Please Read This Very Important Wind Petition - Thank You

Comment

Comment by Barbara Ulman on November 2, 2013 at 11:22pm

It seems the height of arrogance for other states to site their wind factories in Maine, a beautiful state which needs to stay that way.  Tourism and the local populace will be negatively affected if all the wind projects proposed are built.  This state needs to be respected for its natural beauty.  Hands off Maine!

Comment by Kathy Sherman on November 2, 2013 at 6:29pm

I had almost signed this petition without being able to read the text, but cannot now that I have.

As much as I oppose despoiling these Maine Mountains and oppose the long-term contracts of utilities serving CT, RI and MA as a means to finance them, I cannot sign a petition that blames the rate-payers of those states or says that it is because the residents of those states don't want them. It is not even quite true that the contracts with facilities in Maine are the result of the state's expedited wind law, given that the other New England states have promoted industrial wind turbine siting with even weaker standards (such as 1.1 times height from residential neighborhoods) and with NO state level regulatory oversight at all (until after the fact, on-going in CT and MA now). In Massachusetts that is nominally considered "local control"/"home rule", but when the state get localities to expedite permitting of turbines 1.1 X height and turns its back on the death of two juvenile osprey just from the limited amount of wind power that is installed, the situation is almost worse. There is no Warren Brown advising the DEP about noise excedances in Vinalhaven or the short-comings of post-construction noise monitoring in Mars Hill.

Furthermore, RI and MA have their own form of "expedited permitting" in their "ocean management" plans for industrial development in state waters, as close as 1 mile from low tide. Off pristine, heavily conserved Block Island in an area that the state of Rhode Island designated as a "renewable energy zone" plans for five 6 MW turbines, about the largest commercially available, within 3 miles of the shoreline are going forward. No it is not the miles of impact of the ridgeline projects in Maine, but it is just a demonstration for what is to come up and down the eastern seaboard. It is the same tactic across the states -- put them in remoter places where they directly impact relatively few (the R.I. REZ is far from most of the state's coastline); add economic development rationale to the fullest extent possible (as an island, Block Island has no transmission, depends on diesel and has exorbitant rates) but the same sorts of arguments motivate Oakfield in ME and Sheldon NY, apparently.

The other thing about your petition is blaming it all on out-of-staters, because we all know that your two previous governors, some Maine industries and all those outraged that Gov. LePage wanted UMaine and their local partners to have a crack at the bid for the long-term contract for the floating platform offshore demonstration and federal tax dollars to go with it (for better or worse, whether Maine or Statoil), Maine utilities, your statehouse are amongst the in-state folks contributing to this mess. Your former CDC director who co-authored the "expert panel" review denying the health impacts of wind energy for Mass DEP-DPH after successfully ignoring Mars Hill, Freedom and Vinalhaven has hurt people across the globe, and lawyers and regulators from Maine, and the good folks from the Island Institute are among those who have been quite active in Massachusetts promoting the wonders of wind and denying the negative impacts. Or saying that they have learned from their mistakes in Maine. Massachusetts academics, consultants and Boston lawyers, and unwitting funding from MA and CT ratepayers has, without doubt, contributed to the idea that Maine has a wind resource worth exploiting, even though despite its larger size, it is 25th among US states for wind resource, but...

What we need is not just fighting for one gorgeous vista at a time and all that is at stake with it, but greater coordination to educate the politicians to their foolishness and the rate-payers who likely do not even know that such long-term contracts were mandated, let alone the dramatic impacts on Maine and New Hampshire. The press coverage in CT, RI and MA has been limited to short stories in the business section, and even the "green", "clean" e

Comment by christian mcginn on November 2, 2013 at 3:25pm

I worked at Baxter State Park 1996-1998, Seasonal Campground Attendant at Katahdin Stream.  I wonder what Percival Baxter's views on wind mills would be?  There should be some respected, educated people running for office who will attempt to put an end to other states and businesses taking advantage of Maine's relaxed laws on Wind Mills.  Besides scenic value which is difficult to prove, economic efficiencies should be emphasized by people who run for office.  For example, Maines Wind Law prohibiting all aspects in impact studies, I would like to read and hear more definitions. Prohibited studies is stated 3rd paragraph from the bottom, but no definition.