That is another misleading & false comment & link.

"EVERYONE in the U.S. is the biggest obstacle"

- Completely false. Just because folks are smart enough to realize that a huge windfarm in that particular place will not supply all the energy demands now or in the future & further, is not worth all the money that would be spent does not in any way constitute 'EVERYONE' to be an obstacle. If you're looking for someone to blame, blame the wind - since it only has five percent of the nation’s wind potential in that area. As I've aready stated, there are other alternatives. Wind Farms are not the only choice.

These folks are not against wind farms. Especially when they are used & placed properly.

"There are currently no federal laws or regulations on the siting, construction, operation and maintenance of large-scale wind farms off our coasts," Kennedy wrote. "Our national treasures deserve better."

Kennedy said a "programmatic environmental impact statement" should be part of the ongoing state and federal review to be sure the Cape Wind proposal, the first of its kind in the U.S., receives "enough state and federal scrutiny to justify its going forward."

"So far, in spite of all the loud rhetoric on the issue, Cape Wind hasn't met that test and I doubt they ever will," Kennedy wrote. "Until they do, the project should not go forward. Far more is at stake in the decision than our back yards, and I make no apology for opposing this project now."

Seth Kaplan, who directs the Conservation Law Foundation's Clean Air and Climate Change Project, said the "substantive concerns that underlie the senator's comments are legitimate and deserve respect in the process."

"If it wasn't for senators like Ted Kennedy, we wouldn't have the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the laws that provide the environmental framework that a project like this needs to play out against," Kaplan said.

www.capecodonline.com/special...nds8.htm

---

Devils in the Details

"...While one should appreciate Prof. Saito’s concern for the environment and her desire to render the tools of sustainable energy production as aesthetically pleasing forms, one does unfortunately encounter subversive problems with basic matters of fact at virtually every level of discourse in her essay, starting with a rather glaring omission: More than 60 % of the nation’s energy consumption does not even involve electricity.[4] Without much investigation, she declares that the Cape Cod wind imbroglio is merely NIMBYism wrought by an impoverished aesthetic. She simply regurgitates disinformation from the industrial wind camp about new technology inoculating giant wind factories against their ability to harm wildlife. She assures that newer wind technology will not cause significant disturbances to nearby residents. And with the phrase, "Very few people dispute the environmental benefits of wind energy," she embraces the implication that windpower, if pervasively deployed, would be an effective alternative to fossil fuel combustion. None of these notions is true, at least not for most industrial-scaled windplants planned for the uplands and offshore of the eastern United States, given that this region has only five percent of the nation’s wind potential."

www.contempaesthetics.org/newvo...le.php