20 thoughts on “10 Questions – Mark Rodgers Communications Director Of Cape Wind”

1. Susan Reid, Staff Attorney of the Conservation Law Foundation, includes “dredging” as an action to be taken by Cape Wind in her 3/22/07 letter to Secretary Bowles regarding the Cape Wind FEIR.
   There is sufficient reason to consider that dredging would be required by Cape Wind as Senator Ted Kennedy also states that Cape Wind would require dredging. Conservation Law Foundation letter by Susan Reid to State Secretary Ian Bowles includes under “Water Quality” “dredging” but her letter does not address the requirement of the applicant, Cape Wind, to secure federal and state permits for dredging.

   The Eleventh Question I would like to propose to Mark Rodgers is:

   Has Cape Wind filed for dredging permits?

2. Barbara: The next time I get a chance to ask them questions I will be more than happy to add this as one of them. Thanks for the input.

3. Hey, why did you delete this post from Cape Cod Today? Is it because Mr. Rodger’s neighborhood doesn’t include answering questions with the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I mean why bother when you can just make the stuff up, right?

   As in no dredging and no fishing in this area… The fib detector is registering off the charts!

   Do go back to Mr. Rodgers and ask why he ignored the 2004 fishermen’s report of their catch from Horseshoe Shoal. AND, of course ask this… if you categorically deny there will be any dredging in the Nantucket Sound, how will Cape Wind construct those 12 turbines and manuever barges and tugs in less than 12 feet of water? Some of the area is only 2-3 feet deep.

4. Here is an interesting quote from Mark Rodgers, June 23, 2006, Cape Cinema in Dennis;

   “I agree with Charles [Vinick], Cape Wind will have no affect on Global Warming.”

   From above-

   “8. ME: Do you feel Cape Wind would bring new jobs to Cape Cod? And if so what kind of jobs?”

   “Mark Rodgers: Absolutely. Cape Wind will have a staff of about 55 to operate and maintain the wind farm – these will be highly paid, Cape-based jobs.”

   Fifty-five jobs?? Really?? I find it hard [even impossible] to believe. Consider this info included in a Nov. 6, 2005 Cape Cod Times article; [“Our future? General Electric has invested millions in this Irish offshore wind complex. Nantucket Sound could be next”]

   “…In the meantime, GE keeps FOUR [4] full-time employees in Arklow permanently, tracking the Irish experiment. Two or three times a week, the crew sails out to the turbines for regular maintenance, inspections and tours.”

   [Emphasis added]

   Fifty-five jobs?? Is that a promise Mark, or more wind industry hype??

5. Like I said before Neil, it is just easier to make this stuff up!

6. I think you are right Dona.

   Another question for Sietch/Stilgar/Naib/Shane,

   Could you please tell your readers why this interesting Q&A with Mark Rodgers disappeared from your Tasty Politics blog on Cape Cod Today? The people at CCToday have removed articles and comments without warning in the past. They did it recently with Jack Coleman’s “Valid Criticism- from the opposition” story. I believe Jack protested and his article was quickly put back online.

   CCToday protested too. They wrote-

   “Cape Cod TODAY regrets to inform our readers that Jack Coleman failed to contact the developer for their response before publishing this post…”

   Are you also in a position to protest Sietch/Stilgar/Niab/Shane?

7. Hi Neal: I took down my post at CCtoday, because I wanted to. I think CCToday is a great site, and wish them all the best.

8. stilgar, I sense something between the lines in your response to Neil. I really don’t think CCToday or Rodgers appreciate having a light shown on their activities, especially where the dredging issue is concerned.

9. Dona: Well since you asked here is the truth, CCtoday is run by aliens. I know, sounds crazy, but its true. Aliens. And you know what these aliens want more than anything in the world, to steal our precious wind. They have this crazy plan to erect these giant “wind” machines to literally pull wind from the air, and turn it into *gasp* energy.

   I just couldn’t be a part of an alien conspiracy to steal the earths wind. So I removed my post.

   I feel a lot better now that I have shared this with you. Thanks for being there when I needed you.

   Don’t go charging at windmills. My response to Neil is the truth, and the whole truth.

