<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:nww="http://www.wind-watch.org/namespace.php"
	xmlns:coop="http://www.google.com/namespace"
	>

<channel>
	<title>National Wind Watch: News &#187; Letters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wind-watch.org/news/category/letters/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news</link>
 	
	<description>Industrial Wind News from National Wind Watch</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2008 11:36:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	
					<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Townships beware!</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>05 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Everyone is in favor of renewable energy 
After one and one-half years of study and by majority vote, the Potter County Planning Commission passed a wind facility ordinance and forwarded it to the Potter County Commissioners for fine-tuning and adoption. 
The commissioners have studied the turbine issue now for seven months. They have studied reports, visited numerous industrial wind installations, personally talked with industrial wind developers, local government leaders, and people whose homes have been devalued (and their lives seriously .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/05/townships-beware/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17662</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind turbines: Prove they&#39;re safe</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:42:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>05 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I applaud the Potter County Commissioners&#8217; new wind farm regulations (Endeavor, Aug. 19). 
The burden of proof lies with the wind developers. They need the hard scientific evidence proving their setbacks and regulations will protect the health, safety and welfare of the public. 
As for the state&#8217;s model wind ordinance, the press release for this document states it is a &#8220;template that local governments can adjust to their specifi c needs.&#8221; There are no hard and fast standards. 
Also, it .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/05/wind-turbines-prove-theyre-safe/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17661</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power has problems</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:02:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>05 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The analysis in the editorial &#8220;Wind power benefits outweigh negatives&#8221; is very questionable. It provides an overly-simplistic treatment of electricity generation means and bounces across a number of fossil-fuel related negatives. 
Based on this flimsy process it arrives at what is apparently an obvious and broad sweeping conclusion that wind power is &#8220;&#8230;clearly one of the best energy alternatives&#8230;&#8221; 
However, in fairness to the writer, these are the common mistakes of the conventional wisdom, which supports industrial wind power well .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/05/wind-power-has-problems/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17647</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Scotland]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Anguish from wind farm</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>05 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I write as the owner, with my wife, of one of the homes directly on the A9 at Brora. 
I object vehemently and massively to the monstrous news that Scottish and Southern Energy expect to use our road for constant heavy loads of massive wind farm equipment. The disabled especially – and I am one – and all others who live on this road, most of whom seem to be older people, should not be subjected to the mental anguish .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/05/anguish-from-wind-farm/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17620</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Scotland]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Scotland’s wild places must be protected</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>05 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The points made by William Thomson (Letters, September 3) about encouraging energy production at a local level are very pertinent if we are at all concerned about cutting greenhouse gas emissions. But this is not going to happen to a large enough extent while most effort and funding is currently directed towards large-scale onshore wind farm development. 
Energy conservation is the poor relation in the public debate about reducing emissions. There is no end of talk about how much good .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/05/scotland%e2%80%99s-wild-places-must-be-protected/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17628</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Scotland]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Huge numbers of deer would be slaughtered</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:54:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[As chairman and committee member of the Sutherland branch of the SSPCA we are horrified to learn that Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) in its draft habitat management plan for Gordonbush Estate, have recommended that huge numbers of deer from throughout East Sutherland and probably further afield be lured, through rich feeding, to the Gordonbush estate, corralled and then killed. 
It is left to the reader&#8217;s imagination to picture the panic, fear and terror these animals will endure. By their .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/04/huge-numbers-of-deer-would-be-slaughtered/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17619</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Need windmill regulations before it’s too late</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:30:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The sudden and spectacular interest in wind turbines is here. Newspapers, magazines, and study groups all over the country are taking positions on wind turbines now and the current situation seems about like this: 
The federal government doesn’t prohibit wind turbines. Vermont doesn’t prohibit wind turbines. Wilmington doesn’t prohibit wind turbines. 
There are hundreds of small, and some large, companies in the wind turbine business around the country—several in Vermont. 
If you want to put a 300-foot turbine in your .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/04/need-windmill-regulations-before-it%e2%80%99s-too-late/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17624</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind turbines’ noise, flicker ruin countryside</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:04:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Aug. 21 letter writer who vacationed on the Jersey Shore and stated that the wind turbines added to their entertainment and enjoyment should have them in his back yard. His family doesn’t have to listen to the noise pollution when running intermittently day and night. 
