at a glanceat a glance f.a.q.f.a.q. downloadsdownloads videosvideos
Welcome to Cape Wind stay informed!  
America's First Offshore Wind Farm on Nantucket Sound
Stay Informed!

Stay informed by email, mail or phone about what's going on with the Cape Wind Project! [go>>]

Take Action!
IT'S EASY! Click here to generate an email, letter or fax to be sent to the Minerals Management Service to let them know you support clean energy! [go>>]





Printer friendly page  print story
Send this story to a friend  send story
Abuse of process imperils Cape Cod wind project
Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Portland Press Herald Editorial

In a classic display of back-room politics, an Alaska Congressman is close to scuttling one of the most significant alternative energy projects ever.

Sen. Olympia Snowe, however, is in position to help kill a provision authored by Rep. Don Young that seems designed to limit the footprint of the Cape Wind project in Nantucket Sound in order to make it unfeasible.

Claiming that turbines interfered with marine radar in a British study, Young wants to force the Coast Guard to ban wind towers within 9,000 feet, of navigational channels. He argues that big ships in heavy traffic and fog-bound waters require this margin of safety.

Off-shore oil rigs are permitted within 500 feet of shipping channels. The closest of Cape Wind's proposed turbines would be 1,500 feet from shipping lanes.

Young's amendment was attached to the Coast Guard reauthorization bill during the House-Senate conference committee reconciliation process. What that means is the amendment was not approved in either chamber or considered by any other committee of Congress. It was not subjected to public review by any federal agency with jurisdiction over the matter, including the Coast Guard, the Department of Energy and the Army Corps of Engineers.

This maneuver basically slunk in the back door at the side of a man who's not shy about telling Congress to butt out of his state's preferred energy solution, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Even the Coast Guard, on whose behalf Young is allegedly advocating, says the buffer is too restrictive.

Young has adopts the claims of Cape Wind critics, who can't look past the aesthetics to consider the broader energy picture. Yet the coastline they want to protect is vulnerable to the sea-level rise predicted to occur due to the unfettered burning fossil fuels.

As a member of the conference committee, Snowe ought to vote to reject Young's amendment, and let Cape Wind's alternative energy project succeed or fail on its merits.


Also in Opinions and Editorials:
· Cape Wind Responds to Mr. Wattley   (08/22/08)
· Cynitha Stead Op Ed on Cape Wind   (08/21/08)
· Recent Letters and Op Eds about Cape Wind   (07/28/08)