Posted By: jkotcon (7:40am 08-31-2009)

Report Abuse

Actual data matter. According to the Energy Information Administration, consumption of electricity in the US dropped 4.1 % from May 2008 to May 2009. Coal-fired electricity declined 14.8 %, petroleum dropped 8.3 %, nuclear was up a paltry 0.6 %, while wind was up 12.5 % (even in a declining overall market). Costs for renewables are coming down, while costs for fossil fuels continue to increase. Those who think that renewables can not supply useful energy need to get out of the way of those who are already doing it. That is why getting the regulations on wind right is so important. Market economics are making wind an increasingly important source, and we need to keep that industry under control or out-of-state firms will control it the way that out-of-state coal firms now manipulate our resources, communities, and government. But the argument that it does not produce useful levels of energy is simply wishful thinking and not grounded in actual data.

Posted By: stashdrwall (7:39am 08-31-2009)

Report Abuse

This particular project brings into question the value of wind. There is not much chance this proposed wind energy source will offset a single megawatt of coal power. It will impose itself on native american, colonial, civil war, and early logging historical assets. It will also impact yet unknown water resources.

I see a lot of relationship between wind versus coal in these comments, Wind versus coal is not an argument with any rational basis. Wind will not reverse the trend for more, more, more energy.

That's where the discussion should be focused before WV and the Appalachians are destroyed. If we thought as much about conservation as we do about industrializing ridges, or removing them for coal, we would actually see some progress.

In the meantime, wind should be stripped of its tax subsidies and let's see what the economics of winds looks like then.

Posted By: AaronS (7:11am 08-31-2009)

Report Abuse

France is one of the few countries that does not have the energy issues America and much of the rest of the world have. Ever wonder why that is?

http://www.wvgazette.com/Opinion/OpEdCommentaries/200908290428

Posted By: SFKeating (1:25am 08-31-2009)

Report Abuse

Goodrich--
You grossly misrepresent the facts on wind power. Wind power DOES generate useful electricity, but the rate of turbines being built does not begin to equal the increase in electric demand in the USA. Such nonsense comes from a coalition of fossil fuel interests who are the main funders of National Wind-watch, and their European counterpart. The net energy gain of wind plants is well documented and averages EROI/18 across all turbines in current use, with new units exceeding EROI/34.
Wind is not the One Big Answer. In fact, there is NO one big answer out there. If we listen to Big Coal, we would think that there is. Wind is only one part of a very diverse future for energy production.

Posted By: Bruno (6:10pm 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

The coal industry really wants us to believe that our only choices for electricity are coal and nuclear, and that we should put tax and ratepayer money into carbon capture sci-fi, rather than using proven wind and solar technology. Craig must not have ever seen mountaintop removal, or his definition of "utterly, permanently devastate" would not include the relatively minor impact of wind farms.

Posted By: Craig Goodrich (4:59pm 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

Some commenters (and most journalists and politicians) apparently think these turbines are actually some kind of renewable power source. They aren't.

They produce no useful electricity whatever, save no emissions, strain the area grid, and utterly, permanently devastate the one resource we have that is absolutely not renewable: our beautiful countryside and forests.

They are purely a method of vacuuming money from the pockets of taxpayers and electrical customers into the pockets of system-gaming financiers and fat cats, who have convinced the gullible politicians that they have to sound "green".

The only green in these monstrosities is money. Your money. Get the facts at http://www.wind-watch.org.

Posted By: WVState (12:42am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

This company has screwed up, big time. They quit talking to the officials they were supposed to, they're ignoring historical sites, and now they're even redrawn the state boundary to accommodate themselves.

As for the deniers, it's always going to be a case of NIMBY (not in my back yard). The local people don't want wind towers, but they're happy to enjoy the coal-fired electricity created in Kanawha County (or wherever) from coal extracted in Mingo County (or wherever). The people in Mingo would love to have wind power so they don't have mountains falling on them and streams flooding - at least those not employed by Massey. The people on the PaTH line enjoy no benefits from the line going through their back yards to deliver electricity to Virginia.

In the end, if you want power you should have that plant somewhere close to you. Just like your landfill isn't 500 miles away, neither should your source of electricity. If you want it, put up with it.

Posted By: Commenting (10:18am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

What about all the vistas destroyed by mountain top removal? I would rather see 100 wind turbines on top of a mountain than see the mountain leveled. What is it now 400 mountains and counting? Almost level, West Virginia.

Posted By: sofraj (10:13am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

It's a good thing Massey didn't ask for an MTR permit. That mountain top would have been blasted away already.

Bruno, we need need to come up with a new name for the wind deniers. Winders, maybe?

Posted By: Bruno (9:29am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

Really? Wind "will never make a substantive difference in the total energy matrix of this country?" What about when the coal is gone and we've cooked the planet? So you're proposing to just keep using coal and pretending it is clean and will last forever? At some point, it's either renewables or nothing, and if we don't make a serious effort at transition soon while we have the chance or we really will be sitting in the dark.

Posted By: joe46and2 (8:53am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

Wind power is horribly innefficient per acre and will never make a substantive difference in the total energy matrix of this country. What it will do, is spoil pristine vistas such as this wonderful place. And how do we get rid of smog and regional haze? We quit wasting billions of dollars on worthless global warming technology and direct toward tradional polutant controls that we know work and fix a real problem.

Posted By: Bornfree (7:47am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

What in H*** do people want. They don't want to burn coal to make electricity, it's dirty. They don't want to use hydro power, it might kill a fish. Nuclear is dangerous. Now the wind mills don't look nice enough. The next thing they'll jump on is solar. I bet that the electric bill for most of the ones that do the most griping is a lot higher than mine. They want their cake and be able to eat it too.

Posted By: jkotcon (7:29am 08-30-2009)

Report Abuse

If HNWD is not complying with the terms of their permits, then by all means, a hearing is warranted. But I wonder how many of those complaining about the scenic impact of a windfarm have ever bothered to complain about the slow build-up of the gray-brown smog from coal-fired power plants that is currently obstructing the view? While the visual impact of the wind farm will be dramatic, smog kills people.