Eco-Scandal or Clerical Mistake?
Well, well. The cat's out of the bag: "The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound [...] filed a federal document last month reporting that its work is partially funded and shaped by an international energy conglomerate. [...] The disclosure represents the first documented financial connection between the group opposing the wind farm and Oxbow Corp., which mines and markets energy and commodities, including coal, natural gas, and petroleum."
Of course, the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound immediately said that the filing of the document was "a mistake". What is the mistake, we wonder. Is it a mistake in the sense that the document contains factually incorrect information, or is it a mistake in the sense that it reveals facts that they would have rather kept hidden? Not too hard to estimate the probabilities on that one.
The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound responds
The PR reponse was quick:
Audra Parker, a spokeswoman for Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, said she asked to get the document changed after learning that Oxbow was listed as a contributor to the group's lobbying effort.
"There has been no financial contribution from Oxbow for BKSH lobbying efforts," Parker said "They corrected their mistake."
The Regulatory Process Keeps Grinding Forward
After seven years of review by various governmental agencies, Cape Wind recently received a federal draft environmental review that did not identify any major environmental impediments to building the wind farm in Nantucket Sound.
::Enercon E-126: The World’s Largest Wind Turbine (for now)
::Wind Power Produces 123% of Residential Energy Demand in Rock Port, Missouri
::Small Wind Power is Growing Fast, Even Bush Sr. Will Get a Wind Turbine
::New Wind Power Record in Spain: 40.8% of Total Demand!
More on Cape Wind Farm Controversy
::Documents link wind farm foes to energy firm
::Cape Wind: An Audio Interview With Robert Whitcomb
::An Answer for Offshore Wind?