with giant billboards anyway... so what "view" are we fighting over? That colossal McDonald's M that's so appealing? The enormous blow-up Michelin man? It would behoove us to stop acting like children. There's plenty of open space available... I don't see what the issue is. Yet another ploy to keep the fossil fuel industries holding the reins.
How does someone not "GET" what's at stake here? just set up some rules for these companies... no deforestation, for example, as this would negate the environmental benefits of wind farm. Again, a bit of regulation would go a long way.
November 4, 2009 12:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why they're even having this windmills argument is beyond me. I read online documents describing the planning stages and the like. Near as I could tell the proposals would locate them well offshore. In fact, so far offshore, that they'd be an indiscernible speck on the horizon or not visible at all. Maybe that isn't true but that is what I gathered from my reading.
November 4, 2009 5:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
There have to be some strategies to scare away birds and bats and I am sure more work needs to be done on that.
November 4, 2009 8:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi, Flower.
This is the sort of thing that everybody involved would need to compromise on somehow to get the best result for all. Some people are capable of that, and many are not so much.
In the Mid-East it would all fall down as the windmill people would have an argument that God wanted them to have the windmill land, the businessmen would said God wanted them to trade uninhibited by any restrictions, the cultural people would say God wanted no businessmen involved as they would form an intolerable intrusion, and the religious people would say that not only could they NOT move their location in any way, but the windmills even being *near* their unobstructed view of the East would still be intolerable because God would never want that.
So they would never ever solve it. Could mature adults solve it in USA? It would involve a *lot* of give and take!
November 4, 2009 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink