The rules according to Kennedy

[Jolie Rouge]

The rules according to Kennedy
by Jeff Jacoby

If there is one thing that Senator Edward Kennedy is adamant about, it is that government officials play by the rules.

"The vast majority of Americans share our commitment to basic fairness," he lectured his fellow senators last May, when Republicans were threatening to trigger the "nuclear option" -- to change the Senate's rules to prevent judicial nominations from being filibustered. "They agree that there must be fair rules, that we should not unilaterally abandon or break those rules in the middle of the game."

There was nothing clandestine about that no-filibuster threat. Senate Republicans had been discussing it publicly for more than two years. Nevertheless, the senator from Massachusetts blasted the idea as egregious and underhanded. "Every child," he thundered, "knows that you don't change the rules in the middle of the game."

But Kennedy's antipathy to furtive rules changes and back-room power plays, it turns out, stops at the water's edge -- specifically, the edge of Nantucket Sound, which separates Cape Cod (where the Kennedy family has an ocean-front compound in Hyannis Port) from the islands of Nantucket and Martha's Vineyard. A shoal in the center of the Sound is where Boston-based Cape Wind Associates hopes to build the nation's first offshore wind farm -- an array of 130 wind turbines capable of generating enough electricity to meet 75 percent of the Cape and Islands' energy needs, without burning any oil or emitting any pollution. The turbines would be miles from any coastal property, barely visible on the horizon. In fact, Cape Wind says they would be farther away from the nearest home than any other electricity generation project in Massachusetts.

But like a lot of well-to-do Cape and Islands landowners and sailing enthusiasts, Kennedy doesn't want to share his Atlantic playground with an energy facility, no matter how clean, green, and nearly unseen. Last month he secretly arranged for a poison-pill amendment, never debated in either house of Congress, to be slipped into an unrelated Coast Guard funding bill. It would give the governor of Massachusetts, who just happens to be a wind farm opponent, unilateral authority to veto the Cape Wind project.

When word of the amendment leaked out, environmentalists were appalled. The wind farm proposal is supported by the leading environmental organizations, and they never expected to be sandbagged by one of their legislative heroes. Even if Kennedy would prefer to see Cape Wind plant its windmills in somebody else's sailing grounds, he has always claimed to support the development of wind power


"I strongly support renewable energy, including wind energy, as a means of reducing our dependence on foreign oil and protecting the environment"
-- Cape Cod Times, Aug. 8, 2003.

And what happened to all those righteous words about not throwing out the rulebook in the middle of the game?

If ever a project and its promoters have "played by the rules," Cape Wind has, and in spades. Its plans have undergone more than four years of scrutiny by federal, state, and regional regulators, with another year or more of evaluations, hearings, and studies to come. At least 18 government bodies -- from the Army Corps of Engineers to the Environmental Protection Agency to the Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management Office -- have been involved in reviewing the wind farm proposal. Cape Wind has had to surmount an astonishing variety of regulatory and due diligence hurdles. So far it has successfully met every one.

The list of permits, approvals, licenses, and reports that regulators are requiring Cape Wind to file or obtain would overload a library. First and foremost, there is the exhaustive environmental impact statement required under federal and state law, the first draft of which, 3,800 pages long, was released in November 2004. Then there is also the Approval to Construct Jurisdictional Facilities from the Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board. And the Chapter 91 Waterways License from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. And the General Stormwater Permit from the US Environmental Protection Agency. And many more, too numerous to list here.

Cape Wind has invested millions of dollars in this project, and no small part of that cost has gone to dotting every legal "i" and crossing every regulatory "t." But if Kennedy gets his way, all of Cape Wind's time, money, and effort will have been for naught -- crushed in a naked abuse of political power. And when that happens, it isn't only a Nantucket wind farm that will be dead, but another piece of the public's dwindling faith that the men and women it elects to office can be trusted to do the right thing.

"Every child knows that you don't change the rules in the middle of the game," Kennedy says. Indeed. Grown senators are supposed to know it too.

Copyright © 2006 Boston Globe

[Jolie Rouge]

New England wind projects raise small town issues
Posted 5/26/2006 7:35 PM ET
By Beverley Wang, Associated Press Writer

LEMPSTER, N.H. — When Kevin and Debra Onnela moved to their 1,500-acre mountaintop spread 27 years ago, a homemade windmill provided all the electricity they needed — and more. "The batteries would just be hissing," Debra Onnela said recently outside her house. "We'd go in, turn on a vacuum cleaner, dishwasher, just to get rid of the power."

After three years of playing catch-up with surplus power, the Onnelas dismantled their windmill and got a generator. Now the Onnelas want to bring wind power back to their land, but not for themselves.

In 2003, the couple signed a lease option giving Pennsylvania-based Community Energy Inc. permission to plant a dozen 400-foot turbines with 285-foot blades along three miles of Lempster Mountain's ridgeline. Earlier this month, Community Energy was purchased for $30 million by Spain-based Iberdrola, the world's largest wind-power producer.

The Lempster project would be the state's first corporate wind farm. Operating at about 37% capacity, Community Energy calculates the 24-megawatt project would support 10,000 homes a year. And Debra Onnela can't wait for construction to start.

"I think they're beautiful," she said of the turbines.

Others aren't quite so enchanted. Some Lempster residents worry the turbines will create noise or environmental problems. Even wind power supporters worry the town of just 1,050 people lacks the resources to properly manage a $40 million utility project.

That has caused hard feelings between the Onnelas and some neighbors.

"I've probably lost a quarter of my friends," said Kevin Onnela.

But Jeff Keeler, project manager with Community Energy, calls it a win-win for the community — it sends tax dollars to the town, without putting children in the schools or pollutants in the environment.

For the Onnelas, the project gives them retirement income while preserving the land from development. Keeler won't say how much Community Energy is paying the couple — the town's largest landowners — but notes the amount falls within industry standards. Landowners typically earn between $2,000 and $5,000 per megawatt on a lease, said Tom Gray, a spokesman for the American Wind Energy Association, an industry group.

The Onnelas say their yearly property tax bill is about $23,000.

"We bought a lot of land to preserve Lempster," said Kevin Onnela.

Right now it's uncertain what will happen.

About 100 residents, along with the selectmen in Lempster and neighboring Washington, want the state to scrutinize the project. The residents' petition says the community "has no mechanism to ensure that this significant energy facility will not have unreasonable adverse effects on the health, safety and welfare of the community."

If the state agrees to look at the project, it could cause a delay of a year or more. And that worries the Onnelas, who think a delay could jeopardize the project. "We thought we were doing something good," Kevin Onnela said.

The New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee, which includes heads of agencies for the environment, transportation, health and economic development, meets next month to discuss whether to review the project — it has the power to endorse or kill the wind farm.

"A little town like this can't afford to hire an attorney if something comes up," said 80-year-old Selectman Harold Whiting Sr. "I don't care if the wind farm goes in, I don't care if the wind farm don't — as long as it's done right. And if it's done right, I don't have a problem."

By national standards, the Lempster project is small. Sites in California and Texas, the most heavily developed states, can have up to 1,000 turbines. But in New England, where open space is scarce and the best wind often is found above wooded mountain peaks, much of the debate over wind energy has centered on wildlife and land conservation.

"People's major objections are largely aesthetic, the way they look and the way they sound," Keeler said. "I think a lot of people who oppose the project don't really know the state's already pretty heavily involved." He points out that even without a site review, the company must seek state wetlands and transportation permits.

Wind farms have received a mixed response elsewhere in northern New England.

Vermont's Public Service Board is expected to decide this summer whether to approve a plan for four turbines on East Mountain in East Haven. A hearing officer has recommended against the project because it sits at the edge of a conservation area.

But in Maine, one wind power project is under construction and at least five more are being explored, including a proposal by a Canadian company to erect turbines on mountains north of the Sugarloaf USA ski area.

And earlier this year, Berlin officials welcomed three 160-foot turbines erected near Jericho Lake.

But in Lempster, the Onnelas' leasing of the ridgeline has sparked a war of words, fractured friendships and deepened the rift between full-time and part-time residents.

"We were tricked," reads a letter from residents asking to remove their names from the site evaluation petition, saying they didn't understand that seeking a review could delay the project.

Kevin Onnela blames part-time residents for fanning opposition to the project.

Jeff Dwyer is one of those residents. He says the wind farm will create noise, ruin the landscape and harm wildlife, and all without producing much power. "Should we jeopardize the rapidly diminishing wilderness experience for future generations by allowing tax motivated minimally productive power plants to visually pollute our New Hampshire landscape?" he asks in a letter to the state. Dwyer also worries the wind farm eventually will grow beyond Lempster.

Keeler says Community Energy has no plans to expand beyond 12 turbines.

Lisa Linowes, a resident of Lyman, about 90 miles away, and member of National Wind Watch, a watchdog group, is working with Dwyer to organize opposition in Lempster.

Linowes says she supports clean energy, but doubts wind can put a dent in fossil fuel consumption. "If the facts on the ground showed that wind facility would bring down a coal plant ... I would have a very different opinion," she said.

Others say people have to make a choice: give up some ridgeline now to wind farms or lose them later to global warming.

"There are people who are concerned about the changing landscape and there are people who are concerned about, 'How are we going to deal with global warming and climate disruption?'" said David Hamilton, the Sierra Club's director of global warming and energy programs. "It is a tough question but the challenge of global warming is so monumental that we really need to be doing everything that we can do to address it."

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2006-05-26-NE-windfarm_x.htm?csp=27

[Jolie Rouge]

May 24, 2007
ENVIRONMENTAL HYPOCRISY UPDATE

Okay, we've heard a lot about the greenhouse effect, etc., but I'm reading Wendy Williams and Robert Whitcomb's Cape Wind: Money, Celebrity, Class, Politics, and the Battle for Our Energy Future on Nantucket Sound and I'm beginning to doubt the political class's serious commitment to this cause. The book's a treasure trove, but here's a description of how what was supposed to be a wide-open democratic town meeting on the Nantucket Sound wind power project was taken over by the astroturf brigades of the project's well-heeled opponents:


The evening's piece de resistance: the presence of the Honorable William Delahunt , the white-haired U.S. congressman whose district included the Cape, Marthas's Vineyard, and Nantucket, as well as towns and cities closer to Boston. . . . Delahunt hated the wind farm. Or, at least, he said he hated it. Delahunt was widely seen as Senator Edward M. Kennedy's man. What Ted Kennedy hated, Bill Delahunt hated. And Ted Kennedy loathed Cape Wind, with an unwavering ardor that curiously belied the environmental ideals he so often proclaimed from the floor of the U.S. Senate . . . .

Delahunt's control of the podium was unusual. Every other speaker had to use a floor microphone and was limited to three minutes. To maintain discipline, a very large traffic light turned first a warning yellow and then a time's-up red. Delahunt, however, assumed he was exempted from the burden laid upon the rest of the hearing's participants. Blindsided by the Congressman's performance, project supporters -- and there were plenty on Martha's Vineyard, despite the Alliance's efforts -- were miffed. How had this politico gained control of what they thought was to be a "public" -- as in, for the public --- hearing, and opportunity for thoughtful and informed people to add their insights to the discussion.

(In fact, [Delahunt's staffer Mark] Forest had forced Army Corps officials to bow to Delahunt's coup d'etat. Had the Corps refused, the congressman could have taken out his revenge when appropriation votes came up on Capitol Hill.)


And it gets worse from there. I'm finding the book quite interesting so far. And lest this passage give the impression that there were only Democrats acting hypocritically here, I should note that the alliance against the wind power project was bipartisan, with "Bush Pioneers" working happily alongside the Kennedys to block the project lest their oceanfront views be sullied by the sight of windmills five miles away. Here's more:


Reporters had fun for a while that evening, but on reflection, some were saddened. The hearing was supposed to be an opportunity for public discourse and an expression of democracy at the local level. Instead, it had been hijacked and turned into a publicity stunt. While wrapping themselves in the mantle of democracy, the Nantucket Sound affluent were behaving as if they owned the government. . . .

When a democratic process could be sold like this to the highest bidder, and when a U.S. congressman was present to do the honors, what did this mean for the future of America? A few of those present that evening found the symbolism of the event frightening, given the dangerous realities of the new millennium. Energy prices were steadily rising. Regular people were having trouble paying their bills. Climate change seemed to be under way. Oil and gas were in short supply and developing nations were eager to have all that electricity could provide, from lightbulbs to computers.