They sound like the whirl of a jet engine piercing through the air. The shadow flicker created by the sun shining through the blades acts like a strobe light blinking in your windows. Wildlife .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/04/wind-turbines%e2%80%99-noise-flicker-ruin-countryside/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17621</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Scotland]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>What price Gordonbush&#63;</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:49:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The land affected by this monumentally inappropriate industrial development is set to dominate and face the central heart of Sutherland. 
It sprawls across ancient boundaries of clan lands, churns up a Mackay skirmishing ground, desecrates a meeting of watersheds, is an old, precarious droving way, known well as a place where the rise and fall of the burns used to leave a traveller in trouble. Viking place names abound here, innumerable archaeological sites, now known to number far more than .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/04/what-price-gordonbush/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17616</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Massachusetts]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Not leaping on &#39;green bandwagon&#39;</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[COHASSET &#8212; The privately funded wind turbine project taking shape on the Graham Waste site will likely be a lucrative project over the long term, placing its private backers firmly in the black. 
As residents of our town we should be asking ourselves, what are the true benefits of the project to the town? 
On the surface it seems that generating clean, green, renewable energy is an admirable, socially responsible thing to do. So why shouldn’t the town of Cohasset .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/04/not-leaping-on-green-bandwagon/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17614</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Turbine: Total disregard for residents</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:58:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[According to the FDC web site, applications for wind turbines will be permitted subject to &#8212; 
&#8220;There being no adverse effect on neighbouring occupiers due to noise emission, visual intrusion, shadow flicker, or electronic disturbance&#8221;. 
It seems that our turbine-obsessed authority has chosen to ignore its own guidelines on turbine development for reasons one can only speculate on, such is the case regarding the Whittlesey wind turbine. 
I ask the question is it right ethically or morally, to knowingly approve .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/04/turbine-total-disregard-for-residents/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17607</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Wales]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Ignoring what we wanted</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 10:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>03 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I am writing to draw readers&#8217; attention to the bizarre game of hokey cokey played by the council’s development control committee in its recent decision-making. 
One minute, a planning application was out, then it was in again! 
I am referring to the decision in July to refuse planning permission for the Maerdy Wind Farm above Treorchy and the overturning of this decision in August. 
The July discussion occurred after the applicant and members of the public were given an opportunity .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/03/ignoring-what-we-wanted/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17557</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Do you know you&#39;re backing windfarms&#63;</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>02 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Employees of wind turbine companies have been canvassing support in Cumbrian towns to aid their planning applications to build on green field sites, encircling The Lake District National Park. 
Residents of the towns probably have no detailed knowledge of the individual sites, but are supporting renewable energy, which they mistakenly believe to be deliverable and cheap.
The government’s obligation to the EU to build 7,000 more turbines before 2020 at a cost exceeding £100bn pounds, or more than £4,000 for every .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/02/do-you-know-youre-backing-windfarms/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17529</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Jewel in the crown at risk</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:24:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>02 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I am writing to object to the planning application for wind turbines at Davidstow in Cornwall. 
As owner of Hamatethy Common, which includes Roughtor, I am grief-stricken that anyone would want to ruin the whole of our beautiful moors – they are the jewels in the crown for North Cornwall. 
We (the landowners and the commoners) have been forced to give unlimited public access in the right to roam so that everyone can enjoy the moors, and now they are .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/02/jewel-in-the-crown-at-risk/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17521</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Utah]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power is overrated</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 10:22:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>02 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[An article of Aug. 19 praises the wind-turbine facility at the mouth of Spanish Fork Canyon. But it&#8217;s misleading. It says this is a 19-megawatt facility and is expected to produce energy 80 percent of the time. But that doesn&#8217;t mean it will produce 19 megawatts 80 percent of the time. 
I have driven past this facility several times this year. Each time, most of the rotors were stopped with one or two turning very slowly. So, technically, the facility .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/02/wind-power-is-overrated/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17520</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ohio]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Don&#39;t get swept away by wind energy</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 09:53:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>02 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[ The Associated Press article &#8220;Winds of change,&#8221; in the Aug. 24 Dispatch, pointed out some drawbacks to wind power but did not go far enough. The argument for clean renewable energy is compelling, regardless of whether you believe global warming is real or preventable. 
Reducing our dependence on foreign oil has the potential for far-reaching economic, environmental and political benefits. However, wind energy is not the panacea that its proponents claim. 
