Regarding John Anderson’s letter, wind turbines do only use a small percentage of the land. So do 20- and 40-acre subdivisions. So do some city blocks. Rarely is land completely covered with buildings border to border. Wind turbines are not different than any other industrial site. You can build a power plant on 20,000 acres and claim you used only a small amount of the land. Graze cattle around the plant and call yourself a rancher.
Electrical generation from wind does not involve mining, water or drilling for fuel. True, but turbines don’t grow from seeds in place. Manufacture and maintenance definitely involve water, mining and fossil fuel usage. Millions of tons of copper, iron, and rare earth metals; plus concrete—a serious source of carbon dioxide in the environment. Millions of tons of concrete.
Yes, the wind industry works with the government. It’s called lobbying and tax credits. It’s called contributing to political campaigns. Remember Duke Energy? Negative tax rate, billions in income? This is how wind “sets itself apart.”
The claim that ranchers and farmers benefit and can keep their land. So wind is advocating propping up failing industries? Using one industry to funnel money through to another does not change the nature of the transaction. Just give the money to the ranchers and cut out wind.
The wind industry makes its own decisions concerning siting. Wind, in the beginning, could walk off and leave the towers where they stood to rust away—and did so. Wind spends a lot of time saying “look how nice we are” and people are expected to buy that. The oil and gas industries say the same, but mandatory rules and regulations exist for these industries. Wind should be no different. This is about money just as in oil and gas.
SHERI KIMBROUGH, Evansville
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding