Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Two Faced on Energy

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Two Faced on Energy
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Opponents of a plan to build the first offshore U.S. wind farm in Nantucket Sound off Massachusetts were a step closer on Friday to blocking the $900 million project.

Negotiators in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate agreed late on Thursday to give Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney the power to block a plan by Cape Wind Associates LLC to put 130 giant wind turbines near the resort islands of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket.

Romney, a Republican sometimes touted as a potential presidential candidate, is an outspoken opponent of the plan, and U.S. Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, a leading Democrat, also opposes it.

Backers say the project could generate enough electricity for most of Cape Cod and nearby islands. Opponents include wealthy residents with yachts and shorefront property near the proposed site.

An odd alliance has formed to block the project, including Kennedy and two Alaska Republicans -- Sen. Ted Stevens (news, bio, voting record) and Rep. Don Young (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

The blocking provisions were included in the $8.7 billion Coast Guard reauthorization bill that House and Senate negotiators approved late on Thursday.

Young's spokesman said the senator opposed the project out of concerns it would be unsafe for ships trying to navigate off the Massachusetts coast.

Jim Gordon, President of Cape Wind, accused Alaska's Young of cutting a backroom deal with project opponents including wealthy island residents.

"This eleventh hour move to change the rules ... is unjust and contravenes our regional and national energy policy interest," Gordon said.

Project opponents say the plan could endanger tourism and fishing, while promoters say it could provide 75 percent of the electricity needs of Cape Cod and nearby islands.

Studies show the area has some of the strongest, most consistent wind in the eastern United States. At peak output, the project would generate more than 400 megawatts of electricity, enough to meet the needs of some 400,000 homes on Cape Cod and the nearby islands.

On a clear day, the windmills would be visible from many of the area's resort homes, including the Kennedy family compound in Hyannisport six miles away. [Ed note: It's a terrible thing when personal objectives are used to set policy. I MUST listen to Teddy more on his burpings on Haliburton [Roll Eyes] ]
The top lawmakers on the Senate Energy Committee -- chairman Pete Domenici and ranking Democrat Jeff Bingaman, are worried that the measure could set a dangerous precedent and chill U.S. investment in renewable energy projects.

"It would be folly for us in Congress to talk about breaking our addiction to foreign oil and, at the same time, pass laws that stymie our own production of clean and renewable energies here at home," Domenici said in a statement.
The House and the Senate could still amend that legislation before hammering out a final version to send to President George W. Bush to be signed into law.

The Cape Wind project is being developed by privately held Energy Management Inc. of Boston.



IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Flydye, before you go leaping to any conclusions (ok, its FAR too late for that...) this wind farm has been ridiculously controversial in MA for well over a year now... and while some of that has to do with yachting and views, quite a bit more doesn't. There are some major environmental concerns, and a slew of other problems that have been the matter of public debate here for quite a while now.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LoverOfJoy
Member
Member # 157

 - posted      Profile for LoverOfJoy   Email LoverOfJoy   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
including the Kennedy family compound in Hyannisport six miles away
While I agree it's possible (and unfortunate) that Kennedy is motivated purely by personal reasons I think the term "compound" is purely inflammatory language. It's a loaded word that is mostly used to allude to housing for Branch Davidian-type groups.
Posts: 3639 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Please share them. I've heard unverifiably that the windmills will be an inch high when seen from shore.

Considering the message sent, these environmental concerns had better be pretty major! The environmental movement has to decide whether asthetics are a major environmental concern...because frequently they argue that point. It certainly seems to be the case here.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That is a neutral term. I made no such connection until you brought it up. Any relations I made in my mind with the term "compound" was more of fat cat's with multiple mansions on their acres of land.

Still a negative connotation, but a non terrorist one.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
livermeer kenmaile
Member
Member # 2855

 - posted      Profile for livermeer kenmaile   Email livermeer kenmaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The term compound contains elements of dissent forced to agree by common interests despite their many quarks and the forms of valence they often suffer.

