[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Giving ‘renewable’ a bad name  

Credit:  Rutland Herald via Grandpa's Knob Wind Project September 26, 2012 ~~

I recently read David Blittersdorf’s article in the Green Energy Times. He seems to like labels like “environmentalists” for both individuals and institutions. He includes the Vermont Natural Resources Council among them who, as he says, are blinded by their own inaccurate information. He uses the label wind opponents, which is incomplete in itself, as they are actually destructive industrial wind opponents. Who wouldn’t oppose the destruction of Vermont ridgelines for huge corporate profits?

Blittersdorf and all other industrial wind developers like the label of wind farms. Who ever heard of a farm devastating the land it sits on? He talks about the industrial wind opponents he says are the biggest storytellers of detrimental fiction he has ever seen. But take a look at Lowell Mountain. Is that devastating destruction only fiction?

These industrial wind developers wanting to be labeled as saviors from global warming might actually be more correctly labeled political opportunists and modern day carpetbaggers. By making contributions to political leaders such as Gov. Shumlin in order to create their own politically friendly opportunity and by taking advantage of financially stressed towns, they fit both of these labels.

Mr. Blittersdorf likes the label renewable, but how does an industry, namely industrial wind, that destroys delicate ecosystems and causes irreparable damage and destruction to the very essence of Vermont, the ridgelines themselves, call itself renewable? This industry gives the term renewable a bad name; e.g. Lowell Mountain again.

Using one of Mr. Blittersdorf’s own phases, “What was most disheartening was the knowledge that all of this waste and degradation is extremely shortsighted.” Could it be all for personal gain and profit? Blittersdorf says he wants the majority of the population to move to cities and towns. Surely he has forgotten what rural Vermont means. And by destroying Vermont ridgelines he has also forgotten what Vermont means.

What’s in a label anyways? Does it all mean “all for profit”?


Source:  Rutland Herald via Grandpa's Knob Wind Project September 26, 2012

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.