Wind initiatives a hot issue

[ProSense]

Republicans are always trying to sneak things through:

Kerry wades into wind farm controversy
By DAVID SCHOETZ
and KEVIN DENNEHY
STAFF WRITERS

U.S. Sen. John Kerry, who for five years has refused to choose a side in the Nantucket Sound wind farm debate, yesterday slammed a Capitol Hill effort that could doom the turbine project.

Kerry called a restrictive amendment tucked into an $8.7 billion Coast Guard bill by U.S. Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, ''an insult to Americans who care about good government.''

Young's amendment would ban wind turbines within 1½ miles of shipping and ferry lanes.

Snip...

''I oppose this backdoor amendment to the Coast Guard authorization bill which - if passed - will derail offshore wind projects across the nation,'' Kerry said in an afternoon statement.

''At a time of increasing energy demand and sky-high costs, I am very concerned about any legislation that limits our options in pursuing renewable energy,'' he said.

more...

http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/kerrywades25.htm

Let's see if this was lip service from Bush:

Midwest's windmills generate buzz
By Judy Keen, USA TODAY
Fri Feb 24, 7:27 AM ET

Windmills are sprouting on hillsides across the Midwest, but this city is encouraging the use of electricity-producing wind turbines everywhere - even in homeowners' backyards.

Snip...

Last year, a record 9,149 megawatts of electricity was produced by wind in the USA, says Christine Real de Azua of the American Wind Energy Association, a trade group.

Snip...

"It's possible we could generate up to 20% of our electricity needs through wind and turbine," President Bush said Tuesday at the National Renewable Energy Lab in Colorado.

Marv Schlutz helped make Mason City a wind-energy pioneer. He asked the zoning board for a variance so he could put a 100-foot windmill at Mason City Warehouse, his storage business. He figured he'd save enough on electric bills to pay for a $40,000 system in eight to 10 years.

more...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060224/tc_usatoday/midwestswindmillsgeneratebuzz

[Mass]

1. Good news.

[rox63]

2. I think the environmentalist in Kerry

is winning out over the part-time Nantucket resident on the wind-farm issue.

[TayTay]

3. It is also 'nationalizing' the issue.

My esteemed taller Senator is also being entirely consistent with what he has repeatedly stated is a number one goal for America: find alternative sources of energy. He is also being entirely consistent with his long-time view that legislation should be crafted 'in public' and in the sunshine and not in the 'back offices' of Congress.

Hmmm, nationalizing a local issue. Hmmmm. Another step that makes me think I will be looking for a new Senatorial candidate for '08 in the not too distant future.

[MH1]

7. This amendment isn't just about the Nantucket project,

and if the Nantucket project should be blocked it still should be blocked. But this amendment has two major problems:

1) it will block most if not practically all offshore wind projects, and the merit of the "safety" issue is dubious (is that wide of a lane really needed for shipping and ferries? Come on.)

2) it is another example of repugnant back-door amendment process in Congress that does not give appropriate hearing to amendments:

Both the Senate and House have passed versions of the Coast Guard bill, but leaders from both chambers are working out details in a private conference committee. The Young amendment, which was added to the House bill during the closed-door meetings, had not been part of either version.

I spent some time looking on Thomas and couldn't even find the "amendment." It's bill H.R.889, and there are no amendments listed after 9/15/05; the Grist article says this amendment was introduced in December, but there is no reference to it on Thomas. What's up with that? Because it's in conference we won't even see this stuff until it pops back out to the Senate? Or has the * administration incompetence infiltrated Thomas now, too?

Anyway - Kerry was right to refer to it as a "backdoor amendment" and "an insult to Americans who care about good government."

Having read the "Backbone Award" thread earlier it occurred to me that I would really, really love for Kerry to come out swinging on the process by which this amendment was snuck into the bill. It's just right down there in the republican muck with passing bills in the middle of the night; holding votes open much longer than normal, but just long enough to twist enough arms to change their votes so that the republicans win, and not one moment longer; bringing 1000-plus-page bills to the floor without giving the Democrats any say in crafting them and not more than a few hours to review...and the list could go on.

Yes, John Kerry is right, again: it's an insult to Americans who care about good government. It has absolutely nothing to do with wind farms.

[kerrygoddess]

4. It's a real touchy issue

While there's benefits to wind projects there's a lot of drawbacks as well. It's a tough call on Cape Wind, because the drawbacks include the fishing indistry issues, which JK is a champion of. It's not as simple as land wind farms.

I posted about this, with links to the Cape Wind project and an article in Grist about the environmentalists abjections to it. http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2059

[ProSense]

5. At least Kennedy and Kerry agree on on aspect in the OP

to TayTay's point about "sunshine." In any case I'm gald the debate isn't about the benefits, so there is hope for compromise. This is it in a nutshell:

If the turbines were built five miles farther beyond the coastline (they are now currently planned for about six miles offshore), where they wouldn't interfere with fishing interests, Kennedy said he could back the project. He also said he supported offshore wind projects in other regions that would pose less of an economic and environmental threat, including two that have been proposed for offshore areas near Long Island and New Jersey.

"I never intended to be a champion on this issue," he said, alluding to pressure from Greenpeace that forced him to defend his position. "There are plenty of places to put windmills, and plenty of projects I will support. But there's only one Horseshoe Shoal. You can't move your fishing ground somewhere else."


Cape Wind Avengers

Cape Wind CEO Jim Gordon told Muckraker that environmental reviews of the project refute many of Kennedy's claims about the potential environmental hazards and noise pollution. Cape Wind and its backers also argue that the development would pose minimal harm to the fishing community, noting that the cables carrying the electricity back to shore would be embedded six feet under the seabed.


Snip...

Kennedy also said he was emphatically opposed to an amendment unveiled by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) last month that would prohibit all major offshore wind installations from being sited within one and a half miles of a commercial shipping route, even though it would block the Cape Wind project. Young attached the amendment to the Coast Guard budget bill, which is expected to be voted on in February.

http://www.grist.org/news/muck/2006/01/12/capecod/

[kerrygoddess]

6. I'm not so sure about the fishing claims

"If the turbines were built five miles farther beyond the coastline (they are now currently planned for about six miles offshore), where they wouldn't interfere with fishing interests"

The problem with building these on the coast is that the building itself, no matter how far off shore could possibly disrupt certain types of habitats for fish and shellfish. The New England fishing industry has taken some big hits in recent years due to overfishing certain areas, mercury polution, etc.

I think wind farms are great alternative energy sources, but they can be detrimental to wildlife particularly birds. Birds can't help but get sucked into turbines.