10. That may be your ‘turth’ stilgar but Mark Rodgers and CCToday are covering up the truth on the dredging issue. Since you have such a rapport with Rodgers surely you can ask how they propose to build those twelve turbines that would be located in waters below 12 feet with out dredging working harbors and channels through the shoal. As you know proponent Jack Coleman posted on this issue and to date no one from Cape wind has come forward. Why not? What is the big secret?

11. PS. At first your blog was removed and the comments left up. But then CCToday had to stop the presses and remove the comments. What gives? All I can think is that we have Cape Wind by its Achilles heel and they do not like it.

12. Dona: I didn’t ask Mr. Rodgers about dredging, I told Barb that I would if I got the chance. I don’t have any idea if there is some grand secret. I really don’t know what to tell you.

    I feel we have chatted enough to be friends, and as a friend I have to tell you, you might be spending just a bit too much time on the Cape Wind thing.

    I would bet that we would see eye to eye on many an issue, but our anonymous animosity should really stop. I know you don’t like this project, you know I do. I am sure you, Barb, Neil, and the rest are good folks, but your constant harping does not show your best side.

    You have a lot of reasons why you don’t like Cape Wind, but I would be really interested in hearing and equal amount of ways you plan on solving the problems of global warming. I would love to see your groups anti-cape wind blogs start filling up with ways to save the species.

    Cape wind will not make or break the fight against global warming, but in the end global warming is real and its getting worse every single day. We need to do something, we need to take drastic and rapid actions. We need a lot of things, and arguing with each other over this or that aspect of this plan is not going to fix anything.

    Dredging or no dredging I really don’t care. I want to create a world in which children do not have to worry about wars for oil, dirty air, rising oceans, and a world with a fever. I am willing to sacrifice some things for that. I am willing to pay more money for my energy, I am willing to use less of it, I would be willing to kill a few birds, or even a one time disturbance of some ocean floor. If it meant that human beings could live on a planet that is not going to heat up to the point that we have a hard time living on it.

    I have thought long and hard about this, and realize that no one solution to our energy needs is perfect. Some are expensive, some cause pollution, some ruin views. But some are better than others.

    We are in the fight of our lives, and by we I mean you me and every other living person on this rock. We can debate over the pros and cons of this project, but in the end we have to do something.

    Thanks for listening

13. So you are willing to kill a few birds, stilgar? That is of no surprise to me.

14. You may be willing to kill birds but luckily there are laws that protect our wildlife from people like you. Because, you see, without the wildlife there will be no people. We are all interconnected. But, obviously, you are ignorant of the workings of the natuaral world. So it is easy for you to ‘sacrifice’ those you care and know nothing about. Those witout a voice. I don’t call that sacrifice.

15. Niab,

    You are greatly overstating the benefits and underestimating the negative impact potential of Cape Wind. “We have to do something” is really not justification to do “anything.”

    The significance of this precedent should not permit reviewing agencies to wave past details as these are potential adverse impacts multiplied by a scale of an area of ocean equal to the size of Manhattan Island. The details include risk to public safety that Cape
    Wind represents.

    My question,

    “Has Cape Wind filed for the dredging permits that Conservation Law Foundation references as action by Cape Wind in their letter to State Secretary Ian Bowles of 3/22/07 on the FEIR? This is relevant to observance of policy, federal and state laws that require permits for dredging.

    The public safety threats associated with Cape Wind should result in the determination that the risks outweigh benefits by MMS. Don’t take my word for it:

    Congressman William D. Delahunt to House Chairman Committee on Homeland

    Security Honorable Peter T. King:

    “I am deeply concerned about the project’s proximity to key civilian and military radar installations.” The Air Force’s PAVE PAWS radar-part of the country’s early warning system for ballistic missiles-is located on the nearby Otis Air National Guard base.”

    The Congressional Defense Committee:

    “The Effect of Windmill Farms on Military Readiness” cites:

    “For UK air defense radars, the radar operators must be able to reliably track all aircraft that could pose a threat. The operators must include the ability to track by primary radar alone if necessary. UK studies to date have concluded that the radar’s probability of detection is reduced in air space over wind turbines due to technical aspects of radars and the large cross section of wind turbines, and no mitigation solutions have yet proven the required level of radar coverage. On this basis, the UK Ministry of Defense must be consulted on all proposed wind turbines that are within the radar line of site of an air defense radar, regardless of distance.”

    “The results from those flight trials documented that state-of-the-art utility class wind turbines can have a significant impact on the operational capabilities of military air defense radar systems. The results demonstrated that the large radar cross section of a wind turbine combined with Doppler frequency shift produced by its rotation blades can impact the ability of radar to discriminate the wind turbine from an aircraft. Those tests also demonstrated that the wind farms have the potential to degrade target tracking capabilities as a result of shadowing and clutter effects.”

    National Air Traffic Controllers Union Cape Air Approach:

    “could not think of a worse place to put these turbines.”

    National Air Traffic Controllers’ Cape TRACON to the USACE:

    “Placing 130 of these turbines in this area, in our opinion, is a disaster waiting to happen.”

    “We have some very serious worries over the location of this project. Cape Wind Associates has published “Airplane Flight Routes” on its web site, which depicts flight paths that are well clear of the proosed Wind Farm. The reality of this situation is quite different. This is a very heavily traveled area for air traffic. If you were to ask me, where is the worst possible place to construct a hazard to aviation and jeopardize safety in the Cape and Islands airspace, I couldn’t have picked a better spot than the current location.”

    “The evidence of endangerment to all who travel by air sea over and upon Nantucket Sound is compelling.”

    Nantucket Memorial Airport to Congressman Delahunt:

    “The Sound is a primary lifeline to Nantucket Island for both surface marine activity and aviation. It appears obvious that any interruption of reliable radar coverage would pose a serious concern to the safety of this area. The vertical obstruction also poses a challenge to any search and rescue efforts in a relatively large area.”

    Barnstable Airport Manager to the FAA Marion Blakely:

    “The purpose of this letter is to seek the FAA’s cooperation to immediately suspend its current finding of “No Adverse Effect”, regarding the proposed Cape Wind Farm proposed for Nantucket Sound. This project not only poses a threat to more than 24 square miles of pristine waterway, but more so the FAA’s previous ruling is more than four years old and quite rudimentary, given the immersion of new facts surrounding the numerous negative effects of large-scale wind projects such as the one proposed for Nantucket Sound.”

    Barnstable Airport, Martha’s Vineyard Airport, and the Nantucket Memorial Airport have appealed the FAA “no hazard” and strongly object to Cape Wind.

    Barnstable Airport officials call this project “Lethal.”

    Port Captain Charles Gifford:

    “My name is Captain Charles Gifford, I am the Port Captain for the Wood’s Hole, Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket Steamship Authority. I’m a U.S. Coast Guard licensed Master Mariner and an approved instructor at the Massachusetts Maritime Academy.”

    “The Steamship Authority annually makes 22,000 trips transporting close to three million passengers and over 600,000 cars and trucks to the Islands of Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket. It is our opinion that the 130 wind turbines planned for Horseshoe Shoals and Nantucket Sound has a potential for creating a significant hazard to safe navigation for our vessels and other users of the waterways.”

    Flying Cloud Capt. Bruce Malenfant states that he is “horrified” at how close the proposed wind farm would be to his Barnstable Nantucket route.

    William H. Rypka retired lieutenant commander in the U.S. Coast Guard:

    “Accidents can and will happen, and the wind plant would increase both their frequency and the potential for loss of life and oil spills. There is an active commercial fishery in the Sound along with the many fishing boats, ferries and pleasure craft that transit the area. The 130 steel and concrete structures would be located adjacent to the main shipping channel and would be huge hazards to navigation; they could not possibly be viewed as navigation aids.”

    Mass. Fishermen’s Partnership:

    “Cape Wind puts fishermen at risk”

    MFP is a Coalition of 18 Massachusetts commercial fishing organizations that call on Cape Wind to “stop making false claims” about their offshore wind project’s impact on fishing. “Navigation of mobile fishing gear between the 130 wind towers would be hazardous or impossible”

    Mashpee Wampanoag Nation:

    ”Historically the Sound is of great importance to the tribe,” tribal spokesman Scott Fearson said. ”The tribe considers the Sound to be ancestral waters. There are a number of concerns about this project.” ”The Tribe’s economic health and cultural heritage are virtually defined by our reliance on our coastal resources. ”The Cape Wind project would disrupt the fragile habitat of these aboriginal fishing grounds and pose new navigational hazards to our fleet. The consequences would be devastating, in terms of both economic development and public safety.”

