Why Cape Wind should never happen
Threat to public safety:
Cape Wind poses a threat to air travelers as an FAA Presumed Hazard opposed by all three local airports' officials with 400,000 flights annually traveling in this airspace. Ferry operators transporting 3 million passengers annually between Cape Cod and the islands are opposed to Cape Wind they state poses a significant hazard to safe navigation. The MMS final EIS admits 1.43 vessel collisions per year are anticipated. Will these collisions involve a fishing vessel, passenger ferry, or a recreational vessel? As the most important pubic policy consideration is public safety, Nantucket Sound should be excluded from consideration as a suitable location for 130 wind turbines.
Cape Wind would not provide reliable or affordable energy:
Citizens need reliable and affordable energy. Cape Wind would produce neither, nor. Cape Wind spec'd GE 3.6 MW wind turbines were "discontinued". Cape Wind's currently spec'd Siemens 3.6 MW wind turbines are sinking and shifting as deployed offshore at the UK Gabbard project. Maintenance for offshore wind turbines cost is 10 times the cost for onshore maintenance. MMS and U.S. EPA admit Cape Wind energy would be twice the current price of energy WITHOUT public subsidies, and is "not economically viable". Subsidies are equal to 77% of project construction cost according to Beacon Hill Institute of Suffolk University.
Cape Wind ignores Best Science:
Cape Wind siting in Nantucket Sound ignores Best Science (the federal government's by law). USFWS and DOI wind turbine siting guidelines state to avoid placing turbines in documented locations of any species of wildlife, fish, or plant protected under the ESA. Avoid locating turbines in known local bird-migration pathways or in areas where birds are highly concentrated, unless mortality risk is low (e.g., birds rarely enter the rotor-swept area). Examples of high-concentration areas for birds are wetlands, state or federal refuges, private duck clubs, staging areas, rookeries, roosts, riparian areas along streams, and landfills. Avoid known daily-movement flyways (e.g., between roosting and feeding areas) and areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, low cloud ceilings, and low visibility.
Avoid siting wind turbines in Nantucket Sound, in other words.
Cape Wind poses a threat to Sacred Land:
There are 25 Federally Recognized Tribes opposed to siting Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound deemed eligible for listing to the National Register of Historic Places as a Traditional Cultural Property. These are the United States South and Eastern Tribes USET.
The brilliant Cape Wind PR team prevented informed debate:
The only good thing about Cape Wind is their PR team that has masterfully confined the debate to rich and selfish NIMBYs against energy independence. To the informed, this is entirely untrue, but effective obfuscation.
Cape Wind would not exist in the public interest:
As Cape Wind was gifted a "no bid" deal for Nantucket Sound by special language inserted in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, regulators have not asked the critical question as part of a competitive bidding process intended to protect rate and taxpayers:
'Who are these guys, Cape Wind, EMI, UPC, First Wind, IVPC?'
'Cape Wind is a proposed public safety hazard' the testimony:
'Even Rich Nimbys can't afford Cape Wind energy' testimony:
'Cape Wind presents immitigable harm to migratory and endangered birds' (in violation of federal laws)
Sinking offshore wind turbines:
Sinking turbines blow ill wind acroshttp://www.allvoices.com/s/event-5587102/aHR0cDovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5jby51ay9pbmNvbWluZy9mcmVzaC1ibG93LWZvci13aW5kLWZhcm1zLWFzLXBvc3NpYmxlLWZsYXctaXMtc2NydXRpbmlzZWQtMTk0MjI3Ni5odG1shttp://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article7096654.ece