conservation would easily tame down most of our problems but it's going to be especially tough going with our current president saying, "we need an energy plan that encourages consumption."

it seems like the most fruitful course would be to join him in the free market by helping the green power and gadgets market become more cost effective for consumers and profitable for businesses. instead of chastising the industry over anomolies like altamont, or boycotting GE, we should recognize that wind power is one of our few hopes for clean, sustainable energy and be flexible and understanding when they stumble while learning to walk. keep the long term in mind.

we can (and should) always improve conservation, but if our president is not only disinterested, but working against it, i think we should be realistic about it's potential to effect the average american. we can undercut every sustainable energy endeavor by saying 'conservation first' but in the end, that only paralyzes progress. conservation and development are not mutually exclusive.

one vote for parallel path.

I'm really surprised that the NIMBY factor is so big in wind farms already. I'd tend to support wind power anywhere really, as a counterbalance to that.

Well, let's take Fairfield County, Connecticut for example... the proud home of General Electric's International HQ, the number one military contractor, and nuclear power operator on the planet. They now fund something called the EdgeLab at the Stamford UConn campus. Many, many folks, some on town councils, are begging, simply begging GE to come and install some of their spankin' new GE windmills all over our county... yet... after three months... still not a single sign of a GE man surveying the landscape, almost as if GE Energy was just there in name only, to keep a close eye on what Norway might be doing... I certainly don't get a fair sense that GE is suddenly actually in the windmill business... that's for sure. More like a wait and see attitude, keep your enemies closer strategy. Some accuse me of being conspiratorial, but come'on... haven't any of you read Gravity's Rainbow? 1000 US soldiers, actually ALL of them undercover GE employees, scurrying and scavenging the German landscape after WW2 for every single bit of revolutionary technology they could get their hands on? I'm not making this stuff up. It really happened. In 1968, GE terminates its EV program, because they didn't want to compete with their number one customer, the automobile industry... we have the Congressional Hearing transcripts!!! Wind energy in the good ol'US of A is going to be a hard sell, because for every willing, dedicated, friendly, eager wind mill salesman, there is a GE man egging to pull the wool over your eyes and the rug under your feet. Good luck my friends bringing wind energy to US shores.

My understanding was that GE bought the Enron wind-turbine business outright. Perhaps Corp Hdqtrs may not want to get too far into the sights NIMBY activists, and is taking a lower profile by handing off installation to other people. ANother way to look at it is that GE does not "buy" its own product: utilities and turn key JV developers do buy them and then sell the project or the power outright. PErhaps a more telling question would be "does GE buy windpower" for its operations"?

I'd rather see wind turbines on the horizon than smokestacks.

i have no love for them either, but neither suspicions nor what happened 50 years ago are enough for me to risk shooting myself in the foot. GE uses mighty r&d to propel wind energy forward and i'll accept it from them because they can take the market to a higher level at a faster pace than anyone else could hope to. we're in bush country for nearly 4 more years so we can either try to work his system to our advantage or boycott any progress on principle. it's like a big nasty husky pulling your sled as opposed to a few friendly chihuahuas. we have somewhere we're trying to get to.

as far as i understand... and i could be wrong... GE makes the technology, but they don't necessarily develop windfarms or provide energy to anyone. the turbines are for sale but if the begging councilmen (or the local energy providers) aren't capable of taking on windfarm development, is it GE's fault? they aren't witholding turbines from them, are they? does the wind power potential in that county make it cost-effective relative to other locations? are there prohibitive zoning laws or lacking tax breaks?

most corporations have shady pasts. ford, nike, ge, dupont, etc. the bigger the corporation the more scandalous the story. in some instances, it might be more helpful for treehuggers to not instinctively fight against the divisions that are furthering our cause. GE can still make valuable and influential contributions toward sustainability and by all indications, that's what they are doing with wind. no, i still don't trust them, and we need all the oversight we can muster, but won't we get further with their help?

Uhm. You do know Gravity's Rainbow is a work of fiction right? It won the 1974 Pulitzer for fiction for goodness sake.

GE's interest, as was Enron's, is no doubt the fantastic tax-evasion possibilities available (subsidized, too!) for large-scale renewable projects, namely industrial wind power. As capitalists, the only sustainability they care about is an increasing stock value.

Wind power is a great alternative to coal,etc., except for the danger to birds, bats and other flying creatures. This is a problem with the windfarm a group wants to put right near Horicon National Wildlife Refuge in Wisc. Why can't they put mesh around the windmills - like fans? It may slow down the windmills a little, but it's worth it to save the lives of innocent creatures.

One argument you will hear is that more flying creatures are killed by exisiting high tension wires and buildings than ever will be done in by new wind turbines. This could be true, I'm uncertain of the facts on a national scale.

Horicon geese certainly are superabundant: to the level of pestilence if you were to ask nearby farmers. The real issue is whether other marsh birds will be at risk. This has to be looked at with the new slower RPM designs. No doubt there will be hearings and formal assessments.