Somehow, somehwere, sometime soon, these challenges were going to have to be addressed -- by someone willing to take the lead. . . . "Nero's fiddle," muttered a journalist watching the show.


As I say, it's interesting reading, and it certainly speaks poorly for the seriousness of the political class on these matters.

http://instapundit.com/archives2/005602.php

[Jolie Rouge]

:bump:

[Jolie Rouge]

America in 2008: What of the Kennedys?
By TED ANTHONY, AP National Writer
Tue Aug 26, 3:45 AM ET

DENVER - It wasn't subtle, but it was heart-tugging stagecraft at its best. With sailboats and choppy seas, passed torches and enduring dreams, clan Kennedy summoned the 1960s and showed that the flame — the one tended by America's most ardent Democrats, at least — burns still.

On their convention's opening night Monday, Democrats waved Kennedy signs and welcomed their lion in winter, the ailing Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. And he delivered, using his political and cultural clout to etch a vivid connection between his family's mythology and Barack Obama's potential. "The dream," Ted Kennedy said, "lives on."

A partisan party is one thing, though; American culture at large is another. And as the senator edges toward stage left, the final brother of his extraordinary generation, a question presents itself: When he is gone, what becomes of the renowned Kennedy mystique, that alchemy of hope, charm, tragedy, controversy and just a whiff of royalty? "It's embedded in our history now. It's part of our DNA. You can't take that away," says Bobbi Baker Burrows, director of photography for Life magazine, whose intimate images helped craft the Kennedy mythology in the early 1960s.

Potent as a political dynasty, the Kennedys of Teddy's generation represent far more. Straddling the eras of Audrey Hepburn and Paris Hilton, they have embodied the better angels of the American nature, and their aura has endured tales of foibles and tragedies and missteps.

And, of course, they were the prototypes for a uniquely American hybrid of politics and celebrity — something that played well for JFK in 1960, RFK in 1968, Ronald Reagan in 1980 and, some would say, Obama in 2008.

It's more than that, though. It's about adaptability to the national mood, a Kennedy hallmark. Which is why, in a fragmented century attuned to sound bites and information overload that might have made even JFK dizzy, space remains in the modern American bandwidth for the Kennedy mystique. "They would be as successful today as they were in their own era because of their ability to adapt not only to their audiences but to the era they were playing in," says Gerald Shuster, a political communications expert at the University of Pittsburgh. "They had a very unique ability to integrate themselves into any audience demographic."

The Kennedys also used hope as clay, molding it into whatever shape was necessary for the moment. That encompassed not only the renowned oratory but the ability to convert the building blocks of personality into cultural capital.

Thus did a gorgeous American extended family, laughing and playing as if posing for a sporting-goods ad, become grist for a mythmaking machine that was far more self-aware than Americans of JFK's era ever realized. Cynical to some, it created bonds that made politics about far more than, well, politics. "It really helps from on high to have somebody that you revere, that you care about and want to hear what they're saying and doing and what they're wearing, everything," says Letitia Baldrige, who was Jackie Kennedy's social secretary and chief of staff during the Kennedy administration. "That's important for us, whether it's an apparition or not."

Despite Democrats' attempts to link them for the purposes of Campaign 2008, those who study the Kennedys largely reject comparisons between Robert and John Kennedy and Obama. But forces outside candidates' control can also evoke the Kennedy mystique in more subtle ways. "People are looking back now because we're in a very similar situation to '68 — an unpopular war, an unpopular president who's waging it, serious domestic problems," says Thurston Clarke, whose new book, "The Last Campaign," chronicles RFK's final days in 1968.

"People ached to feel noble in 1968, and they ache to feel noble again," he says. "People sense there's a similarity between the two periods, and it makes the Kennedys more interesting to them."

Nevertheless, a huge swath of American voters know John and Robert Kennedy only from their parents and their history texts. And the current crop of Kennedys, with such notable exceptions as Caroline Kennedy and Maria Shriver, have not achieved the top tier of renown populated by their parents. "I don't think the American people know them very well," JFK biographer Michael O'Brien says. "They do a lot of good humanitarian work, but if I was to have to name them, I think I would have a hard time."

Try telling that to the hard-core Democrats inside the Pepsi Center on Monday. They waved Kennedy signs at Teddy as he spoke, erupted into cheers at the nostalgic video of sailing and family gatherings and black-and-white footage of a time when much seemed possible. Some, standing in the aisles, even wept when the senator said, "It is time again for a new generation of leadership. It is time now for Barack Obama."

He also said this: "For me, this is a season of hope." The same Kennedy clay, yet another new sculpture.

Graying and aging and even retooled slightly, the Kennedy mystique endures — as political symbol and cultural touchstone. The torch has been passed. What the new generation of Americans do with it is, as always, up to them.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080826/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_measure_of_a_nation_the_kennedy_mystique;_ylt= AjsazBbKYP4w._tq4sHkmXjCw5R4


Someone is living the fantasy ...

[jbbarn]

Good ol' Uncle Teddy!
Father of the big mouth and the big lie.
And they still love him!

[speedygirl]

I think most of them were weeping for the fact that he was standing up there with brain cancer. It's like the end of an era. He's our state senator and has done wonderful things here. I am not a fan by any means of what he has done in his personal life but as far as what he's done for MA, I can't complain.

[jbbarn]

Too bad he never gave a rip about the rest of the republic.

[Jolie Rouge]

See also : http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-information/603215-wind-farm-nimby.html


Tribes claim wind farm would destroy sacred ritual
By Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Writer
21 mins ago

MASHPEE, Mass. – From a blustery perch over a Cape Cod beach, Chuckie Green gestures toward a stretch of horizon where he says construction of the nation's first offshore wind farm would destroy his Indian tribe's religion.

The Wampanoag — the tribe that welcomed the Pilgrims in the 17th century and known as "The People of the First Light" — practice sacred rituals requiring an unblocked view of the sunrise. That view won't exist once 130 turbines, each over 400 feet tall, are built in Nantucket Sound, visible to Wampanoag in Mashpee and on Martha's Vineyard.

Tribal rituals, including dancing and chanting, take place at secret sacred sites around the sound at various times, such as the summer and winter solstices and when an elder passes.

