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!!!

REALLY???

From the 1000 Islands Regional Assessment Draft Report


"Promoting the region based on sustainable development practices will create a unique image for the Thousand Islands as a beautiful, carefully overseen area that values its scenery and environmental quality."

So what does that say about the people who don't support the 1000 Islands region as a Scenic Area of State Significance? 

Really????


      Click on images to enlarge.

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe We Are Going About This SASS Thing All Wrong - A Little Backward Thinking May Be a Better Approach

Ya know…maybe I am looking at this Scenic Area of State Wide Significance (SASS) all wrong.

Till  now  I have been a supporter of this idea.  Of course one of the claims is that this is a way to enhance the tourism economy of the 1000 Islands Region and promote this beautiful area as widely as possible while keeping visually invasive development from destroying our scenic treasure.

Some people are against SASS believing it brings more regulation and would inhibit development. 

But wait a minute, do I really want a SASS designation bringing more tourists to the 1000 Islands bringing more impacts?

More people spending more money. More boats, more cars, more T-shirt shops, more bars, hotels, and restaurants, more tour boats, more pollution!

Maybe these anti SASS people are onto something.   Why bother promoting and protecting this area, it just brings more problems.

I mean after all, look at some of our iconic national parks like Grand Canyon or Yosemite  that are recognized and promoted for their unique and spectacular beauty and where there really are significant regulations.  I can tell you from personal experience that the main tourist areas in these parks have become like cities in the summer, with the same city problems.

Maybe we shouldn’t be looking to the future to promote our beautiful region for more tourism and potentially wise low visual  impact economic growth. What Communist came up with that idea anyhow? 

 Maybe the provincial backward thinking  of the anti SASS people is right on.

 Maybe we  should keep the status quo, or better yet let our region subtly slide backward and let its little tourist towns slowly  die on the vine, till the last T-shirt and trinket shop along the waterfront fades away, and the last tour boats sink at the dock.

Yeah…that’s it!!!  I’m viewing this all wrong!

That may be the ultimate protect of our region after all.  Towns fading away, less tourism, wise development dies, less people, fewer boats and jet skis, fewer second homes, fewer tourist related businesses, all adding up to less environmental  impacts.

It’s an ingenious solution for protection of our region. 

As our  tourism and communities die off nature will take back the 1000 Islands and net net it is a good thing for the ultimate protection making it less crowded and more scenic as time goes on.  Maybe if we push it far enough we could get back to a wilderness setting, and then TILT could buy it all up and preserve it. 

After all it would be a more quiet peaceful setting to enjoy for those of us who really love it.

Vote In The Place You Love The Most - Remember That Mantra??? It is Swiftly Becoming Meaningless!!!

As the industrial wind and related ethics mess  heated up in Cape Vincent, NY the supposed "anti wind" mantra was to Vote in the Place You Love the Most, or could have the most impact, was aimed at seasonal people who could legally change their voter registration to vote in CV rather than another place they lived as long as they met the legal qualifications...and many seasonals did meet those qualifications.  My wife and I also met those qualifications and have voted in CV a number of times.

It is no secret that the seasonal voter has been pivotal in keeping Hirschey and crew in power over several elections.

This mantra was promoted heavily by the CV JLL blog and particularly previous frequent commenter "TI"

So if I am supposed to make difference and "Vote in the Place I Love the Most " or where my vote is supposed to have the most impact...

Then why is it that suddenly CV  Councilman  Marty Mason, who was among the most controversial pro wind CV govt officials in the heated CV wind battle, and many seasonal Hirschey supporters voted AGAINST  is now the CV Deputy Town Supervisor...even if it is only temporary?????

The same man who with others brought forth an illegal and unconstitutional Cape Vincent voter registration law targeted against the very seasonal voters keeping Hirschey and crew in power?

The same man who Mr. Hirschey, the current  CV Town Supervisor, just appointed to the Dep. Supervisor position!!!!

I guess Voting in the Place You Love the Most is becoming more meaningless lately!!!

NY Wind Power - A Huge Waste of Capacity

The list below from the NY Independent System Operator shows the capacity factors for NY wind farms up to 2010. 

Basically the capacity factor for any power plant is what it actually produces in megawatt hours compared to what it could produce at full capacity over the same time usually averaged annually.

Wind has a dismal record as you can see.  You can see that all the NY wind farms averaged together only have a capacity factor of about 23% as of 2010.  To give you a comparison nuclear power plants have capacity factors usually in the 90%+ range.

In  other words for all the negative impacts and tax breaks NY wind farms all put together waste 77% of their capacity when averaged annually against their actual rated capacity in 2010!!!  

World wide if a wind farm can produce a 30% + (which is rare) especially on shore
 that would be a spectacular output for wind.

Keep this clearly in mind when you hear the propaganda wind developers spew out about the capacity of a wind farm or how many homes can be powered.  Pure BS!!!  Just reduce that figure by 75 to 80%!

So if Bill Moore's Galloo Island Wind Farm claims a "capacity" of 100 megawatts it is highly probable it will only produce less than 30% of that capacity on an annual averaged basis.

Another way to look at this is if he puts up 30 huge visually intrusive bird slashing wind turbines, in essence the capacity factor effect of 30% ( and that is generous) will essentially in effect  be like 21 of them are doing nothing but siting there and destroying the view and wildlife. 

Yes... when the wind blows most of the turbines will spin and produce power, except for those broken or getting routine maintenance.  But when the output is average annually compared to its potential capacity it will be in effect like 21 turbines are a waste.  Because sometimes NONE of those turbines will spin or spin at a highly reduced rate due to the lack of wind and won't power a single home despite the inflated claims.

But the sad fact is to get this paltry output where more than 70% of the capacity is wasted, Moore will need all 30 turbines so he can claim 100 MW capacity even though 70% is wasted.  It is a wind industry shell game!  And this is what some people are willing to throw tax money at and trade off the beauty and the environmentally sensitive Eastern Lake Ontario Basin for???  Seriously????

This is an INSANE environmental/financial decision.

Now as an amusing side note.  When I was fighting against a wind farm in N. AZ the wind developer knew we had gotten onto wind's dismal capacity factor record vs the capacity scam.  So the power company promoting the wind farm and buying the power changed tactics and said in a PR piece in the paper the wind farm would produce power about 80% of the time.

They must have figured we were really stupid!  I could claim my car runs 100 % of the time when I need it but that doesn't tell you anything about its actual performance.  It could be sitting in the driveway spitting and sputtering  and going nowhere useful or moving only 1 MPH and I could still make that claim it is running.

A 1000MW wind farm could claim it is producing power even if it is only producing .5 megawatts!!!

The wind stupidity continues and gets more creative all the time.

Marty Mason Appointted Cape Vincent Board Supervisor - YIKES?????

It has come to my attention that Cape Vincent councilman Marty Mason was appointed to the position of deputy supervisor of the CV town board. 

That is a rather frightening prospect!!!

I'm still trying to pin down details, and a comment left on my blog under another post suggests I should view the TB video.

More later

A View Across Henderson Harbor

The panorama you see here was taken from the high Wescott Beach State Park  overlook on the west side of Rte. 3.  From here you have a spectacular sweeping view across Henderson Harbor and Eastern Lake Ontario.

Bill Moore's Galloo Island Wind Farm would devastate this precious unique viewscape. 

It is  unconscionable that the small selfish interests of a few people like Moore and his investors should be allowed access or rights  to this precious scenery to destroy it.  And we may end up giving him a tax break to do it.  These are exceptional environmental and scenic treasures WE all own.  And what puny  power is generated by this wind farm  is likely to go down state.

And for what???

For a source of electric power where 70 to 80% of its capacity averaged annually will never be used as we sacrifice the Eastern Lake Ontario viewshed so treasured by so many.

This is complete environmental insanity!!!