I’ve been reading pros and cons of wind energy, not really making any decision about them.
But after reading several articles (I) am wondering if gaining a few dollars for land in the use of the turbines is worth risking a loss of quality in our environment. It seems those dollars are more important than preserving the quality of the land. That the Niagara Escarpment may undergo irreversable damage-gee, it’s “only” been around 425 million years-makes me seriously question the integrity of the company promoting the wind turbines.
Facts presented in Carroll Rudy’s letter were enlightening for me. Didn’t know all the things involved in constructing these towers will affect not only the environment, but consume electricity even when the blades aren’t running. That hundreds of gallons of oil will be consumed and used.
The intention of developing renewable energy is a good one, but are these wind turbines really ‘renewing’ energy?
It may pay well for some, but the rest of us will end up doing the paying, and paying long-term. Do we want to risk losing the quality of our environment-be it land, health concerns, or flying creatures-for a few dollars?
Think long and hard, do your homework, and consider long-term effects when the subsidies run out and wind turbines are no longer desirable. Do you want the 300-foot plus structures standing stagnant and rusting on your land? Who will pay then?
Mary Ann Dudzinske
10 January 2008
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding