I put these two pictures in a post below and asked if anybody could find the difference between them. So did anybody find the difference?
PICTURE A
PICTURE B
Probably not because picture A and B are the exact same picture posted twice. There is no difference… and that is my point.
Picture A would be the on site result of the Cape Vincent zoning committee’s new zoning law dealing with industrial wind… a “defacto ban” as zoning committee member Mr.Cullen referred to it. When they went to Syracuse their zoning attorney said they were doing a great job so I am assuming that he approves of a restrictive setback approach that would eliminate industrial wind turbines in Cape Vincent
Picture B is depicts the on site results of prohibiting turbines directly instead of the setback approach. Same science, same research, same evidence, same studies to support prohibiting turbines directly as to support the setback approach.
So I can hear some of you saying…”OK Pundt, there are NO turbines in A so what is your problem?”
My problems is that the real difference is picture A does not address many of the big problems of industrial wind development. Like the outrageous subsidies for no real return. The pathetic capacity factors that make wind so unreliable and pointless as an energy source. It does not address the unethical and faulty business model of the wind companies. It does not address directly the commitment to protect the spectacular viewsheds of the region because all the setbacks are based on studies of other impacts. It does not address that wind energy is nearly a complete failure to address our climate issues. It does not address the cumulative impacts that are regional, since our A wind law result is for our little corner of the world and does not address the big picture. After all aren't these the very things other blogs have been repeatedly been screaming about? The bottom line is result A is a cop out to appease Article X and not address the fact that the State is taking away your home rule rights. Result A only addresses the local impacts that may or may not be addressed by setbacks, and makes no statement of the much larger issues. The A result gives tacit approval to wind energy as viable as long as it has sufficient setbacks when in fact setbacks don’t address that it’s a tax payer funded scam! Result A further enables wind developers everywhere. It enables wind developers to put their scam in more remote pristine places like is happening in the West because the other issues might not be present like in a more population dense area like NY or CV. So once again as we are bitching about down state money interests politics pushing the wind scam and on us in a more rural area…then we just push it further out of view to pristine places like certain places in the West for example because it’s OK if the setbacks are right. That is a reckless irresponsible approach, to just make it somebody else’s problem, as long as MY house values don’t decline. That is basically the CV zoning process mantra and it is not responsible in the larger view. That is not the perspective I have from fight wind development both East and West.
My fear is also that if you start down the road of picture A of zoning setbacks only and no statement on the wind scam itself and visual issues and the lack of science behind it, that as we run a round scared desperately grasping for compromise and appeasement to Article X, with no definitive stand, then minds can be manipulated to end up accepting pictures like C below in our own town…or picture D to enable it to be some one else’s problem where the lame setback excuse don't matter. You make it much harder for us to fight the wind scam here where we have large open pristine areas and viewsheds by giving credibility to the idea that setbacks are all that matters and not standing up for the other issues that PROVE wind energy to be a scam.
PICTURE C Well don't ya think just a few would be OK to appease Article X?
PICTURE D
Provincial setback thinking leads to this!!! Just as long as it's somebody else's problem we don't have to address the REAL science that proves it's a scam! These two pictures are the direct result of zoning setback thinking like this ( see link below) that ignores the actual evidence that proves wind is scam and that enables the wind developers to just keep peddling there useless invasive product on unsuspecting people and govts.
If our govt prohibits maybe it will set an example for another govt to wise up and prohibit instead of saying, well they seemed to use setbacks...maybe we can too, and the scam goes on!!! Does the buck stop anywhwere any more on this type of insanity. That is why we are in the mess we are in in this country...just keep endorsing what we know are basically big scams.
Provincial setback thinking leads to this!!! Just as long as it's somebody else's problem we don't have to address the REAL science that proves it's a scam! These two pictures are the direct result of zoning setback thinking like this ( see link below) that ignores the actual evidence that proves wind is scam and that enables the wind developers to just keep peddling there useless invasive product on unsuspecting people and govts.
If our govt prohibits maybe it will set an example for another govt to wise up and prohibit instead of saying, well they seemed to use setbacks...maybe we can too, and the scam goes on!!! Does the buck stop anywhwere any more on this type of insanity. That is why we are in the mess we are in in this country...just keep endorsing what we know are basically big scams.
http://www.wwnytv.com/news/local/Cape-Vincent-Supervisor-Urban-Hirschey-Wins-Republican-Primary-129775248.html
And what about science. Those of us who outright oppose industrial turbines in CV are always accused of being irrational and using no science (which is not true). But what about the setback crowd? How come you can’t see the science such as presented by. utility companies. grid managers, existing real world wind experience, and people like physicist John Droz who spoke in CV and has been presented on both the other CV blogs. All these credible sources present very convincing evidence that wind in the large energy climate picture is a failure with NO actual science behind it including economically. Like our large AZ utility APS that met its renewable "obligations" and just walked away from wind energy because they said it was unreliable, nor cost effective and did not meet peak demand. This is a utility that has to actually deal with wind energy 24/7/365. So why are you ignoring THAT science? the John Droz mentioned above is the same one Mr. Hirschey tried to keep WPEG from inviting to CV. I guess your “science” is a bit short sighted and biased, and goes only as far as you political allegiances, and not to address the much more serious energy issue. So much for your “science”. The credible people in CV that truly oppose industrial wind have looked in detail at ALL the science and research…not just what matches their setback wind enabling agenda.
And finally look at it from the wind developer’s point of view. When a wind developer looks at the two pictures he is going to see one thing NO TURBINES ALLOWED. He isn’t going to go over and kiss the town board and zoning committee on the forehead and say “ WOW I read your science and research , and you guys are absolutely right… I agree with your zoning law…but those prohibit people are really off the wall!!!”
That is what is really going to count in the A-10 , court debate. So why not stand up and take the stance that applies ALL the science, and looks at it from a less provincial view .Stand up and stop sending a message of appeasing wind developers and politicians who are trying to take away our rights and destroy our communities, so appeasement doesn’t enable them to walk the scam right into another community or region essentially with our backing and consent. That is also the idiotic backward thinking when people say Pundt other seasonals shouldn’t have any say in CV, they don’t live here. And that is not all coming from the pro wind side either. I am an American tax payer and concerned about our energy and climate problems. Maybe you haven’t noticed that CV is actually connected to the rest of the world, especially right now and is a big player in the entire wind debate. Just look at the world map on the other blogs and see who is watching over our shoulder. What we do here has BIG implications and I don’t think even the tacit message should be wind energy is OK, and to hell with all you other people watching. To bad suck it up on your own. Small minds see small limited solutions that only effect their immediate interests!!!
Picture A and B look deceptively the same, but that my friends is the BIG difference between the two pictures if you didn’t see it.
No comments:
Post a Comment