| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Thorough study urged on wind turbine application
Credit: September 28, 2013 | philipstown.info ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Readers of this paper are aware that the Zoning Board is considering an application for an $80,000 152-foot tall wind turbine in the forest along 9D that would supply about half the electricity needed by a house occupied part-time by two people. This massive structure, about 4 times what is permitted by the code, is being considered without the aid of standards in the code for something so huge that it was never contemplated. Any decision on the application, pro or con, would leave the public mostly in the dark about what will be permitted elsewhere since the board, unlike an appellate court, does not write detailed opinions.
The code wisely requires special uses deviating from the code to be screened from neighboring property and to “protect the natural, historic, and scenic resources of the town.” The applicant professes a concern (which we all share) for global warming and apparently deems an enormous, disproportionate expenditure for a tiny benefit to override the grossly inappropriate site of the turbine. The applicant can achieve his objective by buying power from Central Hudson, which is designated as having been produced at the large, properly engineered and sited wind farms upstate. Revenue which he furnishes can go toward intelligent and well thought out expansion of the facility.
Some of us in the area in the last few years have given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of development rights to ensure that the beautiful character of the town will remain protected. This project cuts in the opposite direction and threatens to open the door to indiscriminate further development. Let’s hope the applicant reconsiders and finds other ways to meet his carbon footprint reduction goals, such as cutting down the number of residences, reducing transportation, and giving the funds instead to a more appropriate environmental cause.
If this does not happen, I urge the board to make a thorough study of just how much benefit this project would actually do for the environment (no one knows what it will do until it’s up and running), consider why the applicant should be privileged to get a special dispensation, and weigh that against the unprecedented threat to the beauty of this community. There’s a lot of land in the U.S. and a lot of appropriate sites for big, efficient wind farms. We don’t need 150-foot towers popping up in one of the country’s most historic and valued locations. Let’s hope the board throws its weight behind the idea of a moratorium on turbines until the town can consider, perhaps by referendum, what it wants to allow. It’s a big subject and the public needs to be involved.
David H. Ward
Garrison
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 |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=57269 ]
