Comments on: RE: CAPE WIND: Nantucket Sound is a special place, but it isn’t pristine. http://conservationreport.com/2007/10/30/re-cape-wind/ Tracking news regarding conservation, the environment, energy, politics, and technology Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:31:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: RON BEATY http://conservationreport.com/2007/10/30/re-cape-wind/#comment-7668 Tue, 05 Jan 2010 05:36:44 +0000 http://conservationreport.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/re-cape-wind/#comment-7668 As a colonial-rooted Cape Cod native who firmly believes in the sanctity
of our maritime heritage, I am writing to ardently express my steadfast
support for the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound. Based upon sensible
logic, data and reasoning, I am also conversely opposed to the
controversial Cape Wind Project which seeks to despoil and rob us of the
pristine nautical legacy bestowed by our forefathers. As a result of the
likely profound damaging regional financial, ecological and public safety
consequences Cape Wind would wrought upon us all, it should not be allowed
to proceed forward to fruition.

The project poses a cogent danger to essential air and sea navigation.
Siting the project in Nantucket Sound is a breach of the public trust.
Contrary to their sham claims, the cost of the electricity which the
project will produce would not be cheap or competitive. It would be an
unbearable fiscal burden hoisted upon us without our sanction or consent.
Furthermore, it will represent a deleterious local economic blow by it’s
absconding of undeserved taxpayer-funded subsidies, forced real estate
devaluations, and lost revenues from commercial and tourism activities.
The proposed one hundred thirty wind turbines will perpetually cause
unsightly visual contamination and distressing noise pollution. Finally,
Cape Wind will unnecessarily endanger a critical marine and wildlife
habitat.

Off-shore deep water wind has surfaced as a cost-effective and
technologically feasible option in lieu of the Nantucket Sound situated
Cape Wind Project. Cape Wind has chosen a location which possesses
countless expenses as well as hazards to public safety, the marine
environment, and the local economy. Deeper-water sites offer more powerful
winds and the advantages of clean renewable energy without surrendering
the irreplaceable natural beauty of Nantucket Sound.

More distantly sited off-shore locations guarantee the advantages of clean
wind power without many of the harmful effects of close-shore siting.
Furthermore, there would be little harmful impact upon air and marine
navigational safety and local tourist-based economies.

In 2007, the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab
(NREL) estimated a total off-shore wind energy resource of over 1000 GW.
The potential for deep water locations greater than 30 m (or 100 feet) is
enormous. Approximately ninety percent of the off-shore wind potential in
the United States resides in deep water.

With the aforesaid thoughtful rationales in mind, along with the
inherently unfair and inequitable nature of the proposed Cape Wind Project
itself, it must not become a reality which will forever doom our children
and grandchildren to a ghastly socially inhumane legacy.

Ron Beaty
West Barnstable, MA

]]>