Declaring war against natural gas is not enough. New York State has now extended the conflict to grassroots opposition to government-enabled wind and solar projects that cause demonstrable tort.
“We start with the most aggressive climate change program in the country because my friends, the clock is ticking, and it’s ticking faster and faster…. New York has to be the State that stands up and says once and for all, we have to do more and we have to do it faster….” (New York Gov. Cuomo, February 21, 2020)
Frustrated with the slow development of wind and solar projects in the state (grassroots opposition prevailed at Sommerset/Yates, for example), New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has proposed draconian measures to green-light controversial renewable-energy projects.
New York’s plan for net carbon free, 30% by 2030 and 100% by 2050, is impractical on infrastructure and economic grounds.…
“The Project remains as ill-conceived and disastrous for Lake Erie as it was on the date of its conception. The residents continue to fight to protect their interests…. In glaring contrast, Icebreaker is spending millions of dollars… The Board must not abet Icebreaker’s proposed fouling … of Lake Erie.”
– John Stock (attorney), Bratenahl Residents Post Hearing Reply Brief to OPSB Staff and Developers of Icebreaker, November 15, 2019.
For many years I have protested LEEDCo/Icebreaker/Olsen (Icebreaker), the first proposed freshwater offshore wind project in North America. I have covered the different issues of this six-turbine starter project (the organizers have blustered about Lake Erie being the “Saudi Arabia of wind energy with a potential of 1,000 turbines.) As I previously argued:
…The reality is is potential harm of an epic scale.
“The description of wind turbine noise needs a terminological shift. The language should be pulsations at an infrasound rate with modulation of the entire signal at an infrasound rate (as in sensation detected by the ear).” [Cooper, below]
Q: You referred earlier [yesterday] to your second paper at the ICA that is linked to the synthesis paper. Maybe my question on ILFN ties in with the paper on Amplitude Modulation that raises questions as to terminology?
Cooper: Yes. The second paper on amplitude modulation is very important. Because what people are calling AM (by reference to the dBA signal) is incorrect. An electrical engineer will tell you that AM is the modulation (variation in the amplitude) of a carrier frequency (being a high frequency) that is modulated at a lower rate.…