SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Alternative energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (2758)2/27/2006 6:53:27 AM
From: Rock_nj  Respond to of 16955
 
I like the idea of off-shore wind. However, I looked at the Cape Wind website and I was surprised at just how visible the wind turbines would be from the Cape in their computer renditions. It's not quite as unintrusive as I imagined and I can understand local concerns about the affect on views. However, it will only affect the views from a small portion of the Cape.

I would hate to see this project killed via a backdoor method like the bill to ban wind mills near shipping lanes. That's just cowardly. If the reason is the views, use that as the justification to ban them, if you can't and the project makes sense, build it.



To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (2758)2/27/2006 9:00:02 AM
From: Triffin  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16955
 

"This is sort of backdoor politics at its worst, for the worst possible reasons," said Nathanael Greene, a senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

This from the same folks who don't want new coal or new
nukes either .. What the hell are they expecting to use
to keep the lights on once we're sliding down the back
side of Hubbert's Peak ???? Hard landing anyone ??

Triff ..


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News