Leigh Melander’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  mulling on mills some more

  Hey:

  Well, I guess we need to agree to disagree on the aesthetic value of windmills -- at over 400 feet tall, height of a 40 story skyscraper, they don't disappear into the landscape. (Or, in the case of an offshore installation, seascape.) If you like 'em, I guess it's no big deal. I think they're horrific.

  And while I agree with you on your wilderness point (though I was careful not to use the word "wilderness" in my posts -- it's an archetypal concept at this point in this country, I recognize, as we've managed to impact pretty much everywhere fairly thoroughly), I think that's why the areas that haven't been over utilized need to have even more stringent protection.

  Don't know if you've been to the Outer Cape, but unlike most of the Eastern coast, there aren't many homes on the beach. You can walk the dunes in the National Seashore for hours, and while you may come across the occasional dune shack, which are remnants of early Coast Guard presence, you are walking in some of the least visually spoiled coastline in the country.

  My point is, why choose there to place visual intrusions? Yes, there are fishermen who move in and out on the water, yes, these are not completely pristine wildlands, but you can catch a glimpse here of what an outer beach looked like before the boardwalks, enormo-beach houses, carny rides, and other "improvements" whacked most of the coastline. It is utterly magical.

  And 40 story buildings offshore will utterly change that. A far cry from the occasional lobster boat you see chug along the horizon.

  (Not to mention the migratory birds that will die in their turning arms...but that's a different rant.)

  Best,
  Leigh

  Leigh Melander, Ph.D. Aka Dr. Smartypants

  On Cape Wind, R.I.P. posted 3 years, 6 months ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Re: Welcome to the Fun

  Thanks for the welcome!

  I don't know if we've got the luxury of imagining a world without oil and without windmills everywhere. But I think we must try.

  While nothing comes for free, it is imperative that we imagine the very best solutions that have the fewest negative impacts -- whether those impacts are on air quality, climate change, economics, or aesthetics. To save a world as we uglify it is not saving it.

  Rather than imposing a less-than-subtle technology like windfarms on an area that is close to pristine, why aren't we looking more seriously at energy solutions that utilize other problematic issues that arise from a large population. For example, using waste products to generate energy?

  In San Francisco, for example, there's a new program to capture dog poop from city parks and produce gas (I'm assuming methane -- don't remember particulars) -- silly, yes, small scale, yes, but they've got a point. They're taking something that's icky and not just dumping it into land fills, and instead finding a use for it.

  Or, looking at ethanol -- new technologies are emerging that will be able to create ethanol from any cellulose base material, i.e., any plant based product. What if we imagined instead small, community based ethanol plants that used yard and agricultural waste, lumber waste, food waste, etc. to power the community?

  My point is that there are a variety of solutions that we've not arrived at yet. To cast this argument over windfarms as an "all or nothing" or, to quote King George, as "you're either with us or against us" conversation is naive and destructive.

  And we don't necessarily need monolithic solutions. (See what being dependent upon the mono-fossil fuel emperors has brought us!) Instead, a multiplicity of creative ideas that play to the needs and resources of different communities in different ways can provide us solutions that are both relevant and stable.

  It seems to me that the gift in this fuel crisis is that it gives us an opportunity to re-invent how we imagine how we power ourselves. So why not imagine big and break old assumptions?

  Best,
  Leigh

  Leigh Melander, Ph.D. Aka Dr. Smartypants

  On Cape Wind, R.I.P. posted 3 years, 6 months ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Freudian Slips and typos

  Heck, well, fossil fuels and fossil fools -- Sigmund would have been pleased, I'm sure.

  Best,
  Leigh

  Leigh Melander, Ph.D. Aka Dr. Smartypants

  On Cape Wind, R.I.P. posted 3 years, 7 months ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Wind farms and ocean views

  Hi all;

  Am a new Grister/poster but am becoming, far more quickly than I'd like to admit, an old crank.

  And because of my increasing age, I am moving slowly -- so I am just now commenting on the Wind Farm off of Cape Cod story that was posted a little while back.

  While I am absolutely convinced of the need for new energy sources, wind farms are not without cost -- aesthetically, if nothing else.

  I live on the coast of CA and look at a horizon polluted with oil platforms. While wind energy may be a better alternative environmentally, it isn't aesthetically. If you've visited the farms south of LA, they are hideous -- enormous stretches of landscape with an army of galactic invaders, arms spinning endlessly.

  I have also lived on the Cape, and it is one of the most beautiful places on the Earth. Thanks to another Kennedy, the entire outer shore from the elbow is national seashore -- saving one of the few remaining shores and seascapes in the US as relatively untouched wildlands. You can stand on the beach there and feel infinity -- unencumbered by huge machines.

  If solutions are to be truly sustainable, they must be not only environmentally sound but aesthetically sound -- saving ourselves from the disasters of fossil fools is not the answer if we have destroyed the beauty of place.

  Thanks and best to all,
  Leigh

  Leigh Melander, Ph.D. Aka Dr. Smartypants

  On Cape Wind, R.I.P. posted 3 years, 7 months ago 17 Responses