Tidal Fish Forum banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,559 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
It would appear that when the rich are inconvenienced the Republicans quickly try and stop alternative energy sources!

FROM THE ORLANDO SENTINEL 4/23/06
With the need to develop renewable sources of energy becoming critical, Congress is poised to block an offshore wind farm that could annually generate as much power as burning 570,000 tons of coal.

The wind farm would be 6 miles off Cape Cod, Mass. It has drawn fierce opposition from wealthy property owners in the area who don't want its turbines to spoil the view from their mansions.

Two members of Congress from Alaska -- Rep. Don Young and Sen. Ted Stevens -- slipped in language to a spending bill that would kill the project. The bill isn't worth passing if the language remains.

Wind farms might not always be aesthetically pleasing, but they don't pose the environmental hazards of offshore oil rigs. They are a clean alternative that needs to be encouraged, not sabotaged.
 

·
Tidal Fish Subscriber - I'm cool!
Joined
·
14,062 Posts
Posted by jfcoleman on Thursday, March 02, 2006 - 02:00 PM
... Never a better time for a profile in courage, Senator ...
After today's story in the Washington Times, "Kennedy tries to halt windmills," Senator Kennedy can no longer deny an active role in pushing the so-called Young amendment to kill the nation's first offshore wind farm in Nantucket Sound.
The proposal by Rep. Don Young of Alaska, now being considered before a closed-door conference committee after it was never debated in either chamber of Congress, would ban offshore wind turbines within 1.5 nautical miles of shipping and ferry lanes.
"Given the potential dangers of siting one of these wind farms in a busy shipping area, (Mr. Kennedy) thinks it is worth the conferees' consideration," said Kennedy spokeswoman Melissa Wagoner in the Times story.
Anyone familiar with the workings of government will interpret "worth the conferees' consideration" for the code language it is intended to be - in other words, I strongly support this amendment. If Senator Kennedy urged "further study" of the amendment while not explicitly endorsing or supporting it, this would also be understood as code - I oppose this proposal.
Kennedy's stealth support for the Young amendment puts him at odds with a growing number of opponents to the measure - which include the Coast Guard, Senate colleagues John Kerry, Lincoln Chaffee, Jeff Bingaman and Senate Energy Chairman Pete Domenici, his nephew and prominent environmental attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and a broad coalition of labor unions, environmental organizations and renewable energy advocacy groups such as Clean Power Now.
"Senator Kennedy's opposition to Cape Wind is hardly a secret, yet he continues to try to avoid responsibility for his role in pushing this amendment," said Clean Power Now spokesman Jack Coleman. "As one of the most vocal supporters of renewable energy in the Senate, he wants this project derailed in such a way that his name is not attached to it."
"It's not too late for Senator Kennedy to show us a profile in courage," Coleman said, alluding to the Pultizer Prize-winning book written by his brother, then-Massachusetts senator John F. Kennedy.
The Coast Guard made its opposition to the amendment clear in a story this week in Congressional Quarterly. "What we're trying to do is ask Congress to not tie our hands," said Ed LaRue, head of the Coast Guard's Navigation Standards Division. "Give us the opportunity to do what we do best and decide case by case what's appropriate."
Senator John Kerry, a longtime close ally of Kennedy's, has denounced Young's proposal in no uncertain terms, labeling it "an insult to Americans who care about good government."
If enacted, Young's proposal "would foreclose or severely limit the potential for development of appropriate offshore wind facilities in the United States," wrote prominent environmental attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Sen. Kennedy's nephew, in a letter to members of Congress.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,559 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Speaks in code.....is a known opponent...heck Fritzer certainly there must be something more definitive than that out there. I'm sure rich democrats are in the mix....just as when GWB gives a tax rebate Kennedy, Rockefeller's, Kerry et al don't send the money back.
oust them all....
 

·
Tidal Fish Subscriber - I'm cool!
Joined
·
14,062 Posts
Kenndy opposes the wind farms, Kerry has been all over the issue depending on who he is talking to.

My personal belief is that wind power is likely to be a small part of our energy future. You want to know why? A big wind generator produces a couple of megawatts of power. Sounds like a lot, right? A big nuke or coal burning plant produces multiple gigawatts of power (CCNPP produces about 2, Chalk Point about 4). It requires a 1000 wind generators to equal one, which, of necessity, covers many times the area of comparable coal or nuclear power. Moreover, wind power is not constant, as wind comes and goes, and there must be some form of auxillary power or power storage to back it up. More space, more equipment.

Cape Cod? I don't care much one way or the other. If they want wind power there, they should be allowed to build it within some limits (as I understand it, the amendment in question does not forbid wind generators, just generators with 1.5 miles of a shipping channel, because of potential interference with marine navigation electronics). Is energy policy a national goal or not? If it is, Senators from Alaska get the same vote as Senators from Massachessetts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,813 Posts
So it`s now appears it`s not a political thing,but a social class thing.Why didn`t you say that in the first place.Seems like the typical spin.[wink]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,184 Posts
etouffe Im shocked you didnt know about Robert Kennedy. I mean thats really old news and just about every Civics educated person in the free world has heard about that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,559 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Fritzer u recall the wind farm at Palm Springs...some help.
Nuclear looks like a fargone conclusion...but the waste is another "let the grandkids worry about it" solution.
Brazil is at 40% ethanol. Talking about being oil free before many more years. Sugarcane in the south...corn in the rest...BUT we are building houses on farm land in incredible numbers. Too late?
Offshore wind...I agree with the conclusion. Its the rich (repub/demo/aardvark) saying "yes we need it...put it in his yard" attitude that i resent. It may be immature...but it still pizzes me off.
 

·
Tidal Fish Subscriber - I'm cool!
Joined
·
14,062 Posts
Between the US and Canada we have potential oil supplies greater than all of the middle east combined - in the form of tar sand and oil shale. Last time I checked, it was thought that they were economically viable to extract oil from at $40 a barrel, well, guess what... They will take time to develop, but it's reasonably straight forward. Germany even extracted oil from oil shale in WWII. Only our NIMBYs can kill it.

IMHO the only thing France does right (besides that newscaster) is its reliance on nuclear power. The waste issue is BS. Yep - it stays deadly radioactive for a long time. Just pile it somewhere people can't get to it. The NIMBYs (or BANANAs - build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything) have made it nearly impossible. I live 3 miles from a nuke. I'd much rather live there than 5 miles from a coal power plant.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top