The true costs of wind energy include more .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/02/dont-get-swept-away-by-wind-energy/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17513</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Missing paragraph caused confusion</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 10:14:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>01 Sep 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[SETTING IT STRAIGHT: Following my letter in The Sentinel on August 8 regarding wind farms and Judith Oppenheimer&#8217;s response of August 21, I would like to set the record straight. 
Unfortunately a vital paragraph in my original letter was omitted which resulted in a personal attack on myself. The paragraph should have read: &#8220;Wind farms cast a shadow on home prices&#8221;. In the first legal ruling in the UK it was stated that home owners living near wind farms could .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/09/01/missing-paragraph-caused-confusion/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17495</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Some people don&#39;t want the turbines</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:21:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>30 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Why are wind turbines being rammed down the throats of people who don&#8217;t want them? 
They are fine for people who want them, but if their neighbors don&#8217;t want that noise, why isn&#8217;t there help for them? 
I know people who are being forced to move because their neighbor wants the turbines, and the company is putting them within 500 to 750 feet from the home of the people who don&#8217;t want them.
Why isn&#8217;t the distance longer when the turbines .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/30/some-people-dont-want-the-turbines/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17453</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[West Virginia]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Alternative energy</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 10:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>30 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Before everyone unquestioningly embraces wind power as the latest answer to all our energy problems, some unfortunate facts about our energy use as a nation need to be faced. 
Wind power, ethanol and other forms of alternative energy, while all wonderful ideas, are not viable long-term solutions in the face of America&#8217;s disproportionate energy consumption. Our nation makes up less than 5 percent of the world&#8217;s population, yet we consume about one-fourth of the world&#8217;s total energy resources. Yearly, we .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/30/alternative-energy/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17443</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power has limitations</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 10:03:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>30 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Wind turbines are the latest popular “answer” to our country’s energy problems with talk of three-bladed monsters covering vast areas from Texas northward. T. Boone Pickens is spending millions to promote his vision of generating 20 percent of our energy from wind power (although her refuses to install any of the turbines on his own 120,000 acre ranch). 
Readers should be aware of wind turbine limitations. The number of wind turbines per square mile is restricted to between 5 and .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/30/wind-power-has-limitations/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17437</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Oregon]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Washington]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Protecting habitat</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2008 10:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>30 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I oppose liquefied natural gas. I have witnessed two LNG pipeline fires in the Columbia River Gorge. 
I watched as proponents used what seemed to me to be dirty tricks to build the LNG electrical production plant in Goldendale, Wash. My sense of it is that the LNG people will do just about anything to accomplish their goals, and that they are willing to risk all of us to secure their profits. 
Wind power has been proposed in letters to .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/30/protecting-habitat/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17436</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power isn&#39;t the answer</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:30:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>29 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Wind power has its roots in small-scale implementations, and at this level it has some value. This was the case for the leader in wind development for most of the 20th century, the United States, and for European countries such as Denmark and Germany. Because of attractive government subsidization, a wind turbine industry was born and industrial wind plants emerged. 
As Denmark and Germany have discovered, though, once wind power approaches mid-to-high single digits as a percentage of the total .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/29/wind-power-isnt-the-answer/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17429</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Turbines will hurt much more than just the view</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>29 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[It’s too bad that “Save Our Skyline” sounds like a group concerned about the visual impact of industrial wind turbines. That’s the least of our worries. 
We’re concerned about the huge impact of clear-cutting and blasting roads and tower sites. We question who will pay for the high-voltage transmission lines needed to get electricity from the turbines to Toronto. 
If cottagers can’t sleep at night, if they suffer from migraines and depression, will they even want to be here? Will .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/29/turbines-will-hurt-much-more-than-just-the-view/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17403</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Poor advice has led to noisy wind farms sited too close to houses</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:28:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The reason why the United Kingdom has an inadequate health and safety standard for wind farms, which has resulted in people being made ill and even forced to abandon their homes because of noise, is now clear. 
Staff from power firms have been working in Government departments, advising them on matters such as appropriate noise levels and the departments have accepted their advice (The Journal, August 28). 
The result is ETSU-R-97, a document planners and the industry are obligated to .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/28/poor-advice-has-led-to-noisy-wind-farms-sited-too-close-to-houses/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17401</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Virginia]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Investors should be wary of Highland wind project</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:05:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Indeed, investors should pay due diligence in the consideration of the potential risks before investing in the Highland New Wind Development project. In many respects they would be investing in a pig in a poke scenario because of the multiplex unanswered questions concerning the project. 
