Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Wind Farm Off Cape Cod Clears Hurdle
BOSTON - A federal agency said Friday that the nation's first offshore wind farm, proposed for the waters off Cape Cod, posed no serious environmental threat, bringing it a major step closer to fruition.
A computer-generated image of what Cape Wind, the nation’s first offshore wind farm, would look like from the shore of Cotuit, Mass., on Cape Cod. (Cape Wind Associates, via Bloomberg News) Homeowners and boaters on the cape, including Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, have fought the project for eight years, saying it would hurt wildlife, fishing and tourism and spoil the beauty of Nantucket Sound.
Opponents have sued to stop the project, known as Cape Wind, and more challenges are certain, keeping the path to construction bumpy despite what supporters on Friday called a crucial victory.
The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, a group formed to fight the project, suggested that the Bush administration had unscrupulously rushed to approve it before President-elect Barack Obama takes office next week.
"They wanted some kind of a legacy," said Audra Parker, the group's executive director. "Cape Wind is far from a done deal, despite this favorable report."
The federal agency that released the final environmental impact statement on Friday, the Minerals Management Service, is a division of the Department of Interior.
The wind farm would cover 24 square miles - roughly the size of Manhattan - five miles off Cape Cod. From the shore, the 130 turbines, each 440 feet tall, will be visible half an inch above the horizon on clear days, according to Energy Management Inc., the company planning the project. Jim Gordon, the company's president, said that optimistically, construction could begin late this year, and that the wind farm could be producing electricity by the end of 2011.
The project would cost more than $1 billion, Mr. Gordon said, adding that he has spent $40 million since proposing the wind farm in 2001.
"This has been a long, hard road," Mr. Gordon said in a news conference at his Boston offices.
"We think," he said, "this wind farm is going to be embraced by the Cape Cod community, it's going to be embraced by the nation and, most important, it has already encouraged other states to look at developing their own coastal wind resources."
With Friday's release of the environmental impact statement by the Minerals Management Service, the new administration must wait 30 days before issuing a decision. If the decision favors Cape Wind, the federal government can then lease a section of Nantucket Sound to Mr. Gordon's company, according to the Minerals Management Service.
But Cape Wind would still need to wait for several permits, as well as a decision by the Federal Aviation Administration on whether the wind farm would interfere with airplane radar. Past studies by the F.A.A. found no serious threat, but Jim Peters, an agency spokesman, said that F.A.A. officials visiting the site last summer found evidence of possible electromagnetic interference.
Also yet to come are a final statement from the Coast Guard on whether the project would hinder marine radar, and the results of an investigation by the inspector general for the Department of Interior, requested by Cape Cod residents, into the environmental review process.
Mr. Kennedy, whose family compound in Hyannis Port looks out on the proposed wind farm site, has consistently opposed the project on the grounds that it would hurt navigation, the local economy and the environment.
"I do not believe that this action by the Interior Department will be sustained," Mr. Kennedy said in a statement. "By taking this action, the Interior Department has virtually assured years of continued public conflict and contentious litigation."
Aides to Mr. Kennedy made a point of saying Friday that an obstructed view was not among the senator's concerns.
Mr. Kennedy and other critics pointed out that the Minerals Management Service had not yet issued general rules for building offshore wind projects and that their absence continued to make Cape Wind legally vulnerable. Even the American Wind Energy Association, which supports wind projects, said the lack of guiding rules was problematic.
"It continues to be a big concern of ours," said Laurie Jodziewicz, the association's manager of siting policy, adding that the delay in publishing rules "holds up a lot of the projects under consideration right now."
Cape Wind supporters say the project would ultimately supply 75 percent of the electricity for Cape Cod, Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard. But others have cautioned that users' electricity rates will probably rise sharply. Representative Bill Delahunt, a Democrat from Cape Cod who is against the project, said in a statement that it could potentially double power costs for the region.
Gov. Deval Patrick, a Democrat who supports Cape Wind, wants Massachusetts to be a leader in creating alternative energy sources. This week, he set a goal of developing 2,000 megawatts of wind power capacity - enough to power 800,000 homes, Mr. Patrick said - by 2020. The state currently has only nine large wind turbines capable of producing 6.6 megawatts.

7 Comments so far
Show AllWind farms have been a problem for sucking up birds.
But any large scale "green" technology is going to hurt wildlife.
Have to reduce the energy needs.
