Published Date Written by Mike DiCensoEditor,
Recent letters in favor of the Roxbury windsprawl raise a couple questions. If it is acceptable to offer bribes for the first 500 kw of energy per household, would bribes make say, a nuclear waste dump acceptable? It may be the only way to capture the majority vote but that makes a mockery of our democratic system. I doubt the majority who voted in favor of the turbines are affected daily nor are their property values declining like the lakeshore property owners, and they must not care that the lake is lit up by red blinking lights when the night skies should reign uncluttered.
The tax reduction claim is interesting, far surpassing Mars Hill or Lincoln. The roads needing the repair may have been damaged by the overweight trucks, but there will be plenty more to spend the money on. How about reimbursing the property owners who may not even be able to sell because the sprawl of industrial turbines has compromised the view ?
The sound levels meeting the DEP standards is questionable. Were the standards written by the DEP or the wind industry?. The c scale was never used and is proven to be a better indicator of noise as perceived by the human ear.
Another letter claims all means of generation should be used to "supplement our dependency on foreign fossil fuels". To supplement would not reduce our fossil fuel use. We can replace coal use with nat. gas for emissions reduction. If anyone has the mistaken notion that wind power can replace baseload generation, I refer you to Robert Bryce's article "Renewable Energy's Incurable Scale Problem". We do not have enough land for the turbines which would be needed, nor could China build enough coal fired power plants to supply the metal. Outsourcing emissions would not help climate change.
Can these people imagine what Maine would look like with the ridges covered with thousands of blinking red turbines? See www.friendsoflincolnlakes.org for some good pics.