Glenn Schleede's comment on - Terence Blacker: Nimbyism

[cohoctonwindwatch]

Who deserves to be labeled as a "NIMBY"?

Terrence Blacker's comments on "nimbyism" in the January 4, 2008, issue of The Independent are well taken but there is another way to look at the issue.

Let's start by accepting Mr. Blacker's definition; i.e., "...nimbyism is the placing of selfish individual wants before the common good."

In the US, the NIMBY term is often applied to people who oppose "wind farms," other electric generating plants, transmission lines, a variety of other facilities, and the adverse environmental, scenic, and property value impact associated with these facilities.

But who are the people that most often apply the "NIMBY" label to their opponents?

Again, in the US, it seems that those most likely to apply the term are:

a. Developers and prospective owners of the "wind farm," other generating plant, transmission line, etc. who expect to profit from the facility,

b. Lobbyists, publicists, trade associations representing the above,

c. Government officials that take up the cause being pursued by the above,.

d. A wide variety of "non-government," "non-profit," or other organizations -- some of whom are serving as "fronts" for developers and owners, some who are self-appointed advocates for causes selected by their leaders, AND.

e. Potentially most important (and most annoying), those people who want the PRODUCT or SERVICE offered by the proposed facilities BUT do not want the facility and associated adverse environmental, scenic or property value impacts anywhere near them.

In the case of "wind farms," other generating plants and transmission lines, this latter group (e, above) is likely to include (i) residents of cities and surrounding suburbs -- particularly higher income areas, (ii) self-styled "environmentalists," and/or (iii) local government officials and politicians who wish to be seen as "environmentally concerned." Examples that come to mind include:

1. People in California (including political leaders) who oppose building of generating plants IN California but who have been quite willing to import electricity produced by coal-fired generating plants in other states.

2. Political leaders in large cities such as New York who are quite willing to see their economies grow, their citizens' lifestyles improved, and their electricity demand grow -- AND WHO LOOK TO THE PEOPLE IN MORE RURAL AREAS to accept without objection the construction of "wind farms," other generating plants and transmission lines in THEIR backyards, front yards, scenic areas, and OR most any place considered necessary to satisfy the desires for reliable electricity by people and businesses in the highly populated areas.

3. The growing number of local government officials who engage in pseudo-environmentalism by using their constituents' tax dollars to pay premium prices for so-called "green energy" (i.e., electricity allegedly produced from wind and other "renewable" energy sources so that they can appear to be "environmentally concerned" -- but who do so without regard to the environmental, ecological, scenic, or property value damage that "wind farms," and other "renewable" facilities AND transmission lines are imposing on others.

PERHAPS IT'S TIME TO INSIST THAT PEOPLE LIVING IN CITIES AND SUBURBS ACCEPT THE CONSTRUCTION OF GENERATING PLANTS IN THEIR IMMEDIATE AREA.

In fact, state of the art generating units (particularly gas-fired) have relatively few adverse environmental impacts and may present effective ways of redeveloping blighted areas in or close to cities. Furthermore, having generating units close to centers of electricity demand is technically advantageous to grid management, reduces or eliminates the need for building more transmission lines, AND reduces the loss of electricity that occurs when it is transmitted over long distances.

Glenn Schleede

[wild flower]

Hi Glenn

I did not read the Independent article but I would like to make the following general comment on nimbyism.

I have no truck whatsoever with the term nimbyism! It is just another word with derogatory connotations coined to target people who care about 'their' local environment and why shouldnt they.

People often feel powerless against the destruction they see in the wider world and perhaps fighting for what they want or dont want, on their own doorsteps seems a just cause.

[ChrisJB]

Originally Posted by wild flower

Hi Glenn

I did not read the Independent article but I would like to make the following general comment on nimbyism.

I have no truck whatsoever with the term nimbyism! It is just another word with derogatory connotations coined to target people who care about 'their' local environment and why shouldnt they.

People often feel powerless against the destruction they see in the wider world and perhaps fighting for what they want or dont want, on their own doorsteps seems a just cause.

Too right! But concerning wind farms, I am a NIABY (not in anyone's backyard).

Regards, Chris

[cohoctonwindwatch]

Wind flower and Chris JB,

Here is another comment from Glenn. The reason why I am posting Mr. Schleede's arguments should be clear. His logic is consistent and persuasive. He is a member of the private CWW - RIWT - Yahoo Group
cohoctonwindwatch : Risks of Industrial Wind Turbines

James Hall for CWW

Power plant rules sought -- Page 1 -- Times Union - Albany NY

Power plant rules sought

Dear Mr. Rulison,

Thanks for your January 31, 2008, article, "Power plant rules sought."