The Wampanoag fight to preserve their ceremonies has become the latest obstacle — some say delay tactic — for a pioneering wind energy project that seemed at the cusp of final approval. "We, the Wampanoag people, who opened our arms and allowed people to come here for religious freedoms, are now being threatened with our religion being taken away for the profits of one single group of investors," Green said.

The Mashpee and Aquinnah Wampanoag claim Nantucket Sound is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places as a Traditional Cultural Property. The tribes say the designation, which would come with new regulations for activity on the sound, is needed to preserve not only their pristine views but ancestors' remains buried on Horseshoe Shoal, where the turbines would be built.

Cape Wind supporters say the tribes' claim for a National Register listing for the sound is baseless and was sprung late, in league with the project's most vociferous opponents, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound. "I think this is clearly a tactic for delay, for delay's sake," said Mark Rodgers, a spokesman for Cape Wind. "I think it's fair to say, looking at the past eight years, that opponents to Cape Wind have tried every conceivable strategy to slow down or stop the project."

Green bristles at the notion that the tribes, prodded by the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, are jumping in late just to gum up the works. Green and Audra Parker, the alliance's executive director, said the alliance supports the Wampanoags' claim, but didn't engineer it.

Cape Wind, proposed in 2001 and expected to cost $1 billion, aims to provide up to 75 percent of Cape Cod's power. Other offshore wind farm proposals are in earlier stages of development in several states, including Rhode Island, Delaware and Texas.

Cape Wind opponents say it would be a hazard to aviation, harm the environment — including fish and bird life — and mar historic vistas. The late Sen. Edward Kennedy, whose family compound would be in view of the project, fought the project until his death, saying it was a triumph of special interests over state interests.

A major decision on the Wampanoag claim is due within two weeks.

The U.S. Minerals Management Service, the lead agency reviewing the proposed wind farm, has recommended that the sound is not eligible for the National Register to Brona Simon, head of the Massachusetts Historical Commission.

Simon must decide by Nov. 12 if she disagrees. If so, the claim would be sent to the National Parks Service for a final ruling within 45 days.

A parks service decision that the sound should be listed a Traditional Cultural Property wouldn't kill Cape Wind, but it could add months to the approval process by forcing developers to comply with the designation's various standards.

Simon declined comment through a spokesman for the Massachusetts Secretary of State, which has jurisdiction over her office.

Earlier this year, in a letter to the minerals service, Simon criticized federal review of the project, saying it appeared to value Cape Wind's profitability and schedule over "effects to historic properties."

Barbara Hill of Clean Power Now, an advocacy group that supports Cape Wind, said the entire offshore wind industry would suffer if Simon decides more review of the tribal claim is needed. "If there is going to be an allowance to this type of viewshed issue, as far as the eyes can see, what are we going to build?" she said.

Cape Wind appeared close to final approval in January when the minerals service concluded the project posed no major environmental problems. If the tribes win their claim, say project supporters, there would be a host of unintended consequences.

Two Massachusetts environmental and economic development officials, Ian Bowles and Greg Bialecki, produced a list of commercial activities — from commercial fishing to sand mining — they said would be hurt by the ensuing new regulations. They also argued the Supreme Court has ruled that a vast, unenclosed body of water such as the 560-square mile Nantucket Sound isn't eligible as a Traditional Cultural Property. "It seems clear that this request for such a designation, coming at this time, is an attempt to block or further delay renewable energy development in Nantucket Sound," their letter said.

Green said the tribes have objected for years to the effect the project would have on their culture. Regulators, he said, have never met requirements to thoroughly address those concerns — including the pending claim about the sound — or to seriously consider an alternative site for the wind farm, which the tribes and the alliance favor. "I don't expect anything from this, except for due process," Green said. "And I have not received due process."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091102/ap_on_re_us/us_tribe_vs_wind_farm

[Jolie Rouge]

Feds side with tribes in Cape Cod wind farm case
By Andrew Miga, Associated Press Writer
Mon Jan 4, 6:27 pm ET

WASHINGTON – Federal officials on Monday agreed to a request by two Indian tribes for special protections for Nantucket Sound, a move that could delay construction of a proposed wind farm off Cape Cod.

The National Park Service said the sound is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places as a significant traditional cultural, historic and archaeological property.

The Mashpee and Aquinnah Wampanoag tribes say the designation, which would come with new regulations for activity on the sound, is needed to preserve the tribe's sacred rituals.

The Wampanoag — the tribe welcomed the Pilgrims in the 17th century and is known as "the people of the first light" — practice sacred rituals requiring an unblocked view of the sunrise. That view won't exist if the Cape Wind project's 130 turbines, each over 400 feet tall, are built several miles from the Cape Cod shore across a 25-square-mile swath of federal waters. The turbines would be visible to Wampanoag in Mashpee and on Martha's Vineyard.

Tribal rituals, including dancing and chanting, take place at secret sacred sites around the sound at various times, such as the summer and winter solstices and when an elder passes. The tribes also say their ancestors' remains are buried on Horseshoe Shoal, where the turbines would be built.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who must still sign off on a federal permit before the project can move forward, said Monday he was beginning a final review of the project.

"America's vast offshore wind resources offer exciting potential for our clean energy economy and for our nation's efforts to reduce our dependence on foreign oil," said Salazar. "But as we begin to develop these resources, we must ensure that we are doing so in the right way and in the right places."

Salazar said he would bring interested parties together next week to discuss ways to "minimize and mitigate Cape Wind's potential impacts on historic and cultural resources."

He said if agreement cannot be reached by March 1 on ways to do that, he would be prepared "to take the steps necessary to bring the permit process to conclusion."

The Park Service decision is the latest twist in the long, bitter, public fight over plans to build the project.

Cape Wind opponents say it would be a hazard to aviation, harm the environment including fish and bird life, and mar historic vistas. The late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, whose family compound would have a view of the turbines, fought the project, saying it was a triumph of special interests over state interests.

Supporters say the project will provide cheaper energy, reduce pollution and create green jobs.

Cape Wind supporters say the tribes' claim for a National Register listing for the sound is baseless and was sprung late, in league with the project's most vociferous opponents, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound.

