Re: Global Energy etc.

[Daniel Schroeder <DSCHROEDER@CC.WEBER.EDU>]

> In California, we have a number of wind farms.  There are undesired
> side-effects - visual pollution.  The windy valleys are some of the most
> beautiful areas - the wind generators are large and ugly, scarring the
> hills.  There would be much opposition to the siting of millions of them.
> Plus I think they can be noisy.

I've seen the two major wind farms in CA, and while I agree
that the hills are prettier without the wind turbines than with,
I also think there are many places where wind farms would not
unduly harm the visual landscape.  The two new wind farms that
I recently read about will be at the Nevada nuclear test site and
on farm land in SE Washington and NE Oregon.  I believe there's
also a new wind farm in Wyoming.  Really the wind turbines aren't
much more visually obtrusive than power lines, and you need
power lines with any form of centrally generated electricity.

The noise problems are supposedly less with the newer models.
(Most of the wind turbines in CA are now nearly 20 years old.)

1000 large wind turbines will replace one large hydroelectric dam
or one large coal-fired or nuclear power plant.  Which is uglier?
Which would people rather have in their back yards?  Depends on
who you ask, I guess, but I bet a lot of people would vote for
the wind turbines.

Dan