YOUR COMMENTS

Congratulations New Hampshire and New England. It nice when facts and reason win the day.

Wind energy is currently cost competitive with coal and does a lot less damage to our environment at every level. Once we have to pay for more of the pollution caused by burning coal to produce electricity, wind will definitely be a better investment. Energy storage technologies in development now will help to offset the intermittent wind availability challenge in the near future.

I would encourage those concerned about bird mortality to checkout the Treehugger website article on Wind and Bird Mortality http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/04/common_misconce.php

I think you'll be a lot less fearful of Wind Power once you read this article.

Good luck to Coos County and Granite Reliable Power.
- Melissa, Middletown, CT

Jim in Manchester: I hate to break it to you but New England imports a significant part of its electrity from Quebec.
- LJC, Manchester

Wind and solar will never produce a significant portion of the power we use in this country. Nuclear is the only currently viable option to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. As far as the "beautiful" wind turbines go, they're noisy, they're output is both intermittent and unreliable, and they only produce a small fraction of their rated output. And the power cannot be fed into our existing grids.
- Brian, Farmington

David,
The US & NH are a long long long way from being in Denmark's position, where we have to import electricty because we overbuilt on wind. The purpose of adding wind to the grid is to save fuel (read: money, trade deficits, pollution)at peaking fossil fuel power plants. No one is ever ever ever going to throw away a perfectly good power plant just becuase there is a 'greener' alternative.
- Jim, Manchester

Barry,
You are wrong; The majority or the impacted acreage due to wind turbine construction will be revegetated and make great wildlife habitat again. The construction impacts (road side slopes etc) for mountainous projects are much larger than the permenent impacts.
- Jim, Manchester

Does anyone know the contact person for donations to pay for the legal battle apparently necessary to put an end to this ridiculous project? The volunteers who spent their own time and money to stand up against this insanity should be applauded, but good lawyers cost money. Especially where the issue bucks the popular mantra that "green" is magically good.

It's somehow considered "green" even where thousands of acres of forest viewshed are impacted forever, where there is absolutely no reduction in reliance upon existing power sources (look it up). It's also sad that the AMC was convinced to officially "sell out" its constitutents in exchange for a couple million dollars in "mitigation". All the good things they do pale in comparison to some of the really questionable things.
- Barry, Jefferson

pete, randolph:

Denmark has over 6,000 turbines that produced electricity equal to 19% of what the country used in 2002. Yet no conventional power plant has been shut down. Because of the intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants must be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand for electricity.

Throughout Europe, wind turbines produced on average less than 20% of their theoretical (or rated) capacity. Yet both the British and the American Wind Energy Associations (BWEA and AWEA) plan for 30%. The figure in Denmark was 16.8% in 2002 and 19% in 2003 (in February 2003, the output of the more than 6,000 turbines in Denmark was 0!).

Denmark is just dependent enough on wind power that when the wind is not blowing right they must import electricity. In 2000 they imported more electricity than they exported. And added to the Danish electric bill are the subsidies that support the private companies building the wind towers. Danish electricity costs for the consumer are the highest in Europe.
- David, Keene

Environmentally and economically nuclear is a better option than wind but new projects will take 10+ years to complete. We need both to avoid another economically disastrous run-up in energy prices that will return once the economy rebounds. Wind and solar (down south) for the short term and nuclear for the long term grid supplies.

What is going to happen to gas prices when the Chinese and Indians own half as many cars per capita as Americans do? To keep our transportation system economically viable in the long run, we need more domestic oil production, train construction, and electric car manufacturing. We have failed to slow growth in our fuel demand since the 1970’s. Rumors of oil running out didn’t dent it. Only a few ran out and bought hybrids when we heard about global warming. According to AAA the average cost of car ownership (depreciation, financing, license registration, taxes and insurance) is $15.28 per day plus $0.17 per mile (gas, maintenance and tires) driven. Based on your own driving patterns, compare that to $2.70 per rider after subsidies on a light rail system or $4.30 per rider for an average ride on a bus in Charolette NC. Trading in a car and using mass transit could save consumers thousands of dollars and city governments millions per year. What is it going to take to break our dependence on cars and subsequently on foreign oil, in highly urbanized areas?
- Jim, Manchester

anne in brandon ny and all the other naysayers, whiners, complainers who say wind can't and won't work.

Wind power can and does work in Europe. Denmark gets 20% of their electrical generation from wind. How do they deal with times the wind isn't blowing? They are connected to large grids in Germany and Scandanavia so they can send excess power out if needed and pull power in when the wind isn't blowing. There are many technical and engineering hurdles to overcome before we can attain that level here(namely we need more and larger transmission lines and need connection to large hydro sytems that can be swung to compensate for what the wind is doing- [Hydro Quebec connection?]). So we can sit at our computers and rant "CAN"T BE DONE!" or we can start working on the issues in the way so it can be done.

As far as wind turbines being 'monstrosities', that is totally in the eye of the beholder. For everyone who says they are ugly, I can find someone who thinks they are graceful and beautiful.

And Andrew, yes the biomass plant in Berlin should be built (again -issues with the facility being a 'monstrosity') and grid capicity issues need to be dealt with.
- pete, randolph

This project is so stupid in so many ways. Absorb the limited grid capacity with a project that provides few long term jobs, thus limiting the ability for biomass generators to get approval that support many jobs with existing available workforce (wood harvest industry). Build this monstrosity and obstruction on the highest ridgeline between 2 national wildlife refuges, one with the major focus of protecting waterfowl who are clumsy flyers. Does John really get the bulk of his electricity from coal plants in Bow, even with the multiple existing hydro plants on the Upper CT river and along the Androscoggin, not to mention the biomass plant in Whitefield?
- Andrew, Gorham

It is obvious that the people who say it's a good thing are TOTALLY uneducated.. Pete in Randolf, the coal plants are used to run the turbines at start up, the lights and heat. These can try to start all day long. Clinton NY project was 12% of rated capacity for the 3rd qurter in 2008.. hmmm, the wind footprint cover 37K acres of a town only 43K acres in total.. where is this destruction justified?? Get educated PLEASE!!!
- anne, brandon, ny

I say put the turbines up and let's start reaping the benefits of renewable energy

The quicker we get weaned off foreign energy the better.