The wind project was proposed in 2001 and is expected to cost $1 billion. It aims to provide up to 75 percent of Cape Cod's power. Other offshore wind farm proposals are in earlier stages of development in several states, including Rhode Island, Delaware and Texas.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100104/ap_on_bi_ge/us_wind_farm_ruling/print

[Jolie Rouge]

Cape Wind's fate unclear, even in Obama's hands
By Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Writer
2 hrs 2 mins ago


http://d.yimg.com/a/p/ap/20100124/capt.f2ac9688068f4a86891d1fc03a375b0b.cape_wind_fa rm_gfx848.jpg?x=255&y=345&q=85&sig=he2IOIsBPul7cNjm3HEt3g--

Map shows site of proposed wind farm near Cape Cod

BOSTON – After eight years of review, the future of a controversial wind farm off Cape Cod now rests in what would seem to be friendly hands — an Obama administration that's pledged to make the U.S. "the world's leading exporter of clean energy."

But it's tough to tell if Cape Wind's prospects just got better or worse.

Obama has never mentioned the project while talking publicly about renewable energy, despite his enthusiasm for the topic and the fact Cape Wind would be the nation's first offshore wind farm.

Some Cape Wind advocates have chalked up Obama's silence to respect for the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, an early and influential Obama backer. Kennedy battled the project fiercely, writing Obama of his opposition the month before he died in August from brain cancer.

To add to the uncertainty, Obama's Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who pledged this month to decide whether to approve Cape Wind by the end of April, has called it "a good project." But two Obama appointees to agencies connected to the project's review have links to its chief opposition, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound.

U.S. National Park Service head Jonathan Jarvis is the brother of alliance consultant Destry Jarvis. And Federal Aviation Administration chief Randy Babbitt has worked for the alliance. Both are recused from any decisions involving Cape Wind.

The Obama administration is awaiting the Interior Department's Cape Wind review before taking a position, said Moira Mack, a White House spokeswoman. Mack said the administration "believes that investing in wind energy — on and offshore — is an important part of the transition to a low-carbon economy and has supported new policies and investments to help realize that goal."

Cape Wind, expected to cost $1 billion, aims to provide 75 percent of the Cape's electricity with 130 turbines, each about 440 feet tall, erected in Nantucket Sound. Its developers stand to benefit as a major electricity provider to a state aiming to create enough wind power capacity to power 800,000 homes by 2020.

Opponents say the project is a hazard to aviation and wildlife and would mar historic vistas, including the view from the Kennedy compound. They want it moved out of the sound to an alternate site Cape Wind says is not feasible.

Since he took office, Obama has spoken several times about wind energy, including on Earth Day in April, saying wind energy could potentially "generate as much as 20 percent of our electricity by 2030." He also spoke about "enormous interest in wind projects off the coasts of New Jersey and Delaware."

Barbara Hill of the pro-Cape Wind group Clean Power said she finds Obama's silence on Cape Wind "a bit confusing" because its success is so crucial to future offshore wind projects.

Sue Reid, an attorney with the Conservation Law Foundation and a project proponent, said she believes Obama is simply being careful not to prejudge the project before the approval process ends.

"I think it's a matter of him being very principled and measured, as opposed to that he's made up his mind somehow in opposition to the project," she said.

Though Obama has never mentioned Cape Wind, Salazar told The Associated Press in March that "from what I know of the Cape Cod wind project, it is a good project."

Kennedy disagreed, believing Cape Wind was a case of special interests being allowed to trump local concerns for private profit. He said his opposition had nothing to do with the view from his home.

On July 8, Kennedy and U.S. Rep. William Delahunt wrote Obama and asked him to postpone any decision until Cape Wind was subjected to new ocean zoning rules still being devised by Obama's national Ocean Policy Task Force.

"These 'rules of the road' should be established first, before any large-scale industrial energy project is approved in any of our coastal waters," the letter read.

The task force has since said its rules are "not meant to delay or halt" existing projects, but such projects are expected to take the "goals and principles" of the marine zoning rules into account.

Audra Parker of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound said she was hopeful Obama would defer to Kennedy's concerns and honor "Sen. Kennedy's legacy and his deep appreciation for Nantucket Sound."

"Moving the project would certainly do that," Parker said.

In his July letter, Kennedy also asked Obama to direct the task force "to give full consideration to providing protected status for Nantucket Sound," including "possible inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places as a Tribal (sic) Cultural Property."

The sound was ruled eligible for that protection on Jan. 4, when the keeper of the national register, who is under Jonathan Jarvis at the National Park Service, backed a claim by two Wampanoag Indian tribes that the sound was their "Traditional Cultural Property."

The Wampanoag argued the project would interfere with sacred rituals which require an unblocked view of the horizon and would be built on a long-submerged ancestral burial ground. A park service spokesman said Jarvis was not involved in the Wampanoag decision.

That ruling brought the prospect of more delay and prompted Salazar to intervene. If he approves Cape Wind, a few smaller issues would remain, including review by the FAA, headed by Babbitt. He has worked as an alliance consultant on its claims that Cape Wind could interfere with airplane radar signals.

A Department of Transportation spokeswoman said Babbitt has been recused from any involvement in Cape Wind decisions.

Cape Wind spokesman Mark Rodgers said the project will ultimately succeed on its merits, which were validated over years of review. He noted it's the only offshore wind project that could come to fruition during Obama's term.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100125/ap_on_re_us/us_cape_wind_obama

[Jolie Rouge]

Beware of naked emperors peddling economic prosperity through environmental alternatives. They are not always what they seem:

A Shifting Stance on WInd Company[i]
March 01, 2010 7:29 PM
ANDREW WINEKE - THE GAZETTE[i]

Just days after a news conference announcing the arrival of Colorado Springs’ first wind energy company, the deal appears to have hit heavy turbulence.

The Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Corp., which arranged the deal to bring Rocky Wind Power to the city, sent out a news release Monday raising questions about the company’s credibility and past performance.

Mike Kazmierski, EDC president, said that since Thursday’s announcement, several people had contacted him with complaints about Prevailing Power, the Iowa wind company owned by Rocky Wind owners Steve and Pam Stultz, including at least four consumer complaints filed with the Iowa Attorney General’s Office.

The Iowa Attorney General’s Office could not be reached on Monday.

Furthermore, Kazmierski said, questions had been raised about the technology the company planned to bring to Colorado Springs. “At this point, he has some issues to resolve in Iowa,” Kazmierski said. “Whether that means he comes here at some point is his call.”

