Domestic Fuel

It’s obvious Casey doesn’t live in Pentwater

I believe this project will only help those who need the energy and are willing to pay for it (Detroit and Chicago). Locally, aesthetically, and economically the Oceana and Mason residents will pay for it in lost property values and tax bases.

LakeshoreOwner,

Please explain how wind turbines in Lake Michigan would lower property values and lower the tax base. There are many people in Denmark, the Netherlands, and Northern Germany who live within sight of wind farms in the North and Baltic Seas and who have not found that to be the case.

This includes sailing, boating and fishing on the great lake…

Ms. Burdick,

Wind turbines will stop you from doing none of those things. You sound like those rich, privileged Massachusetts families who are obstructing the offshore wind farm in Nantucket Sound.

This may work in Denmark etc. but it is not the reason people live and visit Pentwater and surrounding areas. Why should Pentwater bear the brunt…

Unfortunately, you are probably right. It will work in Denmark or the Netherlands, but not here. The reason it won’t work here is the American trait of putting “me” before “we,” while the Danes and Dutch think “we” first and consider the good for their entire countries.

Are there any studies that show the impact of windmills on tourism?

I think the impact on the local tourist economy is a valid concern and I’d like to see studies of a cost benefit analysis.

I’m not terribly interested in wind power because its green, I’m interested in it because its cheap…and cheap power is like mana for an economy.

The more pollution I see, the more I think we’re turning into a communist nation. Most of the worlds most polluted cities are in Russia and China.

Would you please direct us to a web site that openly shares the Environmental Impact Statement and the Economic Impact Assessment?

I thought this was interesting…..”Despite their being cited as the shining example of what can be accomplished with wind power, the Danish government has cancelled plans for three offshore wind farms planned for 2008 and has scheduled the withdrawal of subsidies from existing sites. Development of onshore wind plants in Denmark has effectively stopped. Because Danish companies dominate the wind industry, however, the government is under pressure to continue their support. Spain began withdrawing subsidies in 2002. Germany reduced the tax breaks to wind power, and domestic construction drastically slowed in 2004. Switzerland also is cutting subsidies as too expensive for the lack of significant benefit. The Netherlands decommissioned 90 turbines in 2004. Many Japanese utilities severely limit the amount of wind-generated power they buy, because of the instability they cause. For the same reason, Ireland in December 2003 halted all new wind-power connections to the national grid. In early 2005, they were considering ending state support. In 2005, Spanish utilities began refusing new wind power connections. In 2006, the Spanish government ended — by emergency decree — its subsidies and price supports for big wind. In 2004, Australia reduced the level of renewable energy that utilities are required to buy, dramatically slowing wind-project applications. On August 31, 2004, Bloomberg News reported that “the unstable flow of wind power in their networks” has forced German utilities to buy more expensive energy, requiring them to raise prices for the consumer.”

For more visit the listed url!

So many towers would definitely have an emmense effect on the wave motion by slowing down the waves causing sand to form an artificial reef.

Connie,

An immense effect? Please explain how towers with a diameter of about 24 ft, located several miles* off shore, will effect the structure of waves in Lake Michigan and their effect on the beaches.

The waves from the “Gales of November” that roar across the Great Lakes have far more effect than steel pylons stuck in the water ever will. Have you ever protested the “Gales of November?”

Instead of being analytical, you’re grasping at straws.

____________________
* The steady winds that make the Great Lakes attractive for offshore wind farms, are only steady starting at about seven miles offshore.

The difference is sir, those winds are natural. Steel pylons in the lake, are they? Maybe one or two would make only a small difference but many would have an impact whether that is good or bad remains to be studied by our ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS. As to an artificial reef, the area from Little Pointe Sauble Light House, Silver Lake, and Big Pointe Sauble Light House, Ludington, is a natural bay, approximately 26 miles across from lighthouse to lighthouse. That many pylons strectched across would slow the the wave action making a sandbar or reef. Have you ever piled rocks in water where there is sand and waves, left in a row they soon build a wall of rock and sand causing the water to make a new way to get where it needs to get to, sometimes causing erosion in a different area. It may not be a scientific description but having lived on Lake Michigan all my life, I can tell you it does happen. Why are you afraid of more research? I think we need all types of energy but they must be used responsibly so our descendents down the road have a wonderful Lake they too can enjoy.

