Reddington Is A Go?

imported
#1

Wow.

In today’s Bangor Daily News, I read a letter in which someone stated that the Reddington Wind Power project is going to be approved, or at least reccomended by the Land Use Regulation Committee.

I was at the hearings at Sugarloaf. I gave testimony, and said that I while I was for wind power, I was against the turbines being on Reddington Pond Range.

PLEASE ARGUE ABOUT WIND POWER’S BENIFITS/DETRIMENTS IN ANOTHER THREAD, FOR THAT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THIS THREAD.

Can we continue?

It wasn’t just a yes or no vote on wind power. The problem is much larger than that.

The Land Use Regulation Committee (LURC) has to decide if it is okay to change existing legislature (or law, same thing) which prohibits development above a certain elevation in the State of Maine.

With me so far?

So when LURC decides to accept the Reddington project, they will have to alter the language of the law to allow for development of the turbines.

That means every mountain in Maine comes under the gun of development.

It might not be windpower. It might be a new ski resort. It might be a Wal Mart. Or a resort complex.

Again: every mountain in Maine can legally be developed if the language is changed to accomodate the Reddington project.

Wow.

Wind power proponents state that many hikers stated that they would love to see wind turbines.

My point is:

These people have betrayed the very spirit of the Maine’s character, and the character of Maine’s portion of the Appalachian Trail.

I hope you guys enjoy seeing McDonalds on every mountain top.

Kineo Kid

#2

“On every mountian top” very dramatic … but I understand and agree.

Tortuga

#3

another reason the AT is becoming the interstate of long distance trails.

dreamHiker

#4

When I said legislation, I meant to say ‘rezoning’

To allow for Reddington, they will have change the zoning laws.

And that sets a precedence. It starts a big ugly ball rolling, in other words.

Kineo Kid

#5

I don’t know anything about the particulars of this project but there is no legal reason why the laws can’t be written to allow just this single project. They don’t have to rewrite the law to allow development everywhere.

Perhaps there is a particular bill that has been proposed to allow development everywhere? No reason why that bill can’t be changed to be project specific or for it to fail and have a project specific bill be introduced.

Radar

#6

The Decision on Reddington wind farm will be made on Wed Jan 24, 2007. Aproximately 30 turbines will be split between the top of Mt. Reddington and nearby Black Nubble. It does not sound like any officials care much about the endangered species that make there home on Reddington. Even if the turbines present a small danger to wildlife, the construction, power lines, access roads and substations that will have to be built are going to tear up the small mountain top. When I was up there in 2004 they had a test mast put up with a small turbine and instruments. The area they had cleared was about a half acre so they could run support wires. I am sure the 400 foot turbines will need to have cleared several acres a piece.

There are already two other wind farm proposed for Maine that I know about. One for the Gorham, NH area and one on the Maine and Quebec border. Statements have been made by several other power industry groups in the last year that suggest they are looking at all the unprotected high peaks in the NorthEast. One statement that has stuck in my mind was a power industy spokesman saying they could harvest thousands of megawatts of power from Maine, NH and Vermont.
That is a lot of high mountains with wind farms. The only thing stopping them from building on every peak is the location of already existing power lines. It costs about a million dollars a mile for new lines to connect to the grid. The reason they are interested in the highest peaks is to catch the sustained winds of the prevailing Westerlies being squeezed by the peaks as they come in off the Atlantic. If you consider how many places the AT and LT either cross or are near transmission lines then the potential exists for our “scenic” trails to become victims of Global Warming. If that sounds a bit over blown (couldn’t resist the pun L) then picture Thirty, 400 foot high turbines along a ridge line with 150 foot lighted blades and gear/generator boxes the size of large dump trucks. While hiking the AT you will be looking at the Reddington wind farm for at least two days, from Mt. Saddleback into the Bigelows. If several dozen more such wind farms are built then the beautiful unspoiled mountain vistas of the NorthEast will be a thing of the past. The only way to prevent more wind farms is to buy up all the unprotected peaks near the trail.

There also exist an alteria motive for many of the energy firms that are pushing wind farms at this time. Most of these companies own large poluting coal power plants that are very profitable. They realize if carbon trading becomes law they are going to have to buy credits from non poluting power sources that will diminish their profits. The wind farms can provide these credits for minimal or no cost to the parent company. The only reason these companies are turning green is so they can earn more green. When money is the incentive you can almost be certain that our unprotected mountain tops are in danger of being turned into wind farms.

I am not against wind power, but unless there is careful placement of the turbines we are going to degrade the very wilderness we are hoping to save. Personally I prefer wind farms be placed off shore away from the more scenic parts of our coast line. For example a wind farm off shore near Portland harbor would be an improvement to the existing views.

To even stand a chance of minimizing Global Warming we need to utilize every resource we have, but the very first step is conservation and to this date our government has not even been actively promoting it. Every American needs to cut their energy usage by at least half with some of the biggest offenders cutting a lot more. I have achieved a 50% reduction and it is not that easy. When it is 10 degrees out and your inside temperature is set in the 50’s, you wonder if conservation is worth it, but the alternative is an inhospitable Earth. If we do not reduce our CO2 output soon and we trigger a climate feed back loop then we may find ourselves with a run away green house effect. It will be a little too late once Methane Hydrate (clathrates) deposits become unstable and methane is bubbling out of sea and the permafrost at northern latitudes. It has happened in the past and caused mass extinctions and it can happen again if we are not careful.

Challenge yourself to reduce your carbon foot print by 50% and help save our planet.

RickTheLoneWolf

#7

Saw it on the news tonight here in Maine. Project is not dead however, but this is a gigantic step in the direction to that end.

" FARMINGTON - Maine land use regulators on Wednesday took a step toward denial of a project to build 30 wind-power turbines in Maine’s western mountains.

The Land Use Regulation Commission, who met in Farmington, voted 6-1 to ask its staff to submit a document calling for denial of Maine Mountain Power’s proposed project in Redington Township.

Maine Mountain attorney Jeff Thaler called the action a step toward denial and said he’s disappointed.

About 150 participants and spectators attended the LURC meeting during a session that took up most of the day at the University of Maine at Farmington.

The commission’s staff has recommended approval of the plan to rezone about 1,000 acres near the Sugarloaf ski resort to allow for the 90-megawatt project on Redington Pond Range and Black Nubble Mountain in Redington Township.

Opponents said the turbines wouldn’t produce enough power to justify obstruction of scenic views from Sugarloaf and the Appalachian Trail. Several of them held signs outside the meeting. One of the signs said, “Leave Our Mountains Alone.”

Bluebearee