[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

In trying to bribe voters, a mighty wind firm blew it 

Credit:  The Keene Sentinel | November 18, 2016 | www.sentinelsource.com ~~

It certainly wasn’t the biggest story to come out of last Tuesday’s election, but it was an important one nonetheless.

Voters in the small Vermont towns of Grafton (population about 670) and Windham (roughly 328) resoundingly said no to an offer some might have thought they couldn’t refuse. The two towns rejected a bid to site a large wind farm across their common border, and, in doing so, said: We will not be bought.

Spanish energy giant Iberdrola Renewables, which has in recent years been targeting northern New England for large-scale wind facilities – it’s behind the 12-turbine wind project in Lempster – sought to put two dozen 500-foot-tall wind turbines along a ridge in the Stiles Brook Forest.

The two towns, just west of Rockingham, would have greatly benefited financially from the project in any case. The taxes alone, poured into their small-town economies, would have, by some estimates, halved the tax bills of homeowners.

The success of the plan still in doubt, however, Iberdrola upped the ante. It offered an additional annual payment to each town, and in case anyone didn’t get the point, it announced the extra money was intended specifically for registered voters – $1,162 per voter in Windham and $428 for each Grafton voter. The payouts would be funneled through a third party, because not handing checks directly to voters would mean they weren’t bought. Right?

The company naturally denied the offer was in any way an attempt to bribe voters into approving the plan. We’re sure company officials were shocked – SHOCKED! – at the idea anyone would take it as such.

But there really isn’t any other way to take it. And if there was any chance the project would be approved, this offer certainly doomed it. The company promised to abide by the voters’ wishes, and the project failed miserably, falling 235 to 158 in Windham and 181 to 101 in Grafton.

Iberdrola misread its audience. These are the type of Vermonters who made Tunbridge dairy farmer Fred Tuttle the state’s Republican candidate for U.S. Senate when a Bay State millionaire tried to carpetbag his way to the seat in 1998. They have no patience for those who would take them for fools. So hooray for them.

In a way, it’s too bad, though. There were plenty of reasons to approve the project. In addition to the huge tax benefit, the plan would have generated 82.8 megawatts of electricity, especially valuable in a state that recently lost its biggest generator, the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.

There are good arguments for renewable energy as a key element of our national power grid, and wind should play a part in that. Siting turbines will continue to be a thorny issue, though, as residents and nature lovers keep opposing specific projects while advocating for the technology in principle. Just as everyone seems to think Congress stinks but their own representative is OK, wind power is often cited among the solutions to lessening our dependence on oil, gas and coal, but no one wants turbines in their area.

Iberdrola’s reprehensible antics in this case won’t make it any easier to overcome that dynamic.

The plan may have failed on its merits anyway. Many residents in the two towns were already opposed to the idea of wind turbines, and there are other players fighting any advances in wind-based energy production.

But in attempting to grease the skids through an insulting offer, the company simply blew it.

Source:  The Keene Sentinel | November 18, 2016 | www.sentinelsource.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 educational 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 Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

News Watch Home

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


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky