Swirling winds
Wind power.
A clean, renewable source of energy.
Other states in the U.S. are tapping into it to add to their energy budget and help meet our hunger for energy.
Will Maine?
We've talked about the current wind energy proposals for Maine here and elsewhere before, and the impact it will have, if carried through, on the Appalachian Trail, our western mountains, on our recreational experience.
Steven Clark provided the "con" side of the issue last Tuesday, arguing vehemently against the "industrialization" of our mountains. If you missed it, click through and give it a good reading.
Today, Jeffrey Thayer offers up the "pro", his view of the benefits of such a wind power project. Make sure you read his points too.
Look, we've got a big problem on our hands: Energy.
Never mind that we use an ungodly amount of it each day, but that we are so dependent on oil, much of which comes from an increasingly fragile, dangerous and uncertain part of the globe.
Diversification of our energy budget is vital to our future. And there are a myriad of ways to do so. Our energy technology is advancing at a rapid rate and, I believe, can and will help solve this problem sooner rather than later with viable, economical alternatives.
Provided we have the will.
But as I, and others have asked: Must we sacrifice the AT and our mountaintops to do so?
I'm torn. You're torn.
Real, hard choices lie ahead. This is one of them.
Choices that can't be skirted, or pushed ahead any longer, but rather met head on. Very soon. Now really.
What will we do?
I really don't know. Let's discuss...
Carey:
While I greatly appreciate your continued interest in this debate, get off the fence!
We need wind power (and solar, and hydro) to provide clean energy to reduce the pollution our other current forms of energy are emitting. We have the worst air quality in the country!
We need outdoor enthusiasts like you, and sensible members of the AMC, to help foster momentum for wind projects like this. I would gladly see wind turbines from the summits knowing that they are helping to reduce the haze that is increasingly prevalent. How many times have you reached the summit only to have significantly reduced views because of the haze which is directly attributable to burning fossil fuels?
I find it ironic that you and others question the visual impact of wind turbines yet brag about your exploits at Sugarloaf and other ski areas. Talk about visual impairments. You can't have your cake and eat it too!
Middle Path
Posted by
Middle PathFebruary 3, 2006 03:28 PM
Kind reader Middle Path has implored me to "get off the fence." I take that in the nicest way. Fine. I'm an advocate for wind power (as well as other alternatives). But I oppose the Redington project. The aesthetic damage outweighs the benefits, in my opinion, in that location. I would prefer to see wind projects along the coast, where they may (may!)have less visual impact and yet be located closer to the urban populations centers of the state who could use the clean energy. It has been done in other coastal in the US and around the world. It's worth exploring. So there you have it. As for Sugarloaf, it's altready there, the damage has been done. Someday the earth will reclaim the lifts and trails (even The Bag) but for now, I'm liking it. And see it as a beautiful place.
Posted by
CareyFebruary 3, 2006 03:41 PM
Subscribe
Questions/Comments
