Posted on behalf of Jimmy Tragle

[Cohocton Wind Watch - Interactive Community]

Things I'd like to know...

We are constantly told by wind developers that wind energy will reduce carbon output.

Why is it that no glowing reports have come from Europe about the
number of fossil fuel plants that have been shut down as a result of
wind power?

Why is it that no glowing reports of carbon savings due to wind power
have emerged from Europe?

No standard set back policies have been established in the US. Why has a set back recommendation in Europe been set by a company within the industry and not here?

"The location under consideration should first of all be wind -
intensive during the whole year. Usually this is guaranteed on
coastal sites, on open land without forests or high hills within
a range of about 15 km and, of course, on hill tops. Buildings,
particulary housing, should not be nearer than 2 km to the
windfarm." http://www.retexo.de/english/wind/seite5a.htm

2 km is just over 1.24 miles or about 6560 feet. In mountainous
areas this may be too little.

Why do European countries with the highest saturations of wind power have the highest utility rates?

Why do proponents of wind in the US constantly point to Denmark as a leading example and ignore the fact that electricity generated by wind in Denmark is largely exported to Norway where it replaces hydro power and therefore has little if any effect on carbon output?

Why do wind developers constantly rely on sound measurements that don't measure infrasound to claim the newer turbines are quiet when they aren't if measured with the right equipment?

Why is no one looking at cumulative environmental impact rather than the impact from individual wind plants? In mountainous regions this has a the potential to produce flash flood problems as well as massive impacts on important species like bats. A single installation may not be that bad, but large numbers of wind plants have much greater dire potential.

Jimmy

[Cohocton Wind Watch - Interactive Community]

I submitted the following and hope it helps in some small fashion:

I am not a NY resident but I am concerned about the possibility of cumulative environmental damages due to large numbers of wind turbines scattered through the mountains of the eastern US.

It has become more and more apparent to me that wind turbines when used on a large scale basis fail to deliver on the claimed promise. Namely to reduce green house gas emissions.

Things I'd like to know...

We are constantly told by wind developers that wind energy will reduce carbon output.

Why is it that no glowing reports have come from Europe about the number of fossil fuel plants that have been shut down as a result of wind power?

Why is it that no glowing reports of carbon savings due to wind power have emerged from Europe?

No standard set back policies have been established in the US. Why has a set back recommendation in Europe been set by a company within the industry and not here?

"The location under consideration should first of all be wind - intensive during the whole year. Usually this is guaranteed on coastal sites, on open land without forests or high hills within a range of about 15 km and, of course, on hill tops. Buildings, particulary housing, should not be nearer than 2 km to the windfarm." http://www.retexo.de/english/wind/seite5a.htm

2 km is just over 1.24 miles or about 6560 feet. In mountainous areas this may be too little.

Why do European countries with the highest saturations of wind power have the highest utility rates?

Why do proponents of wind in the US constantly point to Denmark as a leading example and ignore the fact that electricity generated by wind in Denmark is largely exported to Norway where it replaces hydro power and therefore has little if any effect on carbon output?

Why do wind developers constantly rely on sound measurements that don't measure infrasound to claim the newer turbines are quiet when they aren't if measured with the right equipment?

Why is no one looking at cumulative environmental impact rather than the impact from individual wind plants? In mountainous regions this has the potential to produce flash flood problems as well as massive impacts on important species like bats. A single installation may not be that bad, but large numbers of wind plants have much greater dire potential.

This should be given greater consideration given the recent unexplained disease that is threatening the bat population in your region.

Allowing international carpetbaggers the opportunity to profit financially by inflicting irreversible environmental damage under the false pretense of saving the environment is unacceptable and immoral.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Jimmy Tragle D.V.M.