"To be humane is to be cruel, vicious and unrestrained, like humans.
To be inhumane is to be compassionate, restrained, moderate, like non humans."
Is there some way to warn birds that they are about to crash into windmills, or planes for that matter? Birds are smart; they navigate from pole to pole using visual, magnetic, star-guidance or other means way beyond ours. Can we help them out with signals that are geared to their perception systems? I wish some neurobiologists would study this because wind power has so many attributes.
And yes, I agree we should consider all living beings when we solve problems. We can bend the network of life, but not break it. We need to simplify our lives to use only what we need.
Joe
I am really not sure about the bird thing. There is a wind farm just to the west of where I live, and it is in a major flyway. There was not one dead goose under those 165 towers last fall. Seems the geese flew around the wind farm.
Here's a (slightly edited) repeat of a post i logged on a previous thread in November:
**********************************************************
Regarding the repeated and repeated mythology about wind power supposedly being not OK because of some horrific impact on birds:
You give no citation for your bird claim. Check this article out:
http://www.awea.org/faq/sagrillo/swbirds.html
Here's a clip:
In December of 2002, the report "Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeast Wisconsin" was released. The study was completed by Robert Howe and Amy Wolf of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, and William Evans. Their study covered a two-year period between 1999 and 2001, in the area surrounding the 31 turbines operating in Kewaunee County by Madison Gas & Electric (MG&E) and Wisconsin Public Service (WPS) Corporation.
The report found that over the study period, 25 bird carcasses were found at the sites. The report states that "the resulting mortality rate of 1.29 birds/tower/year is close to the nationwide estimate of 2.19 birds/tower.16- The report further states, "While bird collisions do occur (with commercial wind turbines) the impacts on global populations appear to be relatively minor, especially in comparison with other human-related causes of mortality such as communications towers, collisions with buildings, and vehicles collisions. This is especially true for small scale facilities like the MG&E and WPS wind farms in Kewaunee County."
The report goes on to say, "previous studies suggest that the frequency of avian collisions with wind turbines is low, and the impact of wind power on bird populations today is negligible. Our study provides little evidence to refute this claim."
So, while wind farms are responsible for the deaths of some birds, when put into the perspective of other causes of avian mortality, the impact is quite low. In other words, bird mortality at wind farms, compared to other human-related causes of bird mortality, is biologically and statistically insignificant. There is no evidence that birds are routinely being battered out of the air by rotating wind turbine blades as postulated by some in the popular press.
Here's another clip about other human-caused bird deaths:
Utility transmission and distribution lines, the backbone of our electrical power system, are responsible for 130 to 174 million bird deaths a year in the U.S...
Collisions with automobiles and trucks result in the deaths of between 60 and 80 million birds annually in the U.S...
Tall building and residential house windows also claim their share of birds... the best estimates put the toll due collisions with these structures at between 100 million and a staggering 1 billion deaths annually.
Lighted communication towers turn out to be one of the more serious problems for birds, especially for migratory species that fly at night... Current mortality estimates due to telecommunication towers are 40 to 50 million birds per year. The proliferation of these towers in the near future will only exacerbate this situation.
Agricultural pesticides are "conservatively estimated" to directly kill 67 million birds per year...
Cats, both feral and housecats, also take their toll on birds. A Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) report states that, "recent research suggests that rural free-ranging domestic cats in Wisconsin may be killing between 8 and 217 million birds each year. The most reasonable estimates indicate that 39 million birds are killed in the state each year."
There are other studies on the impacts of jet engines, smoke stacks, bridges, and any number of other human structures and activities that threaten birds on a daily basis. Together, human infrastructure and industrial activities are responsible for one to four million bird deaths per day!
Old 1970s wind turbines had a fast tip rotation velocity. Newer turbines are slower. Apparently most birds have been evading the relatively slow and dumb falcons (but not the faster and smarter falcons) for millions of years. This capability is easily applied by birds to avoiding a slower turbine blade. Exception: very occasionally an extremely sick bird may get bumped off by nearly anything.
As for Kennedy, yes it's in his back yard. Yes he and his grandchildren will get used to the wind farm, just as people got used to lighthouses. No, the grandchildren won't ram a boat into a wind tower, not without a pint of whiskey and a mean attitude. Sailors can already avoid sand bars and reefs pretty well.
If it can be hit, a whiskey drinking Kennedy would be the best bet...