<?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; Vermont</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wind-watch.org/news/category/vermont/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>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:38:41 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	
					<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>First wind encounters trouble in New York</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 17:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>17 Jul 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Massachusetts-based First Wind, formerly known as UPC Wind, is the subject of allegations of wrongdoing in New York, along with a Connecticut-based Noble Environmental Power LLC, according to the New York Attorney General&#8217;s Office.
First Wind is the firm behind the wind farm proposal in Sheffield.
N.Y. Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo alleges there have been improper dealings with public officials as well as anti-competitive practices.
Subpoenas were served on First Wind, based in Newton, Mass., and the Essex, Conn.-based Noble Environmental Power, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/17/first-wind-encounters-trouble-in-new-york/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/17/first-wind-encounters-trouble-in-new-york/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Massachusetts]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>CET announces schedule of wind energy tours</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 20:30:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>11 Jul 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Center for Ecological Technology (CET) has announced the 2008 annual schedule of tours of Green Mountain Power Corporation’s renewable energy wind facility in nearby Searsburg, Vermont and the new Zephyr wind energy turbine at Jiminy Peak Mountain Resort in Hancock, MA.
The wind energy facility located on Searsburg Mountain was the one of the first commercial-scale wind power facilities constructed in the northeast. Since 1997, eleven 550-kilowatt wind turbines have been producing electricity. Tours are led by the Vermont Environmental .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/11/cet-announces-schedule-of-wind-energy-tours/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/11/cet-announces-schedule-of-wind-energy-tours/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Editorials]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Not much of a choice</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:42:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Jul 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Gaye Symington, speaker of the Vermont House of Representatives and the Democrat&#8217;s candidate for governor, made some choices in the last few weeks that may help predict what kind of energy policy Gov. Symington would pursue in the future should she be elected.
Symington appointed Rep. Tony Klein of East Montpelier as the new chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee. Klein lives in East Montpelier and is a Democrat. He&#8217;s a member of the important House Natural Resources and Energy .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/04/not-much-of-a-choice/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/04/not-much-of-a-choice/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Windmills will profit us not, annoy us more</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:55:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>03 Jul 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[As a real estate broker in this valley for 25 years, and a property owner who will be affected by this wind project proposal, I strongly object.
Don’t allow a foreign-owned energy giant to conduct an experimental wind project on our ridgelines. The sight and sounds of windmills, directly in the path of the migratory animals, birds, and bats, so important to the natural environment, will be dramatically affected. Educate yourself so you understand fully what the benefits and consequences will .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/03/windmills-will-profit-us-not-annoy-us-more/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/07/03/windmills-will-profit-us-not-annoy-us-more/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Something else to mull over</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:17:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>19 Jun 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I have read, with motivated self-interest, about the Deerfield Wind Project (disclosure- I live at the bottom of Searsburg Hill). As far as I can tell, there are compelling arguments, pros and cons, on both sides.
There is one issue, however, that raises serious concerns, and that I haven’t seen addressed.
While it’s true that some Vermonters, shortsighted in my opinion, local taxpayers, and electric customers, will benefit in limited ways, the ultimate beneficiaries of this project aren’t even United States citizens. .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/19/something-else-to-mull-over/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/19/something-else-to-mull-over/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Don’t destroy our best assets</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:53:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>12 Jun 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Regarding last week’s article “Towns Look for Clarification of Windmill Project Plans” about Readsboro’s contract negotiations with Deerfield Wind, residents of Searsburg, which shares the same attorney, were not given the same privilege of discussing their contract and voicing their concerns prior to its signing. The statement that the project “is expected to begin moving forward soon” is incorrect, unless the reporter knows something I do not.
The Public Service Board’s decision is pending this fall but a number of interveners .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/12/don%e2%80%99t-destroy-our-best-assets/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/12/don%e2%80%99t-destroy-our-best-assets/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>All towns should be compensated</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 19:46:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>12 Jun 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I read with interest the recent article in The Deerfield Valley News about discussions regarding the amount of money to be paid to the towns of Searsburg and Readsboro by PPM Energy, should the proposed wind farm expansion in the Green Mountain National Forest be approved.
