Right on, David.

As you point out, wind farms are industrial development.  The underlying assumption is that they are a magic solution and anyone who opposes them is, if not evil, hypocritical at least.

Truth is, the construction and maintentance of windfarms generates greenhouse gases and they feed our addiction to cheap, centralized energy.  They are part of the solution, but they are NOT exempt from criticism.  

The same tactics to silence criticism of windfarms is being used with nuclear energy and other questionable technologies.  

The only magic solution is to reduce demand, through conservation and increased efficiency.  

A big problem with the attack on Kennedy is organizational.  It's typical sectarianism -- a struggling movement finds it difficult to confront its real opponents, so it vents its anger on allies.  Ally X is not pure enough; ally Y does not have the correct line on coal sequestration.  When you get started in-fighting, there's no place to stop.  And your opponents love it.

I respect Bill McKibben, but I think he's wrong on this issue.

Either invade Iraq or mushroom clouds over US cities.

We all know why this was a false dilemna now.  No WMDs in Iraq.

Either nuclear power or global climate disaster.  

Renewable energy can stave off global climate disaster without nuclear.

Either Cape Wind or global climate disaster.  

Other less controversial sites are available for wind farms.  Just becaue wind power advocates give up on this project or modify it by moving further offshore does not mean the general movement towards wind power is defeated.

But is it possible to come up with a true dilemna on energy policy?  Yes it is.

Either solar, wind, wave, water power, geothermal heat pumps, and electric vehicles..or all the problems (including global climate disaster,  massive pollution, envitonmental devestation, safety problems, and health effects of mining,economic disaster,nuclear weapons proliferation, nuclear waste and safety issues, and endless oil wars) , that go along with oil, fossil fuel, and nuclear power.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

I'm a YIMBY (yes in my backyard). I was born on Cape Cod and raised for the first chunk of my life near Nantucket Sound. I don't know the details of the Cape Wind project, and in general would prefer lots of small projects in as many places as possible, but I agree with those who say we have to do as much as possible as soon as possible to generate less greenhouse gases. So while the scale and location of this project raise serious concerns, I am generally in favor of it (with caveats similar to the NRDC's that it be done responsibly).

And I love the sight of wind turbines! I have seen land-based wind farms in the Canary Islands. I thought they were beautiful, and have the photos to prove it. The island of El Hierro has a goal of more energy self-sufficiency and knows that wind power will increase their tourist appeal while decreasing their need to import diesel fuel.  

What matters even more than how we generate our megawatts is the idea of NEGAwatts--the electricity we don't use. I worked very hard to stop the Hydro-Quebec project a decade or so ago. We claimed Quebec didn't need to flood the James Bay area because energy conservation could save more negawatts than the massive project would generate. But in an economy literally fueled by growth, using less of anything is anathema. So we are still trying to generate more electricity. I would love to see the fuel plant on the Canal GONE. Replace it with as many renewable alternatives as possible (including negawatts from conservation and mini-generators such as solar).

My Upstate New York town turned down a small-scale hydropower plant some years ago because the redirected water flow would "reduce the falls' appeal to tourists." Even the most vocal greens became NIMBYs. The falls have always waxed and waned with rainfall, but they virtually disappeared for three months last summer due to a prolonged local drought presumably caused by Global Warming. So a hydroelectric plant based on what the weather USED to be like may have had limited value. Perhaps if we had all been YIMBYs for the last 25 years, our weather wouldn't be so weird. We certainly all need to become YIMBYS now.

I looked into having a wind tower installed on my two acre rural lot. Zoning and economics nixed that, so I pay a premium to receive wind-generated electricity. While I know my electricity really comes from a grid that gets almost all its electricity from burning coal, I'm hoping this premium will eventually increase wind generation in my area. I would love to have some wind towers in the middle of my viewscape. My neighbor across the road bought a defunct dairy farm, and those fallow fields would be a great site for a small-scale wind farm. In the meantime, I've been weatherizing my house and turning off those lights.

fiddlehead farmer

A recent announcement was made of a giant wind farm to be built off the Texas-Louisiana coast. The project faces little opposition and appears likely to be built. Even so, the same hurricanes that are making wind competitive by disrupting the natural gas supply would have similarly threatened this offshore wind farm. I can't help but think our best hope is to continue to locate turbines in farming and grazing areas and have agriculture around their bases.

Perhaps wind energy is like Churchill's perception of democracy -- the worst possible system save for all the others.

Ken Duble