It’s a dramatic shift in tone from Thursday’s news conference announcing Rocky Wind’s decision to locate in Colorado Springs, when Kazmierski called Rocky Wind a “very strong, reputable company.” The conference was attended by Mayor Lionel Rivera, El Paso County Commission Chairman Dennis Hisey and local business and environmental leaders.

Steve Stultz said he was upfront about Prevailing Power’s problems, which he blamed on faulty generators from an outside supplier, and he defended the efficiency of the rooftop wind turbines Rocky Wind was planning to build here. “It’s blown way out of proportion,” he said. “It breaks my heart. We were so excited about Colorado Springs.”

Rocky Wind leased a 14,000-square-foot building, with plans to employ 25 people initially, with the potential for up to 140 jobs.

In a Gazette story on Sunday, Ron Stimmell, small wind manager for the American Wind Energy Association, said that other rooftop turbines had failed to meet expectations because there was generally not enough wind at rooftop level for turbines to operate efficiently.

Steve Stultz contested that, saying that Rocky Wind’s blade design would allow it to succeed where others had failed. He said his first rooftop unit was scheduled to be installed today in Iowa. “AWEA is a good organization, but they don’t have every fact of every unit,” Steve Stultz said. “We’ve tested these units for two and a half years.”

The EDC put together an incentive package worth $376,000 to bring Rocky Wind to town. That money was in tax rebates, Kazmierski said, and none of it is at risk.

Neither Kazmierski nor Steve Stultz would say the deal is definitely off. Hisey said he still hopes things work out. “I was excited — I was ready to buy one,” he said.

http://www.gazette.com/articles/wind-94956-days-announcing.html


Background on Rocky Wind’s shady parent company, Prevailing Wind, here.
http://csbj.com/2010/03/01/rocky-wind-announcement-has-inconsistencies/

[Jolie Rouge]

Decision on Cape Cod wind project due this month
By Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Writer 2 hrs 43 mins ago

BOSTON – The Obama administration decides this month after a nine-year review whether the nation's first offshore wind farm should be built off Cape Cod. If it says no, the industry faces another question with no easy answer: "What's next?"

Not one of the country's half-dozen or so offshore wind proposals has entered the arduous review the Cape Wind project is just finishing. Cape Wind's developers say the earliest they could begin harnessing the breezes of Nantucket Sound is 2012.

The nation's onshore wind industry is the world's largest, but higher upfront costs, tougher technological challenges and environmental concerns have held back the development of offshore wind farms.

Offshore wind is especially important in areas like the Northeast, which lack major land-based winds but are mandated by state rules to use more renewables. Developers promise jobs and a plentiful energy source that emits no greenhouse gases. They say there is enough wind offshore to power the entire country — twice over. "There's a vast ocean that can be tapped right now," says Jeremy Firestone, an ocean policy professor at the University of Delaware. "But, you know, we've got to do it."

Denmark installed the world's first offshore wind turbine 20 years ago. As the U.S. lags behind Europe, and now China, offshore wind technology and manufacturing jobs get entrenched elsewhere, Firestone says.

General Electric recently announced a $450 million expansion of its European offshore wind turbine business. China plans to begin operating its first commercial offshore wind farm off Shanghai by May 1 and has several other projects planned.

The Department of Energy envisions 54 gigawatts in U.S. offshore wind by 2030, or about 4 percent of the country's electric generating capacity. The U.S. already produces 35 gigawatts of power from onshore wind. One gigawatt of offshore wind powers about 300,000 homes.

The Cape Wind project, proposed in 2001, aims to provide up to three-quarters of the Cape's power. But opposition has been relentless.

Critics say it would threaten animal life and mar historic vistas, including the view from the Kennedy family compound in Hyannisport. The late Sen. Edward Kennedy called the project a special interest giveaway and was pressing his opposition until weeks before his death last August.

Two Wampanoag Indian tribes also object to the project, saying it would destroy sacred rituals near Nantucket Sound and could disturb long-submerged tribal burial grounds.

This month, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar will make the final call. President Obama has pushed renewables and his recent decision to expand offshore drilling indicates a willingness to tap ocean-based energy sources. But Obama, who was close to Sen. Kennedy, has never spoken publicly about Cape Wind.

Offshore wind has had strong political backing in Northeast states, such as Massachusetts, Delaware and Rhode Island, where governors have pushed utilities to buy the power. In New Jersey, former Gov. John Corzine also set ambitious offshore wind goals.

Steven Kopits, an analyst with Douglas-Westwood energy consultants, says if Salazar kills the industry's most promising proposal in Cape Wind, crucial political support could wither. "It would gut the industry," he says.

Peter Mandelstam, president of offshore wind developer NRG Bluewater, a division of utility NRG Energy Inc., says U.S. projects have solid backing from state governments and a successful European model to give investors confidence. "The industry is much more than Cape Wind now," Mandelstam says. "It is a series of strong projects, each of which have their own path to success."

Major U.S. proposals include a project in Texas state waters, off Galveston, which could see faster permitting because it doesn't need to go through federal review. But most are concentrated above Maryland in the East Coast's northern half, including Bluewater projects in Delaware and New Jersey.

Each state in the Northeast requires utilities to get a rising percentage of power from renewables over the next several years, such as the 15 percent requirement in Massachusetts by 2020. Many are relying on offshore wind to help them do it.

Today's turbines can't be built beyond 50 meters depth, which is no problem at various East and Gulf Coast sites, though it shuts out the West Coast and its steeply descending sea floors.

The Northeast's heavy coastal population also makes offshore wind a good option because costs increase the further electricity travels over transmission lines.

Last year, the federal government released new rules for permitting offshore projects. They're intended to help companies avoid the twisting route Cape Wind has taken. But officials estimate it will still take 7 1/2 years to get a federal permit. Developers face a web of local considerations along the way, too, including maritime traffic and ecological effects. "The path is too long," Mandelstam says.

The high upfront costs of building and maintaining massive turbines at sea help make it significantly more expensive than onshore wind. For instance, the Department of Energy says building an offshore plant where wind power density ranges between 400 and 500 watts per square meter costs about $120 per megawatt hour, compared to about $80 for a land-based wind plant.

Cape Wind officials won't disclose the project's price, but Kopits estimates it's at least $2 billion.

Offshore developers need substantial subsidies, such as tax and production credits, and developers in Europe benefit from far more government help.

