LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]



Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Paypal

Donate via Stripe

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Will not help 

Credit:  Sun Journal, www.sunjournal.com 11 June 2011 ~~

There’s been a lot of talk about whether Rumford’s proposed wind ordinance is “fair.” As a resident, I’m not so interested in its fairness to the town or the wind industry so much as to future generations.

Will we saddle them with a chain of hulking hilltop refuse from an industry that collapsed when subsidies vanished, or when technology passed their machinery by?

A 2006 Brookings Institute report emphasized that Maine’s single most valuable asset is clearly its “quality of place” and its scenic “brand.” Is it fair to future generations to squander that unique asset for less than six permanent local jobs in an industry that will export its taxpayer-subsidized profits outside this community?

Once upon a time, fire towers (unobtrusive, silent, sources of spectacular views) dotted the region’s mountains. Technology rendered them obsolete, and now they’re almost all torn down – some rusting in heaps, toppled in place. These turbines will dwarf fire towers many times over in size and in numbers, and require resculpting the very mountains to install them.

What will their legacy be when they are rendered obsolete in the world of rapidly changing green energy technology?

Maine’s grid is already one of the greenest in the nation. Maine uses almost no coal or oil to produce electricity, and wind turbines will not help remove either from generation sources; therefore, turbines will not appreciably help remove greenhouse gasses or reduce dependency on foreign oil.

We will vote “no” on the wind ordinance.

Brie Weisman and Jon Starr, Rumford

Source:  Sun Journal, www.sunjournal.com 11 June 2011

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
   Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)
Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share


News Watch Home

Get the Facts
CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky