Supporters and foes of Highland New Wind Development’s proposal to erect 19 windmills on a 4,300-foot-high ridge in Highland County presented their case yesterday in a State Corporation Commission hearing. The arguments in a nutshell, according to Greg Edwards with the Richmond Times-Dispatch:
Wind energy’s supporters see it as preferable to power generated by burning coal or other fossil fuels. Wind power, they say, can cut pollution that sickens people and contributes to global warming.
Opponents see windmills as a threat to migratory birds, bats and other wildlife. The mammoth structures will scar a pristine landscape and hurt tourism, they say.
It is imperative that the United States — and that includes Virginia — develop clean, non-polluting sources of energy. It’s an imperative for reasons of energy security, reducing acid rain and other local forms of pollution and, if you believe Al Gore, slowing the onset of global warming. If Virginia can’t build a wind farm in remote, sparsely populated Highland County, then it’s unlikely we’ll ever build a wind farm anywhere in the state.
Foes cited a study of Pennsylvania and West Virginia wind farms that revealed “unacceptable fatality rates for birds and bats.” Now, I’m all in favor of protecting wildlife, and I’m open to the idea of halting the project — if the carnage is bloody enough.
But I would like to know what those “unacceptable” rates are. How many dead birds and bats? Are any of them endangered species? Has anyone devised a way to reduce wildlife fatalities? If so, how effective is it, what would it cost, and would it imperil the financing of the wind farm? These are all questions the SCC need answers to before ruling against the windfarm.
Just remember: According to the Energy Information Administration, electricity usage is expected to rise anywhere between 11 percent to 17 percent by 2015.
(Photo credit: Campaign to Protect Rural England.)