Thursday, March 15, 2007

"The Hired Hand Who Was Gone With The Wind" - Wind is one 'employee' whose resume doesn't stand up to examination

Editor,

I am writing in response to a letter from Roger Thurber in the February 19th edition of the Daily News. Among his praises for electric power, he refers to electricity as "the cheapest hired hand" that he could hire on the farm. Let's examine the wind power he favors so much in just those terms - as an employee, or "hired hand", of the electrical grid.

Wind power is intermittent, so this hired hand would show up, and leave, at any given time. This would happen so often that you really couldn't rely on this hired hand to get the job done. Consequently, you would have to keep other hands working at the same time (reliable, reserve power plants). In fact, if you tried to look up references on this hired hand, you wouldn't be able to find any proof that he had done any work at all, despite the great estimates he had given you on the amount of work he 'might' do.

Now, since this hired hand sees himself as something really special, he expects that he will be given special treatment on taxes, and anywhere he lives he feels he deserves a special agreement (PILOT - Payment In Lieu Of Taxes). Perhaps this hired hand feels he deserves this special treatment because he is over 100 years old. Over the course of those 100+ years, the utilities would tell him that we need power that works all the time, not one that comes and goes with no warning!

However, this hired hand has now found friends in Albany. With his pockets full of our tax dollars, he is now a very popular guy. In Albany, you don't need to show how much work you did elsewhere, just how much you might do. Of course, his new friends really like the fact that he won't be living in Albany, the Adirondacks, Catskills, or any area downstate for that matter! Some hired hand! Only a politician would accept his resume.

Mr. Thurber also stated that he was disappointed that opponents of wind energy had offered no other non-polluting alternatives, and challenged those that are skeptical of wind promises to live without electricity. Luckily, with our fine utility crews we do not suffer that fate often. Utilities are not politicians - they don't accept hired hands that don't work all the time. Whether it is a crew restoring power, or a power plant that is producing power, you need to be dependable and work non-stop! Perhaps an equal challenge would be to run a farm on just wind power. I can hear it now, "Quiet down girls! We will run the milking machines when the wind comes up ... maybe tomorrow!"

As for suggestions on other non-polluting sources of electricity, you are assuming that wind energy contributes to savings on the grid for us to compare to. We know this hired hand is getting a huge paycheck. Can you show us what work he did to deserve that paycheck? It would take very little to outperform this intermittent resource. There are many more dependable options, such as hydro (which due to outdated laws is still being sold to municipal power companies for 2 cents per kilowatt hour while the grid is being forced to buy wind at 9 cents per kilowatt hour - how do you figure this will make for "the cheapest hired hand" available?), geothermal, and most appropriate for our rural areas, methane digesters, which are already being used very successfully in Wyoming County. These are all dispatchable forms of power - hired hands that can be called on when needed.

What about conservation? If our government took all the subsidy money (our tax dollars) that is being funneled into the pockets of the likes of Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, and GE to fund this bogus hired hand's paycheck, and instead, funneled that money back to every tax-paying citizen to subsidize the installation of proper insulation and energy-efficient appliances in EVERY person's home, CO2 emissions would actually be enormously reduced! EVERY TAXPAYER, AND THE ENVIRONMENT, WOULD TRULY BENEFIT!

To point the finger of responsibility in the right direction, a more appropriate question to ask is: Why have the multi-billion dollar corporations seeking to exploit our areas not provided a complete listing of alternatives to our Town Boards in their DEIS's as they are supposed to do? That's right - these corporations are required to provide a complete listing of alternatives in their Draft Environmental Impact Statements, but they neglect to fulfill this obligation hoping that they will not be called on it. The answer here my friend, is that these multi-billion dollar corporations do not want to fulfill this requirement. Why would they want to educate anyone about any other possible alternatives when their goal is their bottom line, not what's actually best for our rural/residential areas and the environment?!

Lastly, Mr. Thurber warned us that wind turbines would be declared a utility. The State separates the laws for transmission lines and power plants. Of course, the wind proponents use the criterion for transmission facilities as their basis for utility treatment. This is both mistaken and a bit ironic - they are trying to utilize the portion of the law that is for non-productive parts of the utility grid. Hmmm ... wait a minute ... NON-PRODUCTIVE ... perhaps this is the right portion of the law after all!

Part of this law is that you have to show how you are filling a need of the community. Sure hope they accept estimates, or all the "hired hand's" claims - or is this when we finally get some real numbers?!? We are further warned in Mr. Thurber's letter that if wind farms are granted "utility status", this would mean that your land could be used without your permission. Ummm ... isn't that what is already happening when they are determining setbacks from non-participating neighbors' residences?!? Actually, the utility treatment as he described simply means that we would ALL now be non-participants! How does it feel?

In short, the people who are skeptical of this subsidy-driven, corporate rush to sell this old technology as "that which will save us all", simply want proof that it actually works - like a real hired hand would have to if he expected to keep his job! Furthermore, we want our property lines respected! And finally, we want our State to use OUR tax dollars as intended - for REAL services - not as a bribe to accept questionable technology in our towns, and not to accept some "hired hand's" boasts of what he 'might' be able to do just because he's the latest fad with lots of money - OUR money - in his pockets! Show us this "hired hand's" work record - Show us proof!

Sincerely,
Mary Kay Barton, Perry

No comments: