Falmouth Wind Turbines Bad Pennies- A National Threat To Renewable Energy

Falmouth Wind Turbines Bad Pennies

The only recourse available if you were stuck with a “bad penny” is to try to spend it as quickly as possible and get rid of it .

Falmouth is a town in Barnstable County,Massachusetts, United States a population of 31,500 plus.

Falmouth Town Meeting Members In April of 2015 Approved a 119 million dollar budget. A budget as large as any corporate company in the United States.

Falmouth is in the eye of international attention for all the wrong reasons – health problems,property takings and economic loss from the town owned wind turbines.

Local and state officials in a rage in the race to combat climate change have made Falmouth ground zero for poorly placed commercial wind turbines in the United States.

The poor placement of turbines in Falmouth has become one of the most significant threats to renewable energy in the United States.

Here are some recent editorials and letters from Falmouth

Editorial : CapeNews.net, Falmouth, MA

Distill The Arguments To Fundamentals

It would be good, as the debate of the town’s turbines takes on a renewed level of intensity, if everyone could step back and look for perspective on two fundamental questions. Whether agreement can be reached on them, we don’t know. But it would be a good starting point if it could.
One question has to do with how events would have unfolded if everyone knew ten years ago what they know today. A reasonable person would almost certainly say that the town would not have erected turbines at the wastewater facility unless they were smaller machines. It is very difficult to believe that Town Meeting would have given the green light to the project had members known what the impact would be.
Agreement on this is difficult to come by because any discussion inevitably gets sidetracked on blame and recrimination. Those issues can be addressed, but they should not be allowed to take over the dialogue.
Another has to do with the impact on our climate if the town’s turbines are decommissioned. It would, of course, have an impact, but how significant would it be? A reasonable person would have to agree that the impact would be so small as to be negligible. And it would be none at all if the turbines could be moved and put to work someplace else.
Agreement on this is difficult to come by because climate change is real and frightening. The idea of taking a step backward tends to prod emotions. This is understandable, especially when it comes to a project as large as Cape Wind’s Nantucket Sound wind farm, but it is a distraction from rational consideration.
If the Falmouth community could agree to these two points, the issue boils down to a question of money. Are tax payers willing to come up with some number of dollars to return a quality of life to those in the neighborhood of the town’s turbines?
We said it two and a half years ago and we say it again: we believe Falmouth is a caring community. Neighbors, at the heart of it, care about neighbors. If the debate about the town’s turbines can be distilled to fundamental facts without the distraction of emotional arguments, the right thing to do will become clear.
{truncated click link to read entire article }

Source:
http://www.capenews.net/falmouth/opinion/editorials/distill-the-arguments-to-fundamentals/article_b7ec1bf8-ba03-5624-8706-5485034ee3dd.html

Letter : CapeNews.net, Falmouth, MA

A Moral Responsibility - Letter

Robert Reich has written a wonderful new book, “Saving Capitalism,” subtitled, “For the Many Not the Few.”
Reich begins his book with a quote: “There are two modes of invading private property; the first, by which the poor plunder the rich...sudden and violent; the second, by which the rich plunder the poor, slow and legal.”
We taxpayers are not rich, but we are surely richer than the turbine neighbors. Richer both in financial power and in political power.
I was a Town Meeting member when we voted for what turned out to be a bait and switch offer from the state. We had done our due diligence on the first proposal of one small turbine. We did not do another due diligence when that offer was switched to two enormous turbines. I am positive that the Town Meeting members I served with back then would never have voted for those turbines had we known the damage they would cause to some of our fellow townspeople.
Can you even imagine the turbine proponents asking Town Meeting to deprive some residents of the peaceful use of their own properties for the sake of the common good?
Let’s not call on the law now to save us from our moral responsibility to tear down those turbines.
{truncated click link to read entire article }

Source
http://www.capenews.net/falmouth/opinion/a-moral-responsibility---letter/article_0e4e4aa3-5c52-5370-8a12-1dbd3fff8c29.html

Letter CapeNews.net, Falmouth, MA

Turned A Blind Eye - Letter

When the use of wind turbines was originally suggested for the wastewater treatment plant, the Energy Committee assured the public that the town would research what might be involved and there would be many opportunities for input and questions. Neighbors were sent to Hull to view the 660 kw turbine, which was also described in the questionnaire sent to them. Neither neighbors nor Town Meeting in May 2012 were told the size of the initial wind turbine, Wind 1, that was 1.65mw and 397 feet tall. Without proper study the Town made a baseless decision as if it knew what it was doing. Far from it!
The errors and omissions continued. The manufacturer Vestas required the town to sign a letter taking full responsibility for the siting of Wind 2 due to its concerns about the complaints about Wind 1 and known sound pressures the turbine was capable of creating in the designated location. The reply was not signed by the town manager. It was signed by Falmouth’s wastewater superintendent. When that letter was signed, Vestas released the second turbine to the town.
Vestas had asked “Do you have the decibel mapping for Falmouth?” Apparently there was no answer to Vesta’s email by either the Town or Weston & Sampson, the town’s consultants. The town has not provided that answer so far. I’m not sure if there has been an opportunity to ask.
There was never any decibel mapping for the second turbine or for both turbines operating together after the town had assumed responsibility. There was no review of the impact of two turbines operating in close proximity.
Now Town Meeting is being asked to deny a permit process altogether for the operation of Wind 1 even though they have succeeded in getting the Zoning Board to hear it under the old Wind Energy bylaw which was replaced by Town Meeting in May 2012, and passed by unanimous vote.
How can Town Meeting even know what the actual cost of running the turbines is? This has never been accurately measured/publicized. Also, the selectmen cite $15 million for decommissioning but an actual accurate breakdown is vitally important. The town should insist that the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center assist the town with the cost of shutting down Winds 1 and 2. The Mass Clean Energy Center has been responsible from the beginning as seller of Wind 1 to Falmouth after a lengthy and expensive storage of the turbine in Texas. Rather than fund the required sound studies required to responsibly site the turbine which they normally do, they turned a blind eye in order to sell a turbine to the fourth Cape town to consider it.
{truncated click link to read entire article }

Source:
http://www.capenews.net/falmouth/opinion/letters_to_editor/turned-a-blind-eye---letter/article_596c6ef0-167f-5c21-bbab-d1fd8ac86448.html