I watched the Steve Weed live feed from the Article X meeting in Watertown today. There was a lot of good infomation, but will take time to digest. At the end my live feed cut out and did not recover so I probably nissed some interesting discussion in the Q&A that I am sure Pandora's and JLL and the WDT will have.
But I did hear this and it popped out at me. Russell who I give points to for opposing A-10 said she is not anti wind. She clealry want communities to have a say, but feels there is a place for industrial wind if done correctly (whatever that means) and seems to be in favor of personal solar and wind. I as well am not against personal choices to solar and wind if zoned and done correctly. I have lived in a passive solar house here in AZ and have over 20 years, although I sell nothing back the grid in my setup. But on industrial wind she seems to walk both sides of the fence from what I could hear. Sounds like she might be in favor of community wind and solar too, but I may not have heard that correct.
And of course the speaker state legislator Kevin Cahill talking about A-10 threw out the terms "unreasonable burden" refering to a communities local zoning laws..again what ever that means?????
More later
STOP, The regional wind energy industrialization of one of New York State's most beautiful and environmentally sensitive areas, the 1000 Islands of the St. Lawrence River and the Golden Crescent of Eastern Lake Ontario. If you don't think you are seeing the most recent posts click on the current month in the archives to the right.
Art, your heading on this article is a lot different than Jll's, were you guys attending the same meeting?
ReplyDeleteIs the story about Russell not being anti-wind or the the huge fact that wind is dead in the North Country?
John,
ReplyDeleteGo with Ricks version, I believe it is correct. He is good at reporting. I was listening by live feed that was less than optimum, sound and buffering gaps etc. So I was not at the meeting. But she did say she was not anti wind, and I think JLL verifies that too in so many words. Does that mean she would be favor of the subsidies that must be in place to support wind whereever else in the state it is placed. I'm not sure I would be quite so joyous that wind is dead in this area. BP seems to be going to a lot of effort for a dead project. But I really I hope she is right.
However, I find her logic rather funny on whether we should prohibit turbines as a solution. If she thinks the state and article 10 are going to prohibit turbines in our region...then why would our own local prohibition be a bad thing. It would be supporting what she thinks article 10 is already saying. Is the state going to come along and say "You have a ban, ok now you did it, now you are going to pay and get turbines for sure. They going to punish Henderson. Malone Brandon etc. And once again if we do a "responsible wind zoning law" that effective does the same thing of prohibiting turbines...same end result...then the state is going to jump up and down and say oh that is wonderful. Good God we have all kinds of extremely credible reasons in science etc and our own existing laws and scenic region to prohibit turbines responsibly. This is just a pointless exercise in trying to look reasonable for show!
So article 10 was passed to endorse the rabid green energy and wind energy state agenda and now the state is suddenly ok with not putting turbines here in one of the best wind resources in the state. Ahhh something doesn't ad up here and I would watch our backs. keep in mind this was in essence a promo for article 10 at least in part.
But bottom line...If she is right that the state is going to prohibit turbines here, then I guess I and others have been spot on all along, and the state agrees. WE win...not me but WE. I don't really care who prohibits the turbines, if it is the town or the state as long as our beautiful region is saved! But I would hedge our bets with a prohibition.
Art
Could be BP wants the leases for fracking and duped the lease holders into going along with it. Since Iberdola isn't in the fracking business it would make sense the would bail if they knew wind was dead.
ReplyDeleteYou could be right John. Here is a quote from JLL
ReplyDelete"Article X will never allow them to be built here", said "Russell. "I believe industrial wind is done for the entire region. With Article X, we have just lost the ability to have the projects that have been proposed here. Article X has relieved us of the burden of industrial wind."
Liie i said I hope she is right, But boy I think we have to be real careful here. I think the commenters on JLL are getting way ahead of themselves. Keep in mind educated and connected as it is...this is still only Ms. Russell's opinion. We would be fools to assume it's a done deal, and sleep sopundly at night!!!!
Of course it would have been an extremely interesting question to ask her WHERE she thinks turbies WOULD be appropriate if not here. Remember she is talking to NNY audience with a lot anti wind sentiment. If she said it was raining outside I would sure as hell go outside and check just to make sure.
ReplyDelete