Commenter "SIR" in the WDT Has Badly Distorted Reality!

I was reading some of the comments in the WDT about the controversial SASS designation.  A commenter named "SIR" made a comment and I have posted a portion below.

"This is nothing more than an attempt to prevent the development of wind farms in these areas, just ask Mr. Clifford Schneider. He is on the steering committee for SASS. He effectively prevented BP from developing a wind farm in Cape Vincent..."

No... SIR, and you need to get a grip on reality if you are going to engage in this debate with any shred of credibility!  Apparently you need to distort your point this badly for your anti SASS agenda.

First...if that is what Mr. Schneider actually did ... then good for him, and I applaud him!  But that is not what happened, and it just ain't that simple.

However, even though Mr. Schneider as a CV councilman was deeply involved in zoning matters that were restrictive to wind energy development, he did not in my opinion prevent BP from developing a wind farm.

As a councilman Mr. Schneider and his town board were involved in the Art. 10 electric generation siting process between CV, the NYPSC, and BP for the siting of the BP wind farm.  

However, BP walked away from CV and Art. 10 based on the unfavorable wind economics, and financial stresses on the company from its Gulf oil disaster. 

Keep in mind that BP had already gotten out of the solar business long before they dropped wind in CV.  And the reality was they were trying to divest their CV wind farm as part of getting out of the wind business across the board, not just CV.

With no disrespect to Mr. Schneider, but that is why BP left CV, not because of Mr. Schneider or the board he served on.

The reality is the Art. 10 process that could have preempted the zoning law Schneider and his board wrote on wind siting, was never completed.  BP just walked away from it altogether, because of economics. 

It is also not likely the letters people wrote to the NYPSC opposing the BP project had any effect either.  We will never know, and anyone who tells you otherwise is not dealing in the reality that was the CV wind battle and Art. 10.

Despite the fantasy some people like to conjure up, we will never know (at least in the case of BP) whether the Art.10 siting board would have preempted the CV zoning and allowed BP to develop a full or modified project.

In fact the Art. 10 administrative judge, while visiting CV, recommended BP and CV sit down to look at a project that would have been a compromise with the CV zoning.   What does that tell you?  I think it tells you that had the process  played out  BP would have gotten some type of wind farm in CV.

Some people fear SASS will put on additional regulations that will protect the scenic resources so important to the 1000 Islands region.

That doesn't appear to be the case, but  ... SO WHAT!!!

Imagine...some people want to be a little more careful with development in a narrow region so as to protect our unique, beautiful, internationally known tourism and environmental resource...can ya imagine that!

BTW, a scenic resource that has been absolutely critical to the economic survival of this region for decades.  Yet some think this is a radical idea.

GET REAL!!!