The expense puts the power at a premium that not everyone is willing to pay. This month, Rhode Island regulators rejected a deal between a local utility and developer Deepwater Wind, citing a high price per kilowatt hour. Only one other project, Bluewater's project in Delaware, has a power purchase deal, considered crucial to investors.

With natural gas prices dropping considerably from five years ago, offshore wind prices look even more pricey by comparison.

Advocates say focusing on today's prices is shortsighted, arguing that free offshore wind is a good long-term bet compared to fossil fuels, with their unstable and inevitably increasing prices. "Costs will go down," says Walt Musial, an engineer at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. "We may have some slow starts ... and we may have some pushback, but eventually I think we're going to see offshore wind grow."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100415/ap_on_bi_ge/us_offshore_wind/print;_ylt=ArYgm0sYvYTzwdy39zH0.5Jv24cA;_ylu=X3oDM TBycjdqNWs0BHBvcwMxNQRzZWMDYm90dG9tBHNsawNwcmludA--



A 9 year review?!?!? No wonder our countries broke.


The components are being produced for these wind turbines - in China - with US stimulus money - to get Americans back to work. Yes Chinesse workers are benefiting from you tax money. This is what the Americans have not been told.

Obama and China's Dictator Hu are really two socialist that see eye to eye on how to screw the American people


Solar and wind and the bloated subsidies that are being directed toward them are laughable. They are comically inefficient as one professor said in a recent interview with Globe and Mail from Canada. The idiots up there are giving a subsidy for solar panels 15 times higher than what it would cost to have normal sources. There must be constant fossil fuel back up for these types of dreams because of how spotty they are. "There will be almost zero carbon Abatement" was the ending statement in the interview. It's all a feel good wave that will not help and will cause Canadians to lose billions. As for this story. Take a wild guess as to how the Social Democrats out there vote on having a wind farm in their front yard. HA! Drill baby Drill.


Aren't there less scenic and visible places to put a wind farm than off of Cape Cod? We wouldn't build such an installation on top of Mount Rushmore or in front of the White House - perhaps common sense could prevail, and something could be constructed that wasn't smack dab in the middle of one of America's most famous and scenic ocean vistas.

That said, it still amuses me in a perverse way that the liberal and enlightened Kennedys are having to respond with a 'Not in my backyard' (NIMBY) argument, when they and their ilk are so cavalier about saddling ordinary Americans with things that WE hate. I truly do believe the ruling class does believe it is OUR duty to bear up under whatever they decide we need to have imposed on us, but that they should be exempt (e.g., the provisions contained within the healthcare bill).

[Jolie Rouge]

Gov't OKs 1st US offshore wind farm, off Mass.
By Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 7 mins ago

BOSTON – A coalition of groups that oppose the construction of a wind farm in Nantucket Sound say they will sue "immediately" to stop the project.

The announcement Wednesday came after the Obama administration gave approval to a 130-turbine wind farm in Nantucket Sound.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says the project, which would be the nation's first offshore wind farm, is a key to the country's push toward more renewable energy.

But opponents say it will endanger marine life and commerce.

Audra Parker of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound says she can't stand by while public lands and "marred forever."

Other groups who say they'll sue include the Animal Welfare Institute and the Industrial Wind Action Group. A Wampanoag tribe also is expected to sue.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

BOSTON (AP) — The Obama administration has approved what would be the nation's first offshore wind farm, off Cape Cod, inching the U.S. closer to harvesting an untapped domestic energy source — the steady breezes blowing along its vast coasts.

U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced his decision Wednesday in Boston, clearing the way for a 130-turbine wind farm in Nantucket Sound. Cape Wind was in its ninth year of federal review, and Salazar stepped in early this year to bring what he called much-needed resolution to the bitterly contested proposal.

"We are beginning a new direction in our nation's energy future," Salazar said.

But members of the Aquinnah Wampanoag Tribe of Martha's Vineyard have vowed to sue to stop Cape Wind from being built, saying it would interfere with sacred rituals and desecrate tribal burial sites. Others opposed to the project on environmental grounds also have said they'll sue.

Audra Parker of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, the chief opponent to Cape Wind, said the "flawed" project would be derailed in court.

"It's far from over," she said. "Nantucket Sound needs to be off limits to Cape Wind and any other industrial development."

Salazar said he understood opponents' concerns but had to weigh them against the nation's need for new renewable sources of energy.

"This is the final decision of the United States of America," he said. "We are very confident we will be able to uphold the decision against legal challenges."

Cape Wind says it can generate power by 2012 and aims to eventually supply three-quarters of the power on Cape Cod, which has about 225,000 residents. Cape Wind officials say it will provide green jobs and a reliable domestic energy source, while offshore wind advocates are hoping it can jump-start the U.S. industry.

America's onshore wind industry is the world's largest, but higher upfront costs, tougher technological challenges and environmental concerns have held back the development of offshore wind farms.

Denmark installed the world's first offshore wind turbine 20 years ago. China has built its first commercial wind farm off Shanghai and plans several other projects.

The U.S. Department of Energy envisions offshore wind farms accounting for 4 percent of the country's electric generating capacity by 2030.

Major U.S. proposals include a project in Texas state waters, but most are concentrated along the East Coast north of Maryland, including projects in Delaware and New Jersey.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has been an enthusiastic backer of Cape Wind, pushing it as key to the state's efforts to increase its use of renewable energy. The lead federal agency reviewing the project, the Minerals Management Service, issued a report last year saying the project posed no major environmental problems.

Critics say the project endangers wildlife and air and sea traffic, while marring historic vistas. The late U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy fought Cape Wind, calling it a special interest giveaway. The wind farm would be visible from the Kennedy family compound in Hyannisport.

Democrat U.S. Rep. William Delahunt, who represents Cape Cod, said allowing the project to move forward will open "a new chapter of legal battles and potential setbacks" for the wind power industry.

"Cape Wind is the first offshore wind farm to be built in the wrong place, in the wrong way, stimulating the wrong economies," Delahunt said Wednesday.

Home to some of the best-known beaches in the Northeast, Cape Cod has long been a destination for summer vacations and is famous for its small towns and homes in its namesake architectural style.

The project is about five miles off Cape Cod at its closest proximity to land and 14 miles off Nantucket at the greatest distance. According to visual simulations done for Cape Wind, on a clear day the turbines would be about a half-inch tall on the horizon at the nearest point and appear as specks from Nantucket.

