Mark

I represented the Highlands Conservancy in the first wind turbine case ever filed with the Public Service Commission in 2005 [CORRECTION 2000], and I represent them (and the Sierra Club) now in proceedings at the PSC relating to AEP/Allegheny's proposed construction of PATH, a high voltage electric transmission line from the John Amos coal-fired electric plant in Winfield to Maryland -- through 225 miles of West Virginia, including vast swaths of forest.

I think it is inaccurate to state the Sierra has stated a blanket policy in favor of absolutely any and all wind turbines. There clearly is a strong desire to build them, and as many as possible, but there is no blank check. HC dropped its opposition to the first wind turbine in 2005 [CORRECTION 2000] when the developer agreed to make changes moving the turbines further away from Dolly Sod. See the attached agreement.

The Highlands Conservancy has adopted what I regard as an impossible standard for wind turbines, in effect, the exact opposite of blanket approval. HC's requirement that wind turbines demonstrate that they will result in the shut down of some equivalent MW of coal or other fossil fuel plant is just unrealistic, especially in a world where more generation capacity is being built all of the time. The reality is that no wind turbine, in the absence of the authority as the owner of a coal fired plant to shut down the plant, could ever meet that standard. None would be approved, ever, anywhere.

Can you show me a single wind turbine project the HC is currently supporting under its recently announced standard? Of any size, in any location?

I hope you can. Honestly.

Best regards,

Bill

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:14 PM, Mark Blumenstein <markb@mountain.net> wrote:

Thanks Bill for the effort to help me understand the issue
I am fully aware of all You bring to this issue but the relevant point I make and will repeat
is A Blank policy that all WInd projects are good without close examination of the details and the effects on individuals and communities will only lead to a watered down effort . There are thousands of citizens and much animal life that will be negatively effected by this local Beach Ridge project and without compensation for property devaluation etc. and will reap nothing from it except more power for the grid so the Pittsburgh suburbs can flourish . And the green credits mean more pollution by a dirty industry that buys or owns them! Yes there are many negative issues you did not address in your email

I dont care to argue the fine points .

Just look at the WV Highland Conservancy turn around position on Wind projects in WV
Their reversal on this is an epic decision for an environmental org of WV and is very commendable !

So I would suggest that the WV SC also have a closer l@@K at its position
ALL WIND PROJECTS ARE NOT GOOD and therefore a blanket statement endorsing these only hurts the membership issue
as in my case and the image of the org.

Thanks for the consideration
Mark

On Aug 12, 2009, at 6:29 PM, William V. DePaulo, Esq. wrote:

But trust me when I tell you that uninformed moral fervor will not deter the Sierra Club from aggressively pursuing realistic energy and environmental solutions.

Mark Blumenstein

HC73 BX11 Alderson WV 24910

304 445 7822

markb@mountain.net

--
William V. DePaulo, Esq.
179 Summers Street, Suite 232
Charleston, WV 25301-2163
Tel: 304-342-5588
Fax: 304-342-5505
william.depaulo@gmail.com
www.passeggiata.com

This electronic mail is intended to be received and read only by certain individuals. It may contain information that is privileged or protected from disclosure by law. If it has been misdirected, or if you suspect you received this in error, please notify me by replying and then delete this message and your reply. These restrictions apply to any attachment to this email.