[ April 08, 2006, 10:53 AM: Message edited by: livermeer kenmaile ]

Posts: 1449 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
halfhaggis
Member
Member # 809

 - posted      Profile for halfhaggis   Email halfhaggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by livermeer kenmaile:
The term compound contains elements of dissent forced to agree by common interests despite their many quarks and the forms of valence they often suffer.

That is such an incredibly geeky joke. My engineer friends would approve.
Posts: 101 | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KonerAtHome
Member
Member # 2168

 - posted      Profile for KonerAtHome   Email KonerAtHome       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Didn't I say that this was going to happen in another thread about wind farms?

"We need more clean energy sources, but don't put them in my back yard put them out in the middle of nowhere so only the rednecks and farmers have to look at them".

The same exact thing happens with landfills and prisons.

Posts: 461 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Long article describing the fight.

I swear that if these people had been active back then, they'd have opposed telegraph poles as eyesores - and that the US mail was good enough for them.

Say it with me:

WE NEED MORE CLEAN POWER

And I don't care if it blots out the view from every window in my house.

Anybody who opposes clean power projects like this can shut up forever about global warming being a crisis.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
BTW, cheers to greenpeace and other groups that seem to have some understanding and perspective on this issue. I may not like the organizations, but at least they have consistent views.
Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Two cheers for Greenpeace!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
livermeer kenmaile
Member
Member # 2855

 - posted      Profile for livermeer kenmaile   Email livermeer kenmaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
a)The term compound contains elements of dissent forced to agree by common interests despite their many quarks and the forms of valence they often suffer.

b)That is such an incredibly geeky joke. My engineer friends would approve.

You said something yesterday about the essence of Ornery, or something like that, that I greatly admired -- but forgot.

If I had a nickle for everything I've forgotten, I'd have... how much is a nickel, anyway?

Posts: 1449 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
From what I saw on PBS, the builders went so far as to plan for the use of non-toxic oils in their transformers, just in case of any spills.

I'd expect a short-term tourism boom, as people come to check out the windmills.

There is nothing permenant about the impact of setting up these windmills. We're not talking about pit-mining. If it doesn't work out, we can tear them all down in 40-50 years with no real harm done.

Where stands MA's other Senator? Is he just keeping his head down on this one?

Psssssst...Drake....not just more clean power, more domesticly produced energy. Fight Global Warming, redress a small part of our trade defeceit, employ people in decent paying technical jobs....

I think being against this one is somewhat akin to being pro puppy-kicking.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, Jesse, it's pro-compound, which I suppose makes it a catalyst as opposed to a Catapiller, which seems to be anti compound.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Jesse,

these would be subsituting for coal and hydro power - might affect trade deficiet a bit with Canada hydro since the power can probably be shunted around the US.

Not sure what sort of employment impact it would have - I'd think that it would be fairly minimal since you'd want this to be pretty much self contained.

LetterRip

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
LR-

Reducing imports of Oil reduces our overall trade deficiet, neh? My understanding is that most of the areas power is currently provided by an oil burning plant.

It won't be "self contained". The whole system is going to need constant repair and maitnance...I saw 300-500 jobs created on the PBS documentary, but I can't say if that is supposed to include boost to the local economy or just the direct jobs created by the project.

Generators have to be serviced, props balanced, stuff has to be painted, ect. Of course, I also don't know how many jobs will be lost from the existing plant [Smile]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LetterRip
Member
Member # 310

 - posted      Profile for LetterRip   Email LetterRip   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Jesse,

actually it looks like they are predominantly natural gas, not oil,

quote:
Coal | N. Gas | Hydro | Nuclear | Petroleum | Other
23 | 47 | * | 10 | 15 | 4

2003
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/at_a_glance/states/statesma.html

It could be that the specific sub area is petroleum.

quote:
Generators have to be serviced, props balanced, stuff has to be painted, ect. Of course, I also don't know how many jobs will be lost from the existing plant
Are they shutting some plants down to replace them with this new power or just expanding capacity?

LetterRip

Posts: 8287 | Registered: Jan 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1