While the proposed turbines are located in Searsburg and Readsboro, their impact on neighboring Wilmington would be substantial, particularly for residents living in the viewshed of the ridgeline.
Should we not be compensated as well? What .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/12/all-towns-should-be-compensated/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/12/all-towns-should-be-compensated/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Green energy goes wherever it pleases</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>10 Jun 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The cell-phone charger doesn&#8217;t get unplugged as often as it ought to.
The ancient water heater uses far more juice than a newer, more energy efficient model would.
The sheets and towels would dry perfectly well out on the clothesline, but it takes so long, the dryer is more convenient.
The mercury barely crept above 90 degrees this weekend and already the air conditioners set to whirring.
When it comes to our electrical use, most of us thoroughly deserve our guilty consciences. Noble though .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/10/green-energy-goes-wherever-it-pleases/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/10/green-energy-goes-wherever-it-pleases/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Readsboro eyes windfall from turbine project</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2008 17:35:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>06 Jun 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Revenue questions and concerns about the rising cost of energy dominated the conversation at an informational meeting on Tuesday night about the seven proposed wind turbines in the Green Mountain National Forest.
Attorney Richard Saudek, a Montpelier lawyer who is representing both Readsboro and Searsburg in negotiations with Deerfield Wind LLC, fielded questions from several town residents regarding the terms of the agreement that the Select Board is expected to sign in the coming weeks. The project will see 17 total .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/06/readsboro-eyes-windfall-from-turbine-project/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/06/readsboro-eyes-windfall-from-turbine-project/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind power a boon for Readsboro, Searsburg</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>04 Jun 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Seventeen new wind turbines proposed on Green Mountain State Forest Land by Deerfield Wind, LLC, could generate over &#36;3 million for the town over the next 20 years, according to Richard Saudek, attorney for both Readsboro and Searsburg in the matter.
The contract was shared with residents at a meeting Tuesday. Instead of taxes, the town will benefit from the success of the wind farm or receive a minimum of &#36;154,000 annually.
&#8220;The agreement will go through the duration of the project,&#8221; .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/04/wind-power-a-boon-for-readsboro-searsburg/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/06/04/wind-power-a-boon-for-readsboro-searsburg/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>State releases draft energy plan</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 10:28:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 May 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Douglas administration released a draft plan Tuesday to help shape Vermont&#8217;s energy future. Critics immediately lambasted the 267-page document as inadequate to reduce the state&#8217;s dependence on petroleum, to increase energy efficiency or to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The plan, drafted by the state Public Service Department, calls for continued reliance on electricity from Hydro Quebec and Vermont Yankee while utilities find more diverse, preferably in-state, sources of renewable power.
It also foresees Vermonters buying more efficient, less-polluting cars and trucks, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/28/state-releases-draft-energy-plan/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/28/state-releases-draft-energy-plan/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>In Vermont, a debate swirls around an aging nuclear plant</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 09:37:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 May 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[After part of a cooling tower collapsed last August at Vermont’s only nuclear power plant, the company that runs it blamed rotting wooden timbers that it had failed to inspect properly. The uproar that followed rekindled environmental groups’ hopes of shutting down the aging plant.
The proposed closing, albeit a long shot, has gained some support this year among Vermont politicians. The discussion here is bringing into sharp relief a conflict between two objectives long held by environmental advocates: combating nuclear .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/28/in-vermont-a-debate-swirls-around-an-aging-nuclear-plant/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/28/in-vermont-a-debate-swirls-around-an-aging-nuclear-plant/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Is wind a good deal for Vermonters&#63;</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 19:59:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>24 May 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA["Infused in the Board's decision is the unauthorized concept that the Board can jettison the legislature's clear directive that it make certain environmental findings, and replace that direction with an unarticulated, standardless methodology which balances environmental harm with the project's overall societal benefits"]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/24/is-wind-a-good-deal-for-vermonters/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/24/is-wind-a-good-deal-for-vermonters/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Giant wind turbines begin to turn in New York</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 10:27:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>07 May 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[CLINTON, N.Y. — Blades have begun to turn on 121 wind turbines here and in neighboring Ellenburg, a 35-minute drive northwest of Plattsburgh. Saturday, they turned with a soft whush, whush, whush.
