Nancy Tips: State Sen. Anthony Pollina and the politics of devastation

This commentary is by Nancy Tips, a resident of Windham.

Oooooh. Not again. Outgoing state Sen. Anthony Pollina, in his recent opinion piece, attempts to revive the elderly trope that industrial wind opponents in Vermont don’t want wind turbines on account of the possibility that those machines might spoil their gorgeous, pricey views. 

Partly this misconception can be traced to Gov. Phil Scott, whom I hold in the highest esteem. Gov. Scott is a great guy, except for one little thing: He appears to believe that the potential for a spoiled view is the big issue driving Vermont’s mighty industrial-wind opposition.

It isn’t. No indeed. Most industrial-wind opponents I know ain’t thinking about their durn view. Instead, we decry the environmental devastation of turbine installations on sensitive and pristine ridgelines, the destruction of communities through the ruthless, divisive tactics of the wind industry, and the injustice of efforts to site wind turbines very near real Vermonters’ homes. Among several other problems.

I’ll admit to being taken aback by Anthony’s list of the devastating impacts of Hydro-Quebec, with which list he hopes to guilt-trip the good-hearted, electric-car-driving folks of Vermont. But I notice that, evidently, the terrible impacts he cites are only devastating in Canada, but just tickety-boo when the wind industry brings them to Vermont.

It might be instructive to look closely at his list of the various sins of Hydro-Quebec, and see about the possibility that these sins might also be pretty naughty if they showed up in his utopian wind-powered Vermont:

• “Changing the course of rivers”: Hmmm, that sounds pretty bad, all right, and it so happens that it’s quite a likely possibility for us up here in the flood-prone hills, especially given the immense impermeable acreage that must be created for a “profitable” (read “large”) wind installation in this difficult terrain.

• “Flooding an area the size of New York state”: Well, that’s a bit of a stretch, but flooding remains the No. 1 potential natural disaster for us in fragile hill towns, given the proliferation of streams and the propensity for them to turn into raging torrents, given a good, steady downpour (see the first bullet, