In most cases, properly cited wind power projects are a win-win for the clean energy movement and for local towns.
We at the Green Alliance love to see folks actively engaging in a dialogue about renewable energy.
When it comes to wind power, we need to be wary of what is fact and what is fiction because saying “no” to large-scale solutions to climate change will have a negative impact on not only ourselves but on future generations.
A letter by Ray Cunningham (“We have a right to protect our N.H.,” March 29), makes a variety of inaccurate claims about wind power.
First, New Hampshire is not required by a federal mandate to purchase wind power. Rather, our nation’s energy policy is a patchwork of many different state-based renewable standards combined with federal tax incentives. Massachusetts’ and New Hampshire’s energy policy choices are largely determined by their state legislatures and implemented by their state public utility commissions. Every New England state has enacted a strong policy in favor of advancing new renewable energy sources.
Second, wind farms are financially beneficial for rural communities. Ninety-eight percent of wind farms are built on private land and help landowners earn extra income through land lease payments. Also, comprehensive property value studies have found no evidence of persistent negative effects on surrounding properties as the result of wind power development. In New Hampshire, every utility-scale wind project must be approved by a state siting commission, known as the site evaluation committee. That process, while it could be improved, considers local impacts and includes substantial public and community input.
Third, since electricity is transmitted through a regional grid, wind energy generated in New Hampshire and other wind-rich states benefits all of New England. Wind power is already saving New Hampshire consumers money, because electricity generated from wind energy displaces the output of the most expensive, least efficient power plants