“Whush, whush, whush, all day long, all night long — I moved here because it was so peaceful and quiet,” groused Allen Barcombe as he pointed to the nearest tower, jutting up 400 feet into the sky behind his house.
A mile away, Bill Linendoll, an unemployed logger, stepped outside .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/07/giant-wind-turbines-begin-to-turn-in-new-york/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/05/07/giant-wind-turbines-begin-to-turn-in-new-york/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Protect the national forests</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:21:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>03 Apr 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I read last week’s article “Forest Service buys Handle Road parcel” with trepidation. It is important to realize that the United States Forest Service no longer protects forest lands, even national forests, from development. Their 2006 Final Environmental Impact Statement for Vermont’s Green Mountain National Forest identifies 37 sites, for a total of 19,700 acres, as “potentially both viable and suitable” for wind power development.
As quoted in their report on Page 3-298, “Alternative E [has] several large contiguous sites available .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/04/03/protect-the-national-forests/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=12299</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Huntington turbine faces visual challenge</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 10:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>31 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The wind tower above Huntington Center could be an eyesore or a beacon of hope in the eyes of its beholders.
If they give it a second glance.
Seen from town, the 120-foot tower, without its turbine and blades, measures roughly the size of a small paper clip held at arm&#8217;s length.
Detractors say that&#8217;s enough to scuttle the skyline&#8217;s charms. Proponents beg to differ.
The Vermont Public Service Board, a neutral arbiter of aesthetics, has ruled twice against the structure, which was erected .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/31/huntington-turbine-faces-visual-challenge/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/31/huntington-turbine-faces-visual-challenge/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Towns make shortsighted decisions</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:24:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[This letter is in regard to recent articles about Searsburg windmills and West Dover refusing to purchase the Sargent property.
Each decision struck me as being shortsighted. The industrial -sized windmills will alter the landscape of a unique corner of southern Vermont, but not in a way that will enhance the appeal of the area. They will affect the value of the towns around Searsburg (whose residents believe they will get a financial windfall of some sort, no pun intended).
In fact, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/28/towns-make-shortsighted-decisions/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/28/towns-make-shortsighted-decisions/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Residents question selectboard</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:31:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>27 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[READSBORO- Teddy Hopkins vacated his position as chairman of the selectboard earlier this month but that hasn’t stopped town residents from keeping his name the tip of their tongues.
At Tuesday night’s selectboard meeting, Hopkins was again the major topic of conversation after the board announced that he and Arthur “Junior” Passardi were to remain on the windmill negotiating team. According to Chairman Raymond Eilers, the board’s decision was fueled by the progress the current team had made over the last .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/27/residents-question-selectboard/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/27/residents-question-selectboard/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Douglas signs energy bill</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>20 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Gov. Jim Douglas on Wednesday signed into law a bill aimed at promoting renewable energy like solar and wind power, as well as new efficiency measures devoted to reducing Vermonters&#8217; use of oil and other heating fuels.
&#8216;Help Vermonters save money&#8217;
The bill, dubbed the &#8220;energy efficiency and affordability act,&#8221; will &#8220;help Vermonters better manage their heating resources, protect our environment and save money,&#8221; Douglas told scores of lawmakers, administration officials, energy advocates and others who filled his Statehouse office for the .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/20/douglas-signs-energy-bill/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/20/douglas-signs-energy-bill/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[North Carolina]]></category>

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

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Tilting at wind turbines: wind farms in national forest raises red flags</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>19 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Is it impossible to dream of national forests as reachable stars — as places of unbearable beauty and solace to the human soul and places of sanctuary to the beasts and the birds we share the planet with?
“Man of La Mancha” aside, I have concerns regarding large-scale wind farms anywhere and the idea of locating projects with 15 or more turbines (the Deerfield Wind Project in Green Mountain National Forest, Vermont, is proposing 17) in national forests across the country .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/19/tilting-at-wind-turbines-wind-farms-in-national-forest-raises-red-flags/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/19/tilting-at-wind-turbines-wind-farms-in-national-forest-raises-red-flags/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Press releases]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Industrial Wind Turbines Planned in Tourist Mecca</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:19:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>19 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[In National Precedent, Industrial Wind Turbines Planned in Tourist Mecca, Green Mountain National Forest in Vermont
Searsburg, VT &#8212; In what could be a national precedent, the Vermont Public Service Board is reviewing a plan to build 17 industrial wind turbines on more than 80 acres of the Green Mountain National Forest. Known as Deerfield Wind, the turbine project would be located along a prominent ridgeline in the towns of Searsburg and Readsboro, Vermont.
Deerfield Wind would be the first industrial wind-energy .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/19/industrial-wind-turbines-planned-in-tourist-mecca/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/19/industrial-wind-turbines-planned-in-tourist-mecca/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Connecticut]]></category>

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

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

		<category><![CDATA[New Hampshire]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Rhode Island]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Gridlock on electric &#39;highways&#39; could stymie renewable generation</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>10 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Northern New England is turning to the sun, wind and waste wood for clean, renewable power, but there&#8217;s a serious problem: the threat of gridlock on electricity &#8220;highways.&#8221;
A prime example is New Hampshire&#8217;s northern Coos County, where there are proposals to build renewable energy plants with roughly 460 megawatts of capacity — two-thirds of the proposed renewable projects in the state — to run over a transmission line that can only handle 100 megawatts.
The bottleneck is in Whitefield, the end .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/10/gridlock-on-electric-highways-could-stymie-renewable-generation/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/10/gridlock-on-electric-highways-could-stymie-renewable-generation/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Anti-windfarm group sends appeal to Governor Douglas</title>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2008 11:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>09 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Ridge Protectors say energy efficiency bill is unacceptable
Ridge Protectors, a group fiercely opposed to industrial wind power on Vermont&#8217;s ridge lines, has launched a letter-writing appeal to Gov. Jim Douglas, who they hope will veto S.209, the so-called Energy Efficiency and Affordability Act.
The bill, which is aimed at promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency, has passed both the House and Senate, and is on the governor&#8217;s desk.
The letter-writing campaign is a last-ditch attempt to change a part of the measure .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/09/anti-windfarm-group-sends-appeal-to-governor-douglas/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/09/anti-windfarm-group-sends-appeal-to-governor-douglas/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Writer suggests a public debate on wind turbines</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:15:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>06 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[As one of the founding members of “Save Vermont Ridgelines,” I am deeply concerned about the proposed commercial wind turbine development above 2,500’ sea level in Vermont. Over 40 years ago, in recognition of the value and fragile nature of land 2,500’ above sea level, policy makers in our state chose to declare this area of Vermont virtually “off limits” to development. Little has changed since then except for the modifications to Act 248, Vermont’s environmental policy, when considering commercial .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/06/writer-suggests-a-public-debate-on-wind-turbines/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/06/writer-suggests-a-public-debate-on-wind-turbines/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Searsburg reverses stance on windmills</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>06 Mar 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Voters packed the room and spilled out into the entryway at Searsburg’s Town Meeting Monday evening, forcing some voters to shout their ayes and nays from outside the room.
Although the valley’s smallest town often has the highest voter turnout, several controversial articles on the warning may have swelled the ranks at this year’s meeting.
In the evening’s biggest upset, voters reversed last year’s nonbinding resolution to oppose PPM Energy’s proposed wind generation project in Searsburg and Readsboro. In a paper ballot, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/06/searsburg-reverses-stance-on-windmills/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/03/06/searsburg-reverses-stance-on-windmills/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Vt. lawmakers back energy bill</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>28 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Vermont lawmakers gave final approval Thursday to a bill designed to promote renewable energy and energy conservation efforts directed at heating fuels.
&#8216;How do we maximize energy independence in the state of Vermont?&#8217; said Rep. Robert Dostis, chairman of the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee. &#8216;That is what this bill will help us achieve.&#8217;
The approval punctuated an 18-month journey that saw Gov. Jim Douglas veto a bill with many of the same provisions last year. In that legislation, Douglas didn&#8217;t .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/28/vt-lawmakers-back-energy-bill/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/28/vt-lawmakers-back-energy-bill/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Legislators urge Lowell-area residents to demand wind public hearings</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 20:55:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>19 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[NEWPORT CITY &#8212; State Sen. Bobby Starr on Monday urged residents in the Lowell area to demand a hearing on proposed new wind measuring towers for the Lowell Mountain range.
The residents in Lowell don&#8217;t have deep pockets to fight a wind turbine project, said Starr, D-Essex-Orleans. He spoke at a legislative breakfast at the Eastside Restaurant after a question from Lowell resident and wind turbine opponent Don Nelson.
Residents need to immediately push for public hearings from the Vermont Public Service .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/19/legislators-urge-lowell-area-residents-to-demand-wind-public-hearings/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/19/legislators-urge-lowell-area-residents-to-demand-wind-public-hearings/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Petitioned articles top Searsburg’s agenda</title>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:20:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>17 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Deerfield Valley’s smallest town will hold its annual Town Meeting on Monday evening, March 3, at 7 pm, in the Searsburg town office.
This year’s warning has 25 articles – including several citizen-petitioned articles that may be hotly debated on the floor.
Article 11 asks voters if they’ll make the switch from an appointed road commissioner to an elected road commissioner. A petition for the article was circulated by Gary Sage. He says several residents would like to see the position .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/17/petitioned-articles-top-searsburg%e2%80%99s-agenda/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/17/petitioned-articles-top-searsburg%e2%80%99s-agenda/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[New York]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Researchers: Why are thousands of hibernating bats dying in NY and Vermont&#63;</title>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>17 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Bats in New York and Vermont are mysteriously dying off by the thousands, often with a white ring of fungus around their noses, and scientists in hazmat suits are crawling into dank caves to find out why.
&#8220;White nose syndrome,&#8221; as the killer has been dubbed, is spreading at an alarming rate, with researchers calling it the gravest threat in memory to bats in the U.S.
&#8220;This is definitely unprecedented,&#8221; said Lori Pruitt, an endangered-species biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/17/researchers-why-are-thousands-of-hibernating-bats-dying-in-ny-and-vermont/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/17/researchers-why-are-thousands-of-hibernating-bats-dying-in-ny-and-vermont/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Petitioned articles top Searsburg’s agenda</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:35:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>15 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Referring to tax appeals after the existing wind power project was built in the late 1990s, Sage says the town lost a lot of revenue and, worse, had to pay a portion of the power company’s statewide education tax. “They have a sign saying they’re worth &#36;11 million,” Sage says. “We appraised them at &#36;7 million, and they beat us to death with their lawyers until they got it down to &#36;5 million, less than half of what it’s worth. .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/15/petitioned-articles-top-searsburg%e2%80%99s-agenda-2/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/15/petitioned-articles-top-searsburg%e2%80%99s-agenda-2/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Unreliable wind power is not worth it</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 23:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[UPC&#8217;s claim that their wind project could provide electricity for 15,000 homes in Caledonia County may have stirred up a lot of support for their project. It shouldn&#8217;t have and here&#8217;s why:
Wind-produced energy will be fed into the New England power grid line that runs along Duck Pond Road and follows a path to St. Johnsbury. The Independent Service Organization &#8212; New England (ISO-NE) distributes electricity throughout New England using this and similar grid lines. This is the reason why .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/14/unreliable-wind-power-is-not-worth-it/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/14/unreliable-wind-power-is-not-worth-it/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>What a surprise</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:13:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[After casting the die last fall with biased materials, the Department of Public Service announces (Caledonian-Record, Feb. 2, 2008) that its workshops and deliberative polling sessions found just what it had set out to find: People are &#8220;so supportive of wind power they wouldn&#8217;t mind a wind farm within sight of their homes.&#8221;
How many turbines, at what height? And lights? And noise? Well, it&#8217;s easy for people who don&#8217;t live in the mountains to say that, since they know it&#8217;ll .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/14/what-a-surprise/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/14/what-a-surprise/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Vt. House passes new version of last year&#39;s energy bill</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:49:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The Vermont House on Wednesday passed by a massive margin a new version of the energy bill shot down last year by Gov. James Douglas&#8217; veto.
But the Murphy&#8217;s Law of legislating remained in place: If lawmakers make compromises to gain support on one side, they risk loosing the bill on the other.
So while the House version of the bill offered the Douglas administration some compromises compared to last year&#8217;s measure, it may run into trouble when it heads back to .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/14/vt-house-passes-new-version-of-last-years-energy-bill/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/?p=10826</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Sheffield has new agreement over UPC wind project</title>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:23:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>11 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Town officials and UPC Wind, the developer behind a 16-tower wind farm in Sheffield, have negotiated a new agreement on what UPC will pay the town.
It&#8217;s a good deal for Sheffield, Board of Selectmen Chairman Max Aldrich said Friday. For one thing, it eliminates nearly all risk, he said.
For another, it should help with property taxes, although it won&#8217;t affect the education tax rate. 
The new plan is partly an attempt to forestall the possibility of lower payments, if the .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/11/sheffield-has-new-agreement-over-upc-wind-project/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/11/sheffield-has-new-agreement-over-upc-wind-project/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Why let PPM destroy Searsburg ridgelines&#63;</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:35:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>07 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Two recent letters made a claim that the proposed Deerfield Wind project will provide energy to 78% of Windham County residents. Where did this incorrect figure come from? If any of you actually went to PPM Energy’s “informational” meetings, you would have heard the same answer I got when I asked their representatives if any of the electricity produced was staying locally – “The energy would go into the grid. It would go where it was needed at that moment, .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/07/why-let-ppm-destroy-searsburg-ridgelines/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/07/why-let-ppm-destroy-searsburg-ridgelines/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Impact of windmills will devastate Vermont</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>07 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I have read numerous times that the proposed wind project will provide energy for 14,000 to 16,000 homes. Those numbers are derived from the “nameplate capacity,” which is the potential capacity of a wind facility should it be generating power 100% of the time. Wind developers themselves claim facilities generate only 30% to 33% of the nameplate capacity; this puts the total number of homes receiving electricity at 4,600 and 5,300 respectively.
Knowing this, the wind developers continue to mislead the .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/07/impact-of-windmills-will-devastate-vermont/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/07/impact-of-windmills-will-devastate-vermont/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>UPC Wind moves ahead with Sheffield wind plans</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 12:03:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>02 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[UPC Wind plans to continue with its construction schedule for a wind farm in Sheffield, even though Ridge Protectors, a citizens group opposed to commercial wind on Vermont&#8217;s rural ridgelines, has filed an appeal of the Vermont Public Service Board&#8217;s decision with the Vermont Supreme Court.
&#8220;We think the Public Service Board&#8217;s decision will stand the test of time,&#8221; said Matt Kearns of UPC, project manager for Sheffield, on Friday.
The Supreme Court could overturn the PSB&#8217;s decision, if it decides to .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/02/upc-wind-moves-ahead-with-sheffield-wind-plans/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/02/upc-wind-moves-ahead-with-sheffield-wind-plans/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind energy is great, but…</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 11:56:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>02 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[I think everyone will agree that any renewable energy source is better than using coal or petrochemicals or nuclear. Wind is certainly a viable resource but we have to face facts that wind has some limitations. Statistically, wind plants have a 25 percent capacity rating – meaning availability of power output &#8212; because of their reliance on 9 mph or higher winds. The optimized power output of one wind generator is 275 to 500 kilowatts, or about enough for 50 .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/02/wind-energy-is-great-but%e2%80%a6/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/02/wind-energy-is-great-but%e2%80%a6/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind farm opponents file argument in Supreme Court</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 16:39:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>01 Feb 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Attorneys for opponents of the UPC Wind project in Sheffield have filed a 33-page brief detailing their reasons why the Vermont Supreme Court should overrule the state’s Public Service Board and stop the project.
In the appeal filed on behalf of the Ridge Protectors, a citizens group, attorneys C. Daniel Hershenson of Norwich and Anthony Roisman of Lyme, New Hampshire, argue that the Public Service Board (PSB) committed four basic errors in granting the project the “certificate of public good” it .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/01/wind-farm-opponents-file-argument-in-supreme-court/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/02/01/wind-farm-opponents-file-argument-in-supreme-court/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Ridge Protectors appeals to Vermont Supreme Court</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>30 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Ridge Protectors has filed a Vermont Supreme Court appeal of the Vermont Public Service Board&#8217;s decision to approve a wind farm in Sheffield.
The appeal comes as no surprise. Ridge Protectors, a citizens&#8217; group opposed to big wind turbines on Vermont&#8217;s rural ridge lines, has tenaciously battled the project and announced its intent to file an appeal last fall.
UPC Wind, based in Massachusetts, wants to put up 16 420-foot commercial turbines on Sheffield&#8217;s ridge lines.
In August, the PSB issued a certificate .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/30/sheffield-wind-opponents-file-vermont-supreme-court-appeal/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/30/sheffield-wind-opponents-file-vermont-supreme-court-appeal/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Barton selectmen to hear proposal to ban wind farms</title>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:54:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>27 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[After two recent public hearings held by the Barton Planning Commission, a proposal to ban all commercial and industrial wind towers in town will now go to selectmen for consideration, but it may not get the most enthusiastic reception.
Robert Croteau, chairman of selectmen, said he&#8217;s not sure that entirely prohibiting a source of renewable energy is a good idea. &#8220;In my opinion, just ruling outright all forms of wind projects without consideration is worse than poor planning,&#8221; he said. &#8220;It&#8217;s .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/27/barton-selectmen-to-hear-proposal-to-ban-wind-farms/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/27/barton-selectmen-to-hear-proposal-to-ban-wind-farms/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Data gathering begins on Grandpa&#39;s Knob</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:12:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>25 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[Noble Environmental Power is seeing which way the wind blows — and how hard.
The company put up the first of two meteorological towers in West Rutland last week, and project manager Brad King said the second is scheduled to go up in Hubbardton today. The towers are taking measurements as part of the Connecticut-based company&#8217;s plan to put a wind farm on the Grandpa&#8217;s Knob ridge line.
King said not to go out looking for windmills, as the towers are very .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/25/data-gathering-begins-on-grandpas-knob/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/25/data-gathering-begins-on-grandpas-knob/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Searsburg Selectboard scolded</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>24 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[With a population that hovers around 100, and a voter checklist of about 70, Searsburg is one of the state’s smallest towns. But small town government doesn’t necessarily mean small problems.
Residents in the tiny mountain town are up in arms over a series of actions taken by selectboard members. The controversy came to a head at a selectboard meeting on January 8, which more than 20 members of the public attended. At more than half the number that usually attend .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/24/searsburg-selectboard-scolded/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/24/searsburg-selectboard-scolded/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[U.S.]]></category>

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

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

		<category><![CDATA[West Virginia]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Supreme Court hears wind arguments</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>24 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The debate over a proposed wind farm in northern Greenbrier County reached the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals January 9.
     The arguments didn&#8217;t focus on what proponents and opponents usually say to tout or criticize wind energy. The issue before the court was whether the state Public Service Commission followed its own rules in approving a permit for the Beech Ridge Energy project.
     That permit lists 25 separate conditions that must .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/24/supreme-court-hears-wind-arguments/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/24/supreme-court-hears-wind-arguments/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Opinions]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>VPIRG has become a special-interest advocate</title>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:26:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>19 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[The U. S. Supreme Court says elimination of &#8220;corruption or the appearance of corruption&#8221; is the only legitimate reason for a state to abridge the First Amendment rights of its citizens through campaign finance legislation. Using this standard, the court struck down in June 2006 a 1997 law promoted by the Vermont Public Interest Research Group (VPIRG).
In 2007, VPIRG was back with another campaign finance bill &#8212; different but with comparably strict contribution limits.The Legislature, controlled by Democrats, passed the .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/19/vpirg-has-become-a-special-interest-advocate/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/19/vpirg-has-become-a-special-interest-advocate/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Faced with opposition, Manchester wind plan stalls</title>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>17 Jan 2008</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[MANCHESTER — It has been almost two years since voters at Town Meeting directed the Select Board to oppose a wind project planned for Little Equinox with up to &#36;150,000 after a contentious discussion. As this year&#8217;s Town Meeting approaches, the proposal seems to have dropped from the radar of both the proponent and the town directed to stop it.
Endless Energy, a Yarmouth, Maine-based company, had proposed to build five 390-foot wind turbines on Little Equinox to generate 30 million .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/17/faced-with-opposition-manchester-wind-plan-stalls/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2008/01/17/faced-with-opposition-manchester-wind-plan-stalls/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wind project takes first step</title>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:23:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>19 Dec 2007</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[A proposed wind farm on Grandpa&#8217;s Knob cleared its first state hurdle last week.
The Public Service Board issued a certificate of public good for a pair of meteorological towers that will test the wind levels atop the Grandpa&#8217;s Knob ridgeline. The towers, described in the finding as up to 197 feet tall and 8 to 10 inches thick, are set to land on sites in Castleton and Hubbardton.
Testing could last up to five years, according to the board&#8217;s findings.
The board .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/19/wind-project-takes-first-step/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/19/wind-project-takes-first-step/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Letters]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Don&#39;t let wind turbines ruin wilderness</title>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>18 Dec 2007</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[In today&#8217;s Free Press there was a letter from Tom Shea of Searsburg regarding building 400-foot monstrosities on top of our beautiful and perfect mountains. (&#8220;Nothing beautiful about wind turbines,&#8221; Dec. 12 ) I wonder if the people who support such a desecration of the beauty of our state have any idea how a 400-foot- tall wind turbine would look up there. God awful is the answer. All those who complain about putting cell towers on hills around the state .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/18/dont-let-wind-turbines-ruin-wilderness/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/18/dont-let-wind-turbines-ruin-wilderness/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Town to oppose wind project</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:09:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Dec 2007</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[WILMINGTON- The town voted to oppose a plan to put many as 17 wind turbines on ridge lines in Searsburg and Readsboro at a special Town Meeting Wednesday evening.
After a short discussion, voters approved a motion to oppose the project in a 51 to 15 vote. Voters supported a second motion to fund the opposition with &#36;40,000 in a 49-14 vote. The selectboard will use the money to argue the town’s opposition to the project in hearings before the Vermont .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/14/town-to-oppose-wind-project/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/14/town-to-oppose-wind-project/</guid>
					</item>
						<item>
		<nww:division>
		~		</nww:division>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Vermont]]></category>
		<category>Wind power</category>
		<category>Wind energy</category>
		<title>Wilmington voters against wind farm proposal</title>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:20:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<nww:date>14 Dec 2007</nww:date>
		<nww:source>
		~		</nww:source>
					<description><![CDATA[WILMINGTON &#8212; Voters told the Selectboard Wednesday that they wish it to oppose the proposed wind turbine project for Searsburg and Readsboro.
More than 60 voters met in Twin Valley High School&#8217;s cafeteria Wednesday night to make their voices heard on the subject, which has been an ongoing controversial topic here.
They voted 51 to 15 to oppose it, beginning with a written testimony due Dec. 21 and culminating with hearings in April 2008 before the Public Service Board.
The project is looking .&#160;.&#160;.]]></description>
				<link>http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/14/wilmington-voters-against-wind-farm-proposal/</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/12/14/wilmington-voters-against-wind-farm-proposal/</guid>
					</item>
		</channel>
</rss>