Goodbye MR OPEC!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As the saying goes, it's been real and it's been fun, not real fun.
- Harry, Atkinson

I am glad that this is a done deal and I look forward to the energy that will be produced - cleanly. There's no Three Mile Island in wind.
- coreyd, manchester, nh

Rest assured if you could see this area from Ted Kennedy's compound this would never happen. This sounds like a make work project with low yield rewards. With the present attitude tward Green Projects I'm sure its a done deal.
Dave
- Dave Newell, Pepperell,Ma

Herb in Concord:

I am extremely familiar with this area having actually walked the mountain tops where these will be built. You're correct that this area is logged but I wouldn't call the cut areas "defaced". They cut the trees and the forest grows back. In ten years, you hardly know the area was cut. Build these towers and they are there forever, as will the infrastructure to support them.

Good idea but a bad location.
- Mike, Manchester

So many negative comments! Please come to Rt.10 in Newport NH to view the beautiful wind turbines to the south in Lempster. Then drive south to Rt.31 for a closer look. Please talk to the folks who live close by these wonderful machines.
- David Brown, Sunapee

John complains about 'hacking up wilderness mountaintops' while using his computer which is being powered by the Bow coal fired power station- which gets its fuel from Appalachian coal mines- where they remove entire mountaintops to remove the coal.

But that's okay, as long as we don't build a new road in an industrial forest in NH...
- pete, randolph

Shame on the state of NH for letting this proceed. With such a small amount of pristine land being used for 400ft high wind turbines, this is a disgraceful display of greediness and blatant disregard of probably the most beautiful area of NH for natural scenery. Again, people, take a ride up to upstate New York just outside of Plattsburgh and see how ugly a once beautiful landscape looks like with rows of wind turbines. These turbines should be erected on the ocean just outside of visual sight from the shore. The ocean is a DESERT!! Northern NH is not.
- ScottK, Salem

While the committee members visited the general area of the project, there was no way to walk the project side since NO ROADS exist to it. This should give you a sense of how remote and untouched this area is by commercial timbering or other man-sponsored activities. New Hampshire state government showed its ignorance on this deal and its decision, if left unchallanged, will haunt the people of area. AMC sold out, pure and simple.
- Linda, Errol

The negativity and resistance to this is astounding. Are you truly concerned with "defacing" a mountain already used for logging or do you just have a knee-jerk reaction to anything proposed as "green" ?
We will have to chalk it up to the classic fear of change that so many conservatives are guilty of. They are also guilty of conveniently pointing out the cons of any plan while rarely providing an alternative solution.
Just like nuclear power, wind was never intended as a be-all, end-all solution.
A hybrid approach will be necessary in conjunction with continued improvements in conservation and household efficiency. When combined with solar, the issue regarding the lack of summer wind is eliminated.
More sun in summer, but less wind.
More wind in winter, but less sun.
I endorse any plan that helps to eliminate or even to simply reduce coal and wood burning for power generation.
- Herb C., Concord

I'd like to see more wind turbines along the coast. I went boating last weekend in Salisbury MA (where the Merrimack empties into the ocean) and there was a new wind turbine installed there. In talking to a local resident, he said there was so much controversy over that project but now that it's running, people are OK with it.

Aesthetically, I think they're not an eyesore at all. They're rather fun to watch but that's just my opinion. Wind turbines may not be a perfect solution, but I think they're a step in the right direction. I'd love to have a small wind system helping to power my home, but I don't live in the right area. Mountain ridges (such as the area the project in Coos county is being planned) and the seacoast are the best places in NH for wind turbines. Both of those areas have consistent class 4+ winds according to government wind studies.

Regarding birds, I love how people are suddenly concerned with birds when a wind turbine is being planned. The common house cat kills tens of thousands more birds each year than a wind turbine. Should we ban house cats?
- Bryan, Nashua

Noble wind-energy firm under investigation.

July 15, 2008
CHATEAUGAY, NY -- Noble Environmental Power LLC and a second wind-energy firm are under investigation by the state Attorney General's Office for "improper dealings with public officials and anti-competitive practices."

http://www.pressrepublican.com/0100_news/local_story_197230037.html
- Catherine, Keene

A one megawatt wind turbine never equals 1 Mw of 24/7 electricity.

A study of existing wind turbines in Germany has shown that their 48,000 MW of wind turbine power translates to 15,000 MW of power or 31% of capacity.

In the summer when the electric power is needed the most the wind needed to generate the power is at it's lowest level.
- David, Keene

Its amazing how this project has shot through the approval process. Because it's a"green" project. Hacking up wilderness moutain tops and building a 34 foot wide road to build huge and ugly structures doesn't sound very green to me.
Plus, conventional power plants will continue to run since these things only produce power when the winds blows at certain velocities. Money talks!!
- John, Concord

Who are these people on the panel? Where do they come from? Did they visit the site? I'll bet none of them have ever taken one step north of the Notches. This is insane, and we need to stop it.
- Bill, Whitefield

How did the Appalachian Mountain Clubs status get so elevated. With so many people getting lost (some die) on their trails I would think they should concentrate on that.
- Bob, Salem