Consider All Possibilities

By TYLER STUDDS

The loudest voice in the room is not always the most accurate. This is certainly the case with the recent flurry of negative information being circulated about wind power in the press and elsewhere. To be clear, I have no problem with people who express strong opinions on either side of this issue. In fact, as a vocal supporter of wind power I hold many opinions that others would find disagreeable. However, I do have a problem with the selective use of information to dress up rank opinion as reasoned judgment. While this in itself is not necessarily harmful, when it is used to influence others it moves to close the conversation that we owe ourselves to be having: In the age of seemingly insatiable energy use and waning fossil fuels, what is the appropriate use of wind energy as our most abundant renewable resource?

Certainly there are examples of poorly planned wind projects that have negatively impacted individuals and communities. However, there are many reasons why we should use these to inform our conversation rather than to preclude it all together. For one, there are just as many stories of individuals, institutions and communities that have successfully embraced wind power. These projects have been well planned and carefully implemented at an appropriate scale. The town of Hull with its two utility scale turbines is just one good example.

Wind power is not inherently problematic as has been inferred by much of the recent commentary. Clearly there are places where wind turbines don’t belong. Yet this fact has too often been used to assert that wind turbines don’t belong anywhere. This is simply a matter of opinion. It is narrow to evaluate the potential role wind power can play in our community based only on its negative impacts, especially when they are exaggerated as irreversible threats. This in fact is not an evaluation after all but a shortsighted dismissal which I am certain does not reflect the mood of the community as a whole.

To properly evaluate the appropriate use of wind energy on Martha’s Vineyard we need to weigh its known impacts against a full accounting of its potential benefits. One way to start would be to identify the shared electrical needs that we would like to meet with renewable energy. Likely candidates could be schools, town offices and other municipal buildings. We should then identify the locations that meet the minimum technical requirements for a suitable site and evaluate their capacities to host a variety of potential turbine sizes. In doing this we will see that there are a number of potential options for meeting different percentages of our electrical needs. Then we can begin to have a conversation and to decide as a community what is and is not appropriate.

There are many reasons why we can and should expect to be successful in a process such as this. First, there are many dedicated people here who care a lot about our Island and are willing to put in the time which is needed. Second, there are two uniquely progressive wind projects that seek to benefit the community or to place the community at the center of the planning process as is suggested here.

One is the Massachusetts Electric Farm model which would achieve this by providing affordable, renewable energy to local farms and and would help to secure their futures. Feasibility studies at the Allen Farm in Chilmark and Northern Pines Farm in Tisbury are currently underway to gather more information about the technical suitability of these sites. Second, Vineyard Power extends to its member/owners the right to make decisions about how the co-op should be run and where and how to site an offshore wind farm. These projects not only offer great potential to benefit directly the community but perhaps more importantly they stand to reinforce our sense of community as well. These points tend to be missed when the conversation is oversimplified or preempted altogether as has been the case lately.

As I said earlier, and is made clear here, I am an advocate for wind power. But I am also an advocate for careful planning that encourages community participation and deliberate decisions based on good information. And that comes first. Two such processes present these opportunities and I would encourage everyone on all sides of the issue to participate. One is the Martha’s Vineyard Commission’s process to develop siting standards and the other is the decision process for Vineyard Power members to select an offshore wind site. These processes should welcome all opinions, but no single opinion should be allowed to define them.

Tyler Studds is a former partner of Great Rock Wind Power and is currently working on a fellowship with Vineyard Energy Project to develop the decision process to be used by Vineyard Power members to select an offshore wind site.

•

Reality, Not Rhetoric

By DAVID NASH

I’m writing this letter because I was a little disappointed that Mr. Harcourt, author of a piece in the Gazette of March 5 (Trying to Catch the Wind) was not properly identified as being in the business of installing wind turbines. Kind of like a liquor salesperson writing an op-ed piece in favor of alcohol sales in Tisbury, isn’t it?

Mr. Harcourt installed a turbine on the shores of Edgartown Great Pond. In hearings before both the Conservation Commission and the Planning Board the application was approved but with conditions that impacts on birds be determined as well as noise impacts on the neighbors. The bird study was deemed significant because of the incredible diversity of wildlife in the great pond environment. Have we yet to see the results of that study? No, because it hasn’t even been conducted.

So before I’m condemned and forever labeled as being anti-wind and against the future of our planet, let me clearly state that I very much support wind energy as a viable alternative energy source, along with solar and geothermal, as well as a fully integrated nationwide energy use strategy. I support offshore wind that doesn’t adversely impact our marine resources. I support land-based wind projects that are treated as the public utilities that they really are, municipal locations such as treatment plants, landfills and schools, farm co-operatives, and regional cooperatives. I support installations in areas already dedicated to power lines and cell towers and business parks. I support Vineyard Power (which, by the way, we should all join as charter members both to benefit from the potential energy savings but also to allow for our voice to be heard should VP decide to play it cheap and support the placement of turbines in state waters). I am not so supportive of “small” wind, residential wind or symbolic wind turbine installations; they are unnecessary, inefficient and intrusive.

I support the efforts by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission and towns like Aquinnah to try to address the real issue of properly siting these facilities while it is still controllable. It is time to set aside silly, emotional arguments. Mr. Harcourt is right that we are at a crossroads with our energy needs, but his argument that we must turn to wind because we refuse to conserve or control our lust for energy is not only overly dramatic but inaccurate. I served on the Island Plan committee which developed the energy and waste recommendations, and the initiatives necessary to address energy conservation are well discussed and clearly need to be part of our energy future. It is time for us to stop looking to the examples of Samso Island or other locations that don’t really relate to what is going on here on the Vineyard; as much as we want to proclaim our efforts to become self-sustaining with respect to energy generation, we will always be dependent on other sources when either the wind doesn’t blow or when our 100,000 seasonal visitors arrive.

So my point is, let’s get real about this. We don’t need any more overblown editorials as we see from Mr. Harcourt. We need responsible wind development. We need good sound planning from all of our Island governments. We need policies and projects that are properly integrated with our land and marine resources. We need to adequately protect our quality of life and that should clearly include our views and landscapes and other aesthetic and cultural considerations. We need to keep our energy generation footprint just as much in check as our carbon footprint. That would be the best possible legacy for us to leave our planet.

David Nash is an Edgartown resident and a former (retired) director of environmental programs for the state of Connecticut.