I am writing in regard to Invenergy salesperson Eric Miller’s July 12 letter, “More misinformation about Stony Creek Wind Farm.” The only misinformation I’ve seen in regard to industrial wind projects comes from wind salespeople like Miller. Let’s see how:
Mr. Miller evidently thinks that the Stony Creek project has not significantly changed in its scope. But here’s the rub: Although the number of turbines proposed remains the same (59), and the (inadequate, unsafe) setbacks remain the same as before – 700 feet from property lines and only 1,320 feet from the foundation of peoples’ homes – the turbines now proposed are substantially larger.
Furthermore, Miller claims they’ve held six “public workshops,” for “a combined 12 hours of public examination.” That’s an interesting take on what constitutes “public” since no comments or questions from the “public” were allowed, nor was the “public” allowed to view documents supplied to town officials. The town attorney directed citizens to submit written comments and questions to the Town Board, and they would be addressed at these work sessions. Dozens were submitted, but not a single one was addressed.
As Paul Jensen correctly pointed out in his June 18 letter, “A bait and switch in Orangeville,” Invenergy’s new proposal calls for a completely different, new model turbine, which is three stories taller and has a 47 percent larger blade sweep area (larger than two football fields), than the original turbine cited in the DEIS. The generator has been up-sized from1.5 MW to 1.6 MW. Moreover, the turbines are much larger and noisier, and well over a dozen – along with their associated transmission lines – have been moved. This has created an altogether different site plan, with correspondingly different environmental impact areas, than was in the original plan proposed by Invenergy. Mr. Jensen’s determination that “it’s not the same project,” is completely accurate!
When Horizon Wind LLC made significant changes like this in their proposed Dairy Hills project in Perry, Horizon was required by state law to do a Supplemental DEIS. Why should the rules be any different for Invenergy? What possible reason could the Orangeville Town Board have to allow Invenergy to bypass correct procedure? Most importantly, why have all local elected officials not first demanded proof of the wind industry’s claims before selling out their entire township and its citizens to a multi-national mega-corporation?
The wind industry’s very existence is based on their claim that it can reduce CO2 emissions and thereby reduce global warming. With approximately 140,000 industrial wind turbines in the world today, wind has not significantly reduced CO2 emissions anywhere. (Most are located in countries and states struggling with enormous deficits and “skyrocketing” electricity bills – like Spain, and New York State). Wind can not replace existing power plants because it can not produce modern power. We may as well require 20 percent of all transport to be by gliders or sailboats.
The truth is, as has been made clear time and time again – “It’s all about the money!” – A sentiment perfectly conveyed by an Orangeville board member, who said, “We don’t care if they work or not. We just want the money.”
So, if you’re wondering who’s misleading who, you best remember that these giant multi-national corporations, and their financially-motivated, corporate wind salesman – like Mr. Miller – could not care less about any of us, or the beautiful area we call home. Big Wind LLCs just want our money – period.
We have been deeply saddened to see fellow Wyoming County citizens so willing to throw their neighbors under the bus, industrialize some of the most beautiful countryside in the world, and so eager to jump into this welfare line. Blinded by greed, they are signing away control of their property and eternally enslaving themselves to Big Corporate. We won’t even receive today’s equivalent of those 30 pieces of silver.
Those of us who continue to speak out against this madness, simply wish to:
1. Stop the wasteful expenditure of our taxpayer and ratepayer dollars on this corporate welfare scam;
2. Protect fellow citizens from the theft of the peace and quiet enjoyment of their homes and property (something I thought our elected “public servants” were supposed to do); and,
3. Protect our natural environment from being exploited for corporate greed.
I believe our tax dollars should be funding truth and due diligence. This is the kind of performance we should be able to expect from our elected officials – things like full disclosure of data to the public, and use of scientific methodology in planning our energy future. As it is, we have enough problems with wind salesmen making believe that the pigs of wind can fly. For shame!
Mary Kay Barton
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding