[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


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

News Watch Home

Not a Koch Bros. flack  

Credit:  Brattleboro Reformer | 03/23/2013 | www.reformer.com ~~

There is a sizable group of people around the state and especially in Grafton, Windham, Sheffield who are opposed to large-scale industrial wind production (In response to “What’s the origin of Vermont anti-wind sentiment?” March 15). None of us is on the payroll of the Koch Brothers. To my knowledge none of us is a mouthpiece for ultra-right organizations. We are Vermonters who love our ridgelines the way they are. Act 250 sought to preserve the ridgelines and has stood the test of time. We support Act 250 as a way to preserve the forests and fields of our state. Industrial wind projects do not have to conform to Act 250. Due to undemocratic lobbying by big monied utilities, they are not covered by Act 250 and utility development requires no environmental impact statement. Not only that the permitting process prohibits input from the neighbors.

Aside from their beauty, ridgelines protect us from flooding which global warming is guaranteeing will get worse. So why make the flooding worse by shaving the tops off our ridgelines? In the name of saving us from the effects of global warming, we are making the effects of global warming more disastrous? Not smart.

I understand that getting a PhD requires reading books, getting opinions from other sources and then using them as your own as you create sweeping generalities. Please don’t assume that the rest of the world requires spoon feeding in order to come to a conclusion. We don’t have PhDs and our opinions come from our experience as landowners in Vermont. Wind is fine as an alternative energy when it is sited in a physical location where it doesn’t destroy the land. Without any ultra-conservative input, we have decided on our own that it is stupid to destroy Vermont’s landscape in order to save it from global warming.

Small dams and water power worked here for generations as energy sources. Conservation, public transport still need to be pursued as energy saving options. This makes much more sense to my far left sensibilities. My question to the authors of the column is who paid you to write it? Iberdola? Atlantic Wind? The arguments you make are identical to those made by the industrial wind mouth pieces, but unlike you, I do not assume you have been paid to flog the company line. However, it is a valid question back to the person who questions motivation.

Sally Warren,

Grafton, March 18

Source:  Brattleboro Reformer | 03/23/2013 | www.reformer.com

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.



Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

National Wind Watch