Clearly, the governor should be interested in avoiding an electricity shortage, but there is no good reason to believe that his "plan" (15 by 15) is a realistic way to serve the needs of the people of NY -- as demonstrated in the attached paper.

I was puzzled by your statement, "Less controversial are renewable sources of energy such as hydro, wind and solar that also do not emit carbon dioxide." Wind energy has become very controversial, particularly in NY but also in other states and in countries around the world.

During the past 3 years it has become increasingly clear that the wind industry an other wind energy advocates (e.g., NYSERDA) have greatly overstated the energy, environmental and economic benefits of wind and greatly understated the adverse environmental, ecological, economic, scenic and property value impacts. Wind advocates have misled the public, media and government officials. Unfortunately, they have been very successful in getting federal and state officials to provide huge tax breaks and subsidies to the industry. As a result:

a. "Wind farms" are being built primarily for their tax benefits -- not because of the energy, environmental or economic benefits.

b. Millions of dollars annually are being taken from the pockets of ordinary taxpayers and electric customers and given to a few large corporations (many foreign-owned) that own "wind farms."

c. Billions of capital investment dollars are being diverted to energy projects ("wind farms") that produce very little electricity -- which electricity is low in value because it is intermittent, volatile and unreliable. Further, most of the electricity from wind turbines is produced at night in cold months -- not on hot weekday late afternoons in July and August when electricity demand reaches peak levels.

"Wind farms" have virtually no "capacity" value because they cannot be counted on when electricity demand is at peak levels. Only reliable ("dispatchable") generating units can be counted on to serve peak demand. New York will have to add reliable generating capacity (not wind turbines) if it is to meet growth in electricity demand and/or replace old generating units.

Further, "wind farms" are highly controversial because:
a. The huge machines produce very little electricity.
b. The true cost of electricity form wind turbines is much greater than industry lobbyists admit.
c. Developers are seeking to build "wind farms" without sufficient regard for their substantial adverse environmental, ecological, economic, scenic and property value impacts.

Evidence of their controversial nature should be obvious when you recognize the dozens of "greassroots" opposition groups that have emerge in NY, elsewhere in the US and in many other countries.

Recognizing their devastating local impacts of "wind farms," particularly in upstate and western New York it would seem hard to justify passing a law that would permit a state siting board to override local governments that are trying to protect their citizens. I'm aware that political leaders like to label opponents as "NIMBYs," But who are the real NIMBYs? They are the people in cities and suburbs who don't want any generating plants in THEIR back yards but who are quite content to force them on others. Why not insist that generating plants be built IN cities are in suburbs so that they will be close to the sources of demand.

You can find a lot of facts about the controversial nature of wind energy on such web sites as www.windaction.org | Welcome and National Wind Watch | Facts About Industrial Wind Power.

Good luck with your future reporting.

Glenn R. Schleede (former New Yorker)
18220 Turnberry Drive
Round Hill, VA 20141-2574
540-338-9958

[ChrisJB]

What really bugs me about these silly windmills, is when a company like Peel Holdings destroy one of my local moorlands with them, professing to be helping the environment, whilst not far away, the Trafford Centre (which belongs to them), is lit up like a Christmas tree all year round.

It just insults people.

Regard, Chris

[PMG]

Originally Posted by ChrisJB

What really bugs me about these silly windmills, is when a company like Peel Holdings destroy one of my local moorlands with them, professing to be helping the environment, whilst not far away, the Trafford Centre (which belongs to them), is lit up like a Christmas tree all year round.

It just insults people.

Regard, Chris

Peel Holdings would quite happily see the whole of Lancashire concreted over from Blackpool to Burnley with not a blade of grass showing anywhere if it meant them earning even more money Chris............

I can think of others too who live in properties sited in their own grounds which would put Southfork (Dallas) to shame, who are grabbing up land and have been heard to say that wildlife and countryside doesn't matter to them - they can live without all that nonsense..........

Many politicians fall into this category too and if you think any former prime minister or president are living in impoverished conditions in a two up, two down - think again...........

Pauline

[wild flower]

WARNING: This 'was' going to be a short response. Apologies in advance.