How close are they proposing to build these turbines? I have been thinking about putting a windfarm in Lake Michigan for a while now, just lacked the funding. :) If you were to build turbines 150' tall in relatively shallow waters, say 50 miles off the coast, I don't think anyone would ever see them. I also can't believe there are so many people opposed to how they look, but we have to accept that there are and always will be. That's why the lake is perfect for it! This has got to happen, and will only be a bad idea as alt power gets more efficient and cost effective-harnessing photosynthesis...

As for the question of should we all get more conservation minded, I think it's hard to say no. But you have to think we're heading for a time of abundant energy supply, so really, the main concern will be waste disposal and heat generation, am I right?

of course GE is in it for the money. who could do it for any other reason? i hope they find selling wind turbines very profitable so they continue to make them more efficient and widespread. aren't all of our energy sources subsidized?

here's an article on bird kill (including statistical comparisons with office buildings, autos, and communication towers):

http://defenders.org/habitat/renew/wind.html

These giant turbines are soon to be placed in Southwest Washington state. I hate these things. They dot the landscape in the California desert near Palm Springs and are not only ugly, but noisy and much of the indigenous fauna have long departed. Above all the thing that irks me the most is that they are set up as a tax dodge and most of the power is wasted because the local utilities don't want to buy it.

I've also seen these things near Livermore in the Bay Area of California...uglifying the hillsides for miles.

Yuck.

EASTER ADDENDUM to post. By: John Laumer.

Its so exciting to see TH's fired up about this that I thought I'd stoke the wind some more.

The reasons that wind power project proposals are coming so fast lately include the following:
* takes only 9 months to get one up and running once the permits are in place (compared to many years for any other type of generation system).
* financial break-even point can be less than two years and possibly as little as 18 months
* windfarms are scalable on short notice: e.g. 4 now, 8 next year, 16 the year after that, etc.
* small investors can put together a project with the support of mechanical erection companies (yes they're called that) and real estate interests, without project specific government subsidies.
* the turbine makers have the capacity now to respond to market growth.

We often hear about failures and controvies because of the following reasons:
* broadcast media seeks out absurd and narrow minded experts to offer "balance". Often leads to Chicken Little ruling the roust.
* developers get their priorities all backwards. After finding a windy site for cheap they line up the funding and technology; and, THEN go for permits, encountering at the last minute the NIMBY monster.
* the pragmatic solution is to use the regional planning methodology of "overlays", to advance screen for sites that pass the a series of "red face" tests before windfarm developer goes public: e.g. no sites proposed that have critical habitat for endangered species, no members of Congress or members of politically dynastic families own vacation homes, not on critical migration route for hawks or waterfowl, etc etc.
* final technique to ensure a reasonable liklihood of success is to fish for the YIMBY (yes in my backyard) situation with some finesse. see next paragraph for TreeHugger role in the finessing,

In the early 1970's I spend several years working on the siting of nuclear power plants on Gitcheegoomee, and subsequently on peforming full scale environmental assessments for a variety of controverial expensive projects. Based on this experience, I speculate that TreeHuggers could benefit greatly by networking their interests and expertise to force developers to do the equivalenet of Environmental Assessment before formally proposing a project of substance. For example:

Create a sub-topic list for man-made and natural environment. Tackle one subtopic at a time.

For the "legal" topic, you'd explore whether pushing for offshore wind farms in Gitcheegoomee would provide legal prcedent for oil and gas developers to do the same. And, you'd look into whether and where specifically offshore windfarms would be inhibited by international treaty with Canada.
For the the "fisheries" topic you'd work with state local and university experts to identify the spawning and rearing habits of fish species that may conflict with or be obliterated by the construction and operation phases of an offshore windfarm.

Etc etc.

Once TH's had sufficiently networked and reach a consensus on optimal location(s) they could tip developer toward those locations, making sure to include sport fishing clubs and tourism interests in the consensus building.

I'd stop now short of an epic. Keep on commenting please.

An earlier TreeHugger post about the WhisperGen home CHP unit noted the advantages of decentralized power generation. Just so, that's where any wind turbines need to be if they are to make any difference: at the home, where the power is used. Sprawling complexes of industrial-strength wind turbines instead only perpetuate the same problems we need to move away from.

for "green" energy products to become more widespread, they should have one or more of these qualities: safe, user-friendliness (i.e. scalable to the end-user), affordable (the scalability can help reduce costs but also performance), connectable (a collection of small wind generators /solar panels can provide a significant output compared to one large unit), "cool" (or sexy, they both help get products sold), ability to be transparent (how do you get a wind generator to be transparent?), customizable (options can help make a sale), and portable (it's not always windy / sunny in the same location).

These qualities are inherent to most consumer products.

Just some of my ideas:

www.designerspace.com/pages/3-designerspace/design/i/22378/largeview.html

www.designerspace.com/pages/3-designerspace/design/i/4379/largeview.html

www.designerspace.com/pages/3-designerspace/design/i/3903/largeview.html