    Cape Wind is a threat to public safety.

16. Awesome comments Barbara.

    But, you see, stilgar doesn’t care about life on this planet now… he says a ‘few’ birds but then he might also say a ‘few’ people are worth the sacrifice but certainly not HIS.

    But then again we all know wind farms will have zero effect on CO2 emissions, will not cut back on our use of fossil fuels and cause severe damage to critical wildlife habitat.

    Wind Farms are a giant experiment and saying we have to do something is like saying “I think the house is burning down, that is why I am running around screaming and throwing an imaginary cup of water on it”.

17. stilgar, as to the rest of your comment. I am not what is important here and frankly do not see winning your favor as even a remote goal. We are talking about an issue that is of grave importance and I have dedicated myself to it. Sure, it would be nice and more comfortable for you if I would just go away and pursue something else. But that simply isn’t going to happen.

    As to doing something for the species, I dedicated myself (and still do) to shining a light on our overuse of deadly pesticides in the environment. Dead Great Horned Owls from Chlordane (which I helped to ban) were what put that fire under me. And now dead eagles from industrial wind farms ignite another fire.

    The thing about working directly in the wildlife emergency room is those deaths tell us what is happening to the environment. They are are early warning system. To ignore what we see is criminal.

    Before those dead Hreat Horned Owls, we were told Chlordane did not travel through the food chain. The pesticide industry told us that and they were believed. But when those dead owls were sent for expensive testing they proved that Chlordane did, in fact, travel through the food chain since there was no was the owls would have come in contact with it directly and it was only through a build up in their systems through their food source that they died.

    Ignoring dead birds and bats from turbine blades is a huge mistake. The studies are only beginning and they are showing grave danger for those species. As wind farms proliferate the problemsa will only get worse.

    You may be ignorate on the subject of ecology but ignorance is no excuse and serves no one.

    Yes, we need to find alternative energy sources but not at the expense of the other living beings on this planet on which we all depend.

    So no, I will not dedicate myself to a cause of your choice. I cannot close my educated eyes and pretend we are not destroying living beings in order to save them.

    You are backing a fat cat smooth talking developer who will do anything and everything to capitalize on people’s fear and ignorance.

18. I’ve been very interested in the discussions on Cape Wind and I have read the arguments on both sides. Except for this latest dredging question, it’s just been the same arguments repeated for awhile. I am not at all convinced that CW will have to dredge to get the construction barges in place but I think it would be useful in dispelling the dredging issue if CW would provide a little more detail on how they’ll get to shallow areas. I’d also like to know if “Jet Clamming” would be prohibited in the wind farm and also if the Alliance has a position on that practice.

    I don’t live on the Cape or own a place there. I’ve only visited. I’ve seen the pictures of what the wind farm would look like from various places. Aesthetics are subjective of course, but they do not look like an “industrial park” to me. I think they’re cool looking. They certainly wouldn’t dissuade us from visiting and we’d even want to tour them. If I went to a sea-side restaurant on the Cape I’d rather be eating healthy fish and looking at wind turbines slowly spinning along the horizon with sail boats in the foreground than be looking at power boats going by an empty horizon and have mercury in my fish.

    If we are going to switch away from gasoline cars the most promising technology is the plug-in hybrid. That means that even without population growth, we will need more electricity and we need cleaner methods of producing it. My belief is that, on balance, CW will be very clearly a plus for the environment because the choice is not between Cape Wind and nothing, it is between Cape Wind and other methods of producing electricity.

    Would you rather have Koch’s Coal or Neil’s Nuclear? I’d prefer wind but just between the last two I’d take nuclear. I don’t have room for any of that on my lot, though. I’ll take solar, with a hydrogen fuel cell for night as soon as it’s affordable.

19. Pingback: CAPE WIND delayed AGAIN! « The Conservation Report

20. How many wind turbines can you put on an acre?
    Estimated cost per turbine on land?

Comments are closed.