I agree with everything that has been said but adly we are part of a society that is fundamentally driven by money, and money attracts money. Peel Holdings, as much as I despise the destruction of nature (or whats left of it) merely respond to what society want. We want Trafford centres-the more lights the better-the more we can spend our monry on the better-the more homes that can be built the better (after all we have to live somewhere). Wouldnt it be great if, as a society we had a collective will to nip the power of these massive corporations where it hurts - in the pocket!

Wind farms attract massive government subsidies and tax breaks ostensibly to encourage 'green energy' - my backside! It is about targets, which governments set in repsonse to a few people (relative to the population) who jump up and down about climate change/global warming - its not targets we need or wind farms. What we need is a paradigm shift in how society operate at the individual level or 'Sea-change' to use an awful phrase!

I frustrate myself with how much love I have for nature and how much I am tied in to the very lifestyle that is causing its destruction..the car, the house, more clothes, buying more food than I need. I am trying to 'get on' in life and earn more money! Good grief I am someone who should know better and yet still someone who pats her self on the back for recycling! Its not enough -seriously it is not enough and I am doing nothing about it. Oh I also pat myself on the back for making monthly donations to various charities - arghhhhh!

I suppose my point is that many of us can see the problem and we moan on and on about energy and wind farm etc etc but society is fueling it and each and everyone of us plays a part (Im aware there are exceptions but Im speaking generally). But the solution will never come from Governments it will come from collective will and until we are prepared to make sacrifices Governments will keep giving us what we want now at the expense of the future.

Ok rant over. If youve got this far-goddess bless you

[Gill Catton]

Originally Posted by ChrisJB

What really bugs me about these silly windmills, is when a company like Peel Holdings destroy one of my local moorlands with them, professing to be helping the environment, whilst not far away, the Trafford Centre (which belongs to them), is lit up like a Christmas tree all year round.

It just insults people.

Regard, Chris

They aren't permenant and can be removed

Electricity cannot be produced by magic

windmills would not be built if it was certain that they are no good - mistakes will be made - its unavoidable we are human, improvements will follow its called progress.

I trust those legions of scientists that actually spend their lives researching the elements of power production to give the advice as to what is currently viable not the general public or the papers.

If windmills and nuclear is what it takes to keep my water warm and the lights on then I will accept it even in my backyard.

You cannot make an omlette without breaking eggs.

we cannot produce electricity with magic invisible factories. With every form of currently viable electricity production there is uglyness its unavoidable.

[gfilmsuk]

Wind Farms are just another money-making scam at the expense of our environment.
Quote; According to new industry figures, a typical 2 megawatt (2MW) turbine can now generate power worth £200,000 on the wholesale markets - plus another £300,000 of subsidy from taxpayers.
Since such turbines cost around £2m to build and last for 20 or more years, it means they can pay for themselves in just 4-5 years and then produce nothing but profit; unquote. Read the full article here: Wind farms turn huge profit with help of subsidies - Times Online
Wind turbines are nothing more than highly efficient profit generators, nothing to do with electricity.
I'm a NIMBY and proud of it!
Dave

[Gill Catton]

Originally Posted by gfilmsuk

Wind Farms are just another money-making scam at the expense of our environment.
Quote; According to new industry figures, a typical 2 megawatt (2MW) turbine can now generate power worth £200,000 on the wholesale markets - plus another £300,000 of subsidy from taxpayers.
Since such turbines cost around £2m to build and last for 20 or more years, it means they can pay for themselves in just 4-5 years and then produce nothing but profit; unquote. Read the full article here: Wind farms turn huge profit with help of subsidies - Times Online
Wind turbines are nothing more than highly efficient profit generators, nothing to do with electricity.
I'm a NIMBY and proud of it!
Dave

I don't pay any attention to newspapers anymore I have lost count of the number of wildlife related articles that have got even the most basic facts wrong - you have to assume that they are getting facts wrong all over the place.

So what you are saying is that companies that look to produce electricity shouldn't work to try to get a profit that might allow and that wind turbines don't produce any electricity since that's not what they were put there for.....

You better make sure you never choose to get green energy or shock horror it might come from renewable infinite resources like the wind......

much better to choose a power source that can poison a significant portion of the world in a terrorist incident or worse human or computer error- or one based entirely on a resource that will run out and potentially cause more wars - oh or might cause global warming - or one based felling rainforests or clearing peat bogs or stripping out set aside or pushing up the world's price of food stuffs - Yes I can see how that's much more satisfactory........