This is about major breaking US
national security news — that is almost entirely unreported…
Although it is about a US
military-wind energy situation, similar issues exist in other countries.
Please pass this on to other
open-minded citizens.
If you have some connections that
might publish this information, please let me know.
john droz, jr.
————————————————————————————————
This a well-known, accurate observation: “The person who wishes to keep his
respect for laws and sausages should not see how either is made.”
This was very much on display recently
with the machinations going on with the annual US federal legislation for our
military: the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). To understand
the disturbing decisions made, some background as to how we got to where we are
today is needed. (FYI the guilty parties here want you to skip this part, as
they do NOT want citizens to have any real understanding of this issue!)
It would be nice to be able to
convey this whole story in a single sound-byte sentence, but that’s not
possible. If you care about US national security, it is essential to understand
some related information. I’ll summarize it as simply as I can. Let me know any
further info needed…
Point #1: There has been several years of conflict between military
operations (in the US and elsewhere) and industrial wind energy. This is for
multiple reasons, ranging from radar interference, to tall structures
obstructing low-level flight paths, to specialized cases (like deteriorating
the exceptionally important ROTHR facility).
Point #2: Initially the Commanding Officers (COs) of affected
military facilities simply voiced their objections, and in most cases the
proposed offending wind project was not approved.
Point #3: As sensible as this might seem, it was totally unacceptable
to the powerful wind industry lobbyists, and some of their well-connected
supporters. Their plan was to get military base COs basically out of the
equation — while giving the public the impression that military concerns
were being fully considered. That might seem like a tall order, but we’re
dealing with some superior slicksters here. Their ingenious and deceptive end
result was to create the DoD Wind Siting Clearinghouse.
Point #4: The Clearinghouse was all about expanding US industrial
wind energy, not protecting US military or our national security. To
pull this off, the rules and regulations for the Clearinghouse were essentially
written by wind lobbyists, and the initial people in charge were
unabashed wind energy promoters. (Upon retiring, the first person to head the
Clearinghouse was quickly hired as a wind energy lobbyist — you can’t make this stuff up!)
Point #5: Not surprisingly, numerous conflicts continued to exist
between wind energy and the US military. The public has little awareness of
these due to backroom, classified agreements made. The wind industry
took advantage of this lack of knowledge, repeatedly trumpeting that
everything was peachy. For those who didn’t bother to closely look behind the
curtain, it may well have seemed to be.
Point #6: Effectively what happened was that military defenders had
to now look for some protection from state level legislation. Of course the
wind lobby has infiltrated state politics as well, so this was no easy
solution. That said there have been some major victories — e.g. Texas passing S277 and North Carolina passing a two year statewide
moratorium (see here, Part XIII) while they did an investigation of the
wind energy interference matter.
Point #7: Ultimately, though, the defense of our military, and
our national security, is a federal matter. Towards that end, earlier this year
I sent to some key legislators an outline of this problem, which included three (3) simple
but effective solutions to this serious matter (at the end). I was hoping that
they would be incorporated into the current year NDAA.
Point #8: Both the House and Senate committees involved with the NDAA
actually did specifically endorse one of my three recommendations. The
current wind industry written Clearinghouse rules basically say that to reject
a proposed wind project, that there has to be substantial proof that it is a
major national security risk. This has to be then endorsed by the DoD
Secretary. Of course this is one of several things intended to fool the public
(and legislator not paying close attention): it sounds good, but it’s
actually worthless. In other words, the bar was purposefully set absurdly high,
so that it was almost impossible to turn down a proposed wind project — and in
fact only one has been so terminated via the Clearinghouse process over many
years now.
Point #9: One of my three recommendations was to fix the rules so
that if a wind project could be reasonably shown to threaten the lives of
our military personnel, that this would be an acceptable justification to
deny it a permit to be built. It was gratifying to see that BOTH the House and
Senate committees reviewing the NDAA, approved changing the Clearinghouse
rules, to add words to that effect. Excellent!
Point #10: However, a few days ago, for some inexplicable reason,
this extremely important change was extracted from the NDAA legislation!
A very experienced DC lobbyist told me that he could not recall a single case
ever, where an important provision agreed to by both House and Senate
committees, was then removed from the legislation. The question to ask our
federal legislators: is promoting wind energy really more important than
protecting the lives of our military?
Point #11: Probably due to guilt for this egregious lapse of
responsibility, our esteemed legislators then added a new provision to the NDAA: Section 318 (page 179). Basically it authorizes the
DoD to engage the National Weather Service (NWS) to do a study about the impact
of wind turbines on weather radars and military operations. Once again the
intent here seems to be to convey the illusion that we are serious about our
military and our national security, and that something meaningful is being
done.
Point #12: Of course the devil is in the details. This amounts to
kicking the can into the ditch. Nothing in the study is about protecting the
lives of pilots from wind turbine obstructions. Nothing in the study is about
assessing the impact of wind turbines on navigation radar. Nothing in the study
is about protecting the exceptionally important ROTHR facility. Furthermore,
who knows what will happen when the study is finished? In the meantime our
military and national security is being compromised.
Point #13: What’s really disturbing is that plenty of good
reports have already been generated on this issue. For example, Here is a
detailed NWS explanation of the problem. For example, earlier this year the NWS
wrote a blistering
report about how wind development in upstate NY was compromising
FIVE (5) different important NEXRAD radar facilities! For example, Fort Drum
issued this official
statement about wind energy interference. What
else do legislators need to know? Oh, they want more pertinent
studies? How about: this, this, this, this, this, this, and this. We already have studies up the wazoo. We already know what
the problems are and what some good solutions are.
Point #14: The reason we are procrastinating, is that the wind
industry has done a superior job in creating the hallucination that wind energy
is a societal benefit. The fact is that industrial wind energy is a technical,
economic and environmental net liability. Once that understanding is
fully absorbed, no reasonable legislator would agree to sacrifice our military
or national security for such a detriment.
Point #15: The bottom line here is that the protection of our military
(and our national security) is being compromised by powerful special-interest
lobbyists. Our legislators are talking-the-talk, but not
walking-the-walk.
That our legislators would accept a
trade-off that wind energy promotion takes precedence over the lives of our
military personnel, is a good indication of how badly this situation has
deteriorated, and how much special-interest lobbyists are running the
government, and our lives. (For more info on that, see here.)
US citizens should
contact their federal representatives and insist that the NDAA to be properly
fixed, today.