The developers are being required to configure the wind farm to reduce visual effects on the outer cape and Nantucket Island, Salazar said.

Opponents also said the power from the pricey Cape Wind project, estimated to cost at least $2 billion, would be too expensive.

U.S. Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, the Republican who won Kennedy's seat this year, said the project will jeopardize tourism and affect aviation safety and the rights of the Native American tribes. "Nantucket Sound is a national treasure that should be protected from industrialization," Brown said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100428/ap_on_bi_ge/us_cape_wind;_ylt=Ahc1_KrKEIV.gX9P4OPh8iys0NUE;_yl u=X3oDMTFoNjJkYzc5BHBvcwMyOARzZWMDYWNjb3JkaW9uX3Rv cF9zdG9yaWVzBHNsawNnb3Z0b2tzMXN0dXM-

[Jolie Rouge]

.
Obama blocks Chinese purchase of US wind farms
By JULIE PACE | Associated Press – 23 mins ago.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Citing national security risks, President Barack Obama on Friday blocked a Chinese company from owning four wind farm projects in northern Oregon near a Navy base where the U.S. military flies unmanned drones and electronic-warfare planes on training missions.

It was the first time in 22 years that a U.S. president has blocked such a foreign business deal.

Obama's decision was likely to be another irritant in the increasingly tense economic relationship between the U.S. and China. It also comes against an election-year backdrop of intense criticism from Republican presidential challenger Mitt Romney, who accuses Obama of not being tough enough with China.

In his decision, Obama ordered Ralls Corp., a company owned by Chinese nationals, to divest its interest in the wind farms it purchased earlier this year near the Naval Weapons Systems Training Facility in Boardman, Ore.

The case reached the president's desk after the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, known as CFIUS, determined there was no way to address the national security risks posed by the Chinese company's purchases. Only the president has final authority to prohibit a transaction.

The administration would not say what risks the wind farm purchases presented. The Treasury Department said CFIUS made its recommendation to Obama after receiving an analysis of the potential threats from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

The military has acknowledged that it used the Oregon Naval facility to test unmanned drones and the EA-18G "Growler." The electronic warfare aircraft accompanies U.S. fighter bombers on missions and protectively jams enemy radar, destroying them with missiles along the way.

At the Oregon site, the planes fly as low as 200 feet and nearly 300 miles per hour.

The last time a president used the law to block a transaction was 1990, when President George H.W. Bush voided the sale of Mamco Manufacturing to a Chinese agency.

In 2006, President George W. Bush approved a CFIUS case involving the merger of Alcatel and Lucent Technologies.

The Treasury Department said in a statement that Obama's decision is specific to this transaction and does not set a precedent for other foreign direct investment in the U.S. by China or any other country.

China's trade advantage over the U.S. has emerged as a key issue in the final weeks of the presidential campaign. Romney accuses Obama of failing to stand up to Beijing, while the president criticizes the GOP nominee for investing part of his personal fortune in China and outsourcing jobs there while he ran the private equity firm Bain Capital.

Both campaigns are running ads on China in battleground states, especially Ohio, where workers in the manufacturing industry have been hard-hit by outsourcing.

Obama, in an interview Wednesday with The Plain Dealer of Cleveland, said the U.S. must push hard against Beijing but "not go out of our way to embarrass" China.

"We're not interested in triggering an all-out trade war that would damage both economies," Obama said.

The president has the power to void foreign transactions under the Defense Production Act. It authorizes the president to suspend or prohibit certain acquisitions of U.S. businesses if there is credible evidence that the foreign purchaser might take action that threatens to impair national security.

CFIUS is chaired by the treasury secretary. The secretaries of state, defense, commerce, energy and homeland security are also on the committee. The director of national intelligence is a non-voting member.

Earlier this month, Ralls sued the national security panel, alleging CFIUS exceeded its authority when it ordered the company to cease operations and withdraw from the wind-farm developments it bought. Ralls asked for a restraining order and a preliminary injunction to allow construction at the wind farms to continue. The firm said it would lose the chance for a $25 million investment tax if the farms were not operable by Dec. 31.

A lawyer for Ralls said Friday that the project posed no national security threat and said "the President's order is without justification, as scores of other wind turbines already operate in the area."

Ralls dropped its request for a preliminary injunction this week after CFIUS allowed the firm to resume some pre-construction work. The firm's lawyers were expected to react quickly to the administration decision, said a person familiar with the lawsuit who insisted on anonymity because of the sensitive legal repercussions.

Ralls' legal team includes Paul Clement and Viet Dinh, two top law veterans of President George W. Bush's administration. Both men were key players in Bush's aggressive national security operation.

Clement, who was solicitor-general and argued administration positions before the Supreme Court, has since opposed the Obama administration's health care plan and defended the Defense of Marriage Act before the top court.

Dinh, a former assistant attorney general who was the main architect of the Bush administration's anti-terror USA Patriot Act, has lately served as a director and legal adviser to Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation.

A second Chinese firm stymied by CFIUS urged U.S. authorizes this week to investigate their firm to quell fears of ties to China's military. Huawei Technologies Ltd. announced in early September that it would unwind its purchase of U.S.-based computer firm 3Leaf Systems after the deal was rejected by CFIUS.

Huawei, one of the world's largest producers of computer network switching gear, has repeatedly struggled to convince U.S. authorities that they can be trusted to oversee sensitive technology sometimes used in national security work.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-blocks-chinese-purchase-us-wind-farms-181230948.html

comments

It's also illegal for Americans (USA ) citizens to own land in Canada or Mexico. I know this for a fact. Probably many other other countries do not allow foreign nationals to buy land in their countries. I suggest the USA stop non-citizens (individual or corporate) from buying land in the US.

of course this question is not about land exactly, it's about a wind farm in the ocean.

..

Why doesnt he make an Executive Order to have all military components made in the USA for National Security reasons?

..

Maybe it's just me, but something about the Chinese owning what is supposed to be independent domestic energy makes me sick.

..

I trust the Chinese even less than I trust the Russians and I do not trust the Russians very far at all ! A nice tall wind turbine tower overlooking a secret test site would be the perfect place to install an optical and electronic spy center to keep tabs on our Navy aviation experimental work, don't you think?

[pepperpot]

Glad he stopped it.