Time for the latest in my ongoing collaboration with Green Options, this is last weeks, read the newest here.
In a recent Wall Street Journal article entitled ‘Wind Jammers,” the Journal manages to take both sides of the Cape Wind issue, without really taking either, while at the same time firmly sticking their foot into their mouths. If you are not familiar with Cape Wind (or I should say the war over Cape Wind), here is a brief update. A company wants to install a big wind farm off the coast of Cape Cod; they say it will produce 75% of the areas power. It has passed every major environmental and government review process so far. Some very rich opponents of the wind farm claim it will ruin the aesthetic value of the cape (their view), and some fisherman think it might interfere with fishing. If built, it will be America’s first offshore wind farm. Even the Daily Show weighed in on the project. (warning: highly funny)
I have lived in the trenches of this battle for the last four years, and the “war” has been going on for the last 6 years. Getting a large renewable energy project built in the backyard of some of the nation’s richest, and most politically-connected people, is not an easy task. The Wall Street Journal (supposedly one of the nation’s best newspapers) has some interesting, and in my opinion foolish, things to say about the issue.
“But advocates often tout renewable energy not for its economics, but because it’s virtuous. Many of those who are willing to impose the costs of various environmental schemes on other Americans based on “ideals” suddenly have started looking more closely at the tradeoffs when something they hold dear would have to be sacrificed, like a nice view. Wind energy is never going to be anything but a bit player in meeting the world’s energy needs. The Nantucket tempest is useful mainly as a real-world test of whether some of the world’s most privileged liberals wear their ideals all the time, or only when it suits them.”
That’s a lot to chew on so lets break it down.