In response to Mr. Slocombe and others who are questioning the economic impact of Wind Farms there is an excellent study done in 2005 about the Nantucket Wind Farm proposal. This project has many similarities to the one proposed for Lake Michigan. The study concluded that with all economic costs and benefits included there would be a negative 211 million dollars if this project were completed. It also discusses the loss of jobs versus the measily number of jobs created over the long term. If you google;
“Free But Costly: An Economic Analysis of a Wind Farm in Nantucket Sound” you should find it. Even though it is old (2005) it is a very comprehensive study of a project that is eerily comparable to the one we are fighting. Finally, I don’t think this comment area needs to get personal as far as my income or any other person’s income in this area. I am interested in the big picture as well as the personal one. I love Pentwater and the surrounding area. I want what is best for its survival which will undoubtedly impact personal issues as well. Please keep your comments to the issue not to the person.

“Instead of being analytical, you’re grasping at straws.”

Mr. Slocombe,

Your comment seems to offer the perfect summary of your own thought process. Ms. Alvesteffer has offered an analytic argument why more research is needed. By contrast, you seem only capable of appealing to the all-knowing Dutch and Danes, while at the same time bashing the good people of Nantucket simply for being fortunate enough to have lemonade for sipping.

Whose payroll are you on, anyhow? You post more than anyone here, and yet you’ve indicated very little about your own motivations for supporting this project (assuming that you do in fact support it). What gives?

Mr. Rotsche,

I am on no one’s payroll. It’s just that I believe the operative word should be “We” and not “Me.”

Looking at historical wind data for the Great Lakes, it’s obvious off-shore wind farms would provide a much needed and reliable source of electrical energy for the entire Upper Midwest.

To take advantage of those winds, the turbines would be several miles off shore. Far enough that there will be no erosion due to waves, and no adverse efect on personal sightlines and vistas.

Anyone who objects is thinking of themselves instead of the country as a whole.

The highways that go past those people’s lakeside houses, and the Interstate highways that carry tourists up from Detroit and Chicago have more of an adverse effect than would wind turbines several miles out on the lake. But why don’t they object to those highways? Because they have a direct need for them, while they sense no need for wind energy.

Please further explain why more research is needed when we have the 20-year example of offshore wind farms in Denmark and the Netherlands. Shouldn’t we learn from their real-world example instead of funding more research with time and money?

Windfarms on land is much different then windfarms in the water. They each have some good points and bad points. Offshore windmills will affect our eco system in many more ways then on land.
I am not against Windmills and I am thinking of others when I say we need to weigh all the pros and cons to come to the best solution for the present and for generations to come. As humans we have not had such a good batting average through past generations of using our resources wisely. We are beginning to correct that, and we do not need to take a step backwards when we have a chance to have both good energy and a good envirnoment for us and our childrens children. IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO IT RIGHT!!!
We are not Denmark or any of the other countries that are using windmills. They have their choices and we have ours, to insult communities for trying to protect what God gave us makes me wonder what they are afraid we might discover with more research and better guidelines.

As I stated before,sir, one or two 24 diameter steel drums probably wouldn’t have a great impact. We are NOT talking about one or two but many and that will affect wave action because it will be across from point to point of a natural bay. I for one am writing my government officials stressing my concerns for them listening to what many are saying and hopefully they will listen and make responsible guidelines that will benefit the people and our great lakes now and in the future and not strive to line some company’s pocket.

I am all for jobs and wind power but not in Lake Michigan. The value of Lake Michigan can’t be measured in dollars and cents. It is a unique ecosystem found no where else in the world. Would people drive across the country to see the Grand Canyon if it were encircled with windmills. Should we fill the Everglades with wind turbines. I am sure both locations would supply power and jobs but at what cost. We owe it to our children and their children to protect the natural beauty that is our Great Lake.