For example, it is not yet known whether the project sites on Red Oak Knob and Tamarack Ridge have had a verified, authenticated, unbiased, year-round study that has recorded wind velocity and constancy. Without such .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/28/investors-should-be-wary-of-highland-wind-project/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17393</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>We must fight to protect our countryside</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:29:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[In letter on the subject of wind turbines (Telegraph, August 8), Chris Broome criticises Angela Smith MP for what he describes as &#8220;a very uneven comparison&#8221; in her objection to the proposed wind farm at Sheephouse Heights. 
Ironically, in his very next paragraph attempting to justify the development, he points out that &#8220;there are a lot of man made structures in the Peak District itself, including many attractive villages.&#8221; 
He must feel, therefore, that equating a group of stone cottages .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/28/we-must-fight-to-protect-our-countryside/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17389</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Ireland]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind farms and landslides</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:35:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>27 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Landslides like that at Maghanknockane, Co Kerry will happen again and again unless local authorities and An Bord Pleanála appreciate the process by which wind farm construction can cause such damage.  
The boglands on the hills take thousands of years to form and once they slide away they are irreplaceable. What happens is as follows:  
1. The bogs on the hills are formed by rotting heather over thousands of years, but they are finely held together by the .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/27/wind-farms-and-landslides/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17353</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Cheeky to mention us in their newsletter</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:33:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>27 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Your article in the Evening Mail last week (August 20) highlights the anger of local councillors at being used by the wind farm company Infinergy to suggest they are supportive of their plans for turbine development in Furness.  
The company distributed a newsletter to local residents which included statements which are untrue and misleading.  
Other parish councils mentioned in the newsletter have now written to Infinergy about the inaccurate contents of the newsletter.  
I am writing on .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/27/cheeky-to-mention-us-in-their-newsletter/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17352</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[North Carolina]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind plan another green boondoggle</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>27 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Those who think T. Boone Pickens’ energy plan (substitute wind electricity for natural gas electricity and natural gas for gasoline) is the holy grail for kissing off domestic drilling or consuming coal and oil, should think again.  
Natural gas replenishment still requires drilling, frequently in oil rich terrain, such as off shore and Alaska.  
Wind fluctuates. Power grids require a tight match between power demand and supply to avoid disastrous blackouts. As wind power contributions increase so do .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/27/wind-plan-another-green-boondoggle/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17347</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Texas]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>The wind blows where, when it wants</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:17:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>27 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[(Re: Letter to the editor, Aug. 21, &#8220;Blowing away wind criticism,&#8221; by Erin Watson.)  
People aren&#8217;t saying that turbine blades need to be turned electrically when wind dies. They are saying that power coming from other sources has to take the place of the wind-generated power on the electric power grid when wind dies, and it does die!  
A few months ago, the Dallas area experienced rolling brownouts when a front moved through and the wind died unexpectedly, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/27/the-wind-blows-where-when-it-wants/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17334</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Turbines not my legacy</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:26:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>26 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Legacy: Well, well, I have discovered that I am a 62-year-old NIMBY because I don&#8217;t want an Eco village or wind turbines in Maer Hills. I have read with interest the letters from the odd one or two people promoting wind turbines and I can assure you they don&#8217;t speak for the majority of the village people.
I have lived in Blackbrook village for 60 years and, no, I don&#8217;t own my own house. My parents legacy to me wasn&#8217;t money, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/26/turbines-not-my-legacy/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17293</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[U.K.]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power not so good for Danes</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:48:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth say that Denmark generates a quarter of its electricity from renewable energy and that Britain could do so too (Letters, August 17). However, they are not accurate.
The average output of Danish wind turbines is 24 per cent of their installed capacity (3.1gigawatts) which is not quite the same. And the expected reduction in greenhouse emissions has not transpired.
Per head of population, Denmark remains one of the world&#8217;s biggest consumers of coal and producers of .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/25/wind-power-not-so-good-for-danes/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17264</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Sorry, can&#39;t support wind turbines</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:12:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[There is a real conflict emerging over the proposed wind turbines apparently to be installed from Dacre, all along the Opeongo Line through Wilno, Barry&#8217;s Bay and to Algonquin Park.
Neighbors are getting set against one another over this; even some families have started to split, brother against brother.
The issue has serious implications for all of Renfrew County.
Wind turbines sound great when you first hear about them. Who is against renewable energy?
Farmers who struggle to make a living are eying up .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/25/sorry-cant-support-wind-turbines/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17245</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind energy hot air</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:24:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens is telling one thing to the American people and another to Congress.
He has repeatedly said that no government help is needed to pursue his plan to build the world&#8217;s largest wind farm. Yet he is lobbying hard for extension of the Production Tax Credit and National Renewable Energy Zones &#8212; essentially a huge tax shelter for wind industry investors and expedited eminent domain for transmission corridors.
The real innovation here is the well-coordinated manipulation of public .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/25/wind-energy-hot-air/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17222</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>An imagined dialogue on wind-farm strategy</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Nancy Madsen&#8217;s article &#8220;Cape Vincent to air turbine zoning plan&#8221; (Aug. 15) informs readers the town has appointed a committee to review a new draft wind law. The article listed conflicts of interest for each town officer related to contracts with the wind developer.
For a board that has a history of trying to ram through these wind projects any way they can, why are they suddenly trying to do things by the law? Perhaps the recent investigation of wind-company corruption .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/25/an-imagined-dialogue-on-wind-farm-strategy/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17204</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind farm output exaggerated</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Once again, I read in theWhig-Standard that the Wolfe Island wind power project is going to produce enough power for 75,000 Ontario homes (&#8221;The winds of change,&#8221;Aug. 12). This is just not true.
In response to an enquiry, Hydro One informed me that the average Ontario home with electrical heating uses 1,700 kilowatt hours of electricity per month; for homes with non-electrical heating, the figure is 850 kilowatt hours per month. Since some homes use electric heating as the primary heating .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/25/wind-farm-output-exaggerated/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17190</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Stand up against landowners tempted by cash</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:41:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Those who would support the proposed Benington wind turbines seem to feel that this is their last remaining opportunity to protect our planet from imminent destruction. 
Wind energy certainly has its place, but it is not crammed into a small patch of land within two km of over 1,000 houses. Sadly Mr Bott is unable to move the turbines further away from dwellings, as he has no other site available to him. To those of us who are all understandably .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/25/stand-up-against-landowners-tempted-by-cash/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17185</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Using public money on wind power demands scrutiny</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 10:16:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>20 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I was interested in the recent news about the big business of wind farms in our area and the high level of scrutiny needed as a result of public money being spent on this source of renewable energy.  
I think it is very important that we keep a close eye on the potential conflicts of interests that exist with our elected officials, such as Senator Aubertine voting in favor of tax breaks for farmers with wind turbines on their .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/20/using-public-money-on-wind-power-demands-scrutiny/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17124</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Turbine noise a problem for nearby residents</title>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:42:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>17 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I attended the July 30 showing of BP Alternative Energy&#8217;s proposed 95 wind turbine settings in the town of Cape Vincent. A presentation by Dereth B. Glance, program director for Citizens Campaign for the Environment, stated that in her experience there was no noise at 750 feet away from operating turbines. She also stated that studies have shown that there is no reduction in property values as a result of proximity to wind turbines. These statements are in sharp contrast .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/17/turbine-noise-a-problem-for-nearby-residents/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=17000</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[North Carolina]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Location is key</title>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 10:23:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>17 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I’m writing to ask folks who care about our county’s future to contact Carteret County planning commissioners and attend the meeting on Aug. 21 at 5 p.m. at the commissioners’ boardroom and urge them to SPEAK UP and tell the commissioners to be extremely careful when they finally adopt the new ordinance governing “wind turbines,” not windmills.
As chairman of Responsible Citizens for Responsible Energy (RCRE), our stand has never been to ban wind turbines from Carteret County. As our name .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/17/location-is-key-2/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16986</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Ohio]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>The answer, my friend, isn&#39;t blowing in the wind, after all</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 16:13:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>16 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I was disappointed to see that the very large negative effects on both Ohio&#8217;s economy and environment were not discussed in the July 27 article &#8220;Wind power likely to blow in,&#8221; on the wind-power projects in Champaign County.
The first issue is the high cost of wind power, which is about 2.5 to three times the cost of coal-generated power. Large wind-power projects exist only because of large government subsidies. Otherwise, wind power would be restricted to a few applications where .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/16/the-answer-my-friend-isnt-blowing-in-the-wind-after-all/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16960</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Wales]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Blot on the landscape</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 10:14:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>16 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Having just returned from a wonderful holiday in Sardinia, I was initially reluctant to offer any comments of a negative nature. Sardinia is, after all, an island known for its natural beauty, characterised by stunning coastline and splendid mountainous regions. 
But when I was travelling along one of the recommended island tours I was disappointed to see how a vast array of wind turbines had blotted the landscape, destroying what must have been part of the island&#8217;s long-standing beauty. 
On .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/16/blot-on-the-landscape-3/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16936</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind turbine plans are the economics of the madhouse</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:19:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>15 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[By coincidence, on the same day as the letter &#8220;Has Government gone insane&#8221; was published in Your Say (August 9), the Western Daily Press also briefly reported that the said Government has now given consent for two wind farms totalling 126 turbines to be built, which (supposedly) will provide enough electricity to power 200,000 homes. 
Really? I doubt it. Given that none other than the chief executive of E.on, one of the largest electricity suppliers, has freely admitted that all .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/15/wind-turbine-plans-are-the-economics-of-the-madhouse/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16827</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Danger of windfarms</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:07:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I was concerned to read that a revised planning application has been submitted for wind turbines on Todmorden Moor. This is despite increasing evidence that shows not only are they ineffective, they also have significant negative impact on the local economy and environment. 
This is not a case of NIMBYism, it is about assessing and understanding the wider implications. In respect of proposals that have been discussed for sites in Calder Valley, the key points I have to make relate .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/14/danger-of-windfarms/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16764</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New Jersey]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Bird champions are too silent on wind farm harm</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:32:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The “Birds, fish may like wind farm” article on Monday 11 was poorly researched.
It has been well-documented that thousands of birds (from large raptors to small warblers) are killed by land-based wind turbines in the western U.S. each year. And many species of migrating birds using the Atlantic Flyway cross Delaware Bay between southern New Jersey and Delaware every fall and spring. Neither of these facts was mentioned in the article.
The ship that was to collect research data on bird .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/14/bird-champions-are-too-silent-on-wind-farm-harm/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16746</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Massachusetts]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power for days off</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 10:11:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I saw a bumper sticker the other day that read &#8220;Working Family for Wind Power&#8221; and it got me thinking. What kind of working family promotes a form of energy that would quadruple their electric bill? Do working families sit around the kitchen table at night and tell each other &#8220;ya know honey, I just don&#8217;t think the government takes enough out of my paycheck each week, I wish they&#8217;d give a few hundred million to a big energy company.&#8221;
I .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/14/wind-power-for-days-off/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16731</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Wales]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Turbines will tower over landscape</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>13 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Pembrokeshire branch of the Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales is appalled that permission has been granted by Pembrokeshire County Council to the developers of the Shipping Hill Wind Turbines (sited between Ludchurch and Templeton), to increase the size of their two already consented machines.
The 74-metre turbines now approved are scheduled to be built along the 120m and 110m contours within the plantation. This will mean they will extend to between 184m and 200m outside diameter. This is .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/13/turbines-will-tower-over-landscape/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16635</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Lyme board did homework on law</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:21:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>12 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Lyme Planning Board concerns itself with crafting reasonable zoning laws for consideration by the town board. The Planning Board sent wind turbine questionnaires to every Lyme resident. We read and tallied the results from each of the 916 surveys returned.
The survey respondents, by clear majorities, indicated that they did not want wind turbines near the water or the population centers of Chaumont and Three Mile Bay. BP Alternative Energy and Voters for Wind now say that the survey process .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/12/lyme-board-did-homework-on-law/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16585</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[England]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Renewables firm should admit defeat</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>12 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[It seems the wind farm developer Renewable Energy Systems Ltd (RES) has been winded by its own inaccuracy.
The Denbrook Wind Farm developers admit and regret making an error, and have been obliged to allow the issue of noise to be re-examined by returning to public inquiry.
It seems they produced erroneous information when processing noise data used as part of the project assessment, and consequently approval of the proposed nine-turbine development at a previous public inquiry may have been based on .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/12/renewables-firm-should-admit-defeat/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16564</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Louisiana]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>A skeptic second-guesses Pickens</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>12 Aug 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[
Mr. T. Boone Pickens has been very vocal regarding his support for solar and wind power to answer all our energy needs. They’re both good ideas — to a point.
They are renewable sources of energy, albeit a little unreliable. Still or cloudy days can be a little problem, and nightfall happens regularly, but everyone knows that the utility company with its hydro, steam and gas turbines will come to the rescue — or will it? Spinning reserves are expensive.
One little .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/08/12/a-skeptic-second-guesses-pickens/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=16557</guid>
					</item>
		</channel>
</rss>
