Bower's: Al Howlett Will Hopefully Read

Al Howlett, who wrote a pro-wind power letter in today's Portland Press-Herald will perhaps read and consider the following two thoughtful responses.

• 

  Karen Bessey Pease ·  Top Commenter · Columnist at Author and newspaper columnist.

  One wonders if Yarmouth would support an industrial wind facility within its town limits? Imagine one or two dozen (or more) 500 foot tall structures emitting high. low and ultralow frequency noise (the noise you can't hear but can only feel, and which travels through walls and bodies and has been used as a torture technique) whenever the wind blows...including at night. Mr. Howlett might be interested in reading up on the terrible impact just three wind turbines have had on citizens in Falmouth, MA. In fact, I can connect him with residents there, if he is truly interested in learning how these have negatively impacted the health and well-being of residents and just how much true 'economic benefits' have resulted. Decreased property values are just one small economic impact. Yes, Bowers will be denied due to unreasonable scenic impact...but there are many reasons why grid-scale industrial wind is a bad idea for Maine. Anyone desiring an honest look at the facts can (and should) research this issue and look at ALL the data, rather than repeating industry rhetoric.

  Reply · Like · Follow Post · 4 hours ago
• 

  Gary A. Campbell ·  Top Commenter

  Mr. Howlett,
  You obviously don't understand how the law works. BEP did not give "its blessing to 29 of 30 required benchmarks" as you say. The only issue before the BEP was the appeal filed by First Wind and landowner Douglas Humphrey. Those appeals only dealt with the statutory issue of unreasonable scenic impact. They made a very thorough analysis, not only of the process by which the DEP decided the Bowers project did not satisfy the siting standards established in the Wind Energy Act, but also the body of evidence that was considered. 
  
  In 2012 LURC conducted a thorough analysis of Bowers and denied the permit.
  
  In 2013 DEP conducted a thorough analysis of Bowers and denied the permit.
  
  In 2014 BEP conducted a thorough analysis of First Wind's appeal and denied Bowers a permit.
  
  Now you come along and tell us we should compare them to the lovely windmills in the Netherlands. Again, you speak form ignorance. The windmills of which you speak top out at about 25% of the height of the wind turbines being erected in Maine. They have historical value and are fairly unique to the region. They are individual windmills, not a phalanx of 50. But the greatest difference between the Dutch windmills and the Maine wind turbines: the Dutch ones actually work and perform a service needed by the local citizenry.
  
  But wait, there's more: You apparently aren't familiar with the extensive opposition the people for the Netherlands have mounted.
  
  I agree that hydro, wind, solar, nuclear, clean coal, natural gas, etc ALL have a role to play in our national energy mix. What you apparently are unwilling to concede is that the Downeast Lakes Region is worth protecting. Are you aware that within 8 miles of the Bowers project would be 14 lakes which the State of Maine has designated as Scenic Resources of State Significance? Of those, nine will have their horizons blotted with the blinking, rotating (sometimes) white 480 ft tall industrial turbines? 
  
  Despite your disappointment at BEP's decision, Maine is still ruled by its laws. Three times now First Wind has failed to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of three state agencies, that the Bowers project will not have an unreasonable scenic impact on the Downeast Lakes. If you believe that Bowers does not merit protection from such development, then there is not an acre in Maine worthy of protection. Including your beloved Baxter.

  http://www.pressherald.com/opinion/letters/Letter_to_the_editor__It...

  And a most informative video to boot which may help Mr. Howlett put things in better perspective:

  http://fiwn.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/robert-bryce-testifies-before-...

   Fair Use Notice: This website may reproduce or have links to copyrighted material the use of which has not been expressly authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available, without profit, as part of our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, economic, scientific, and related issues. It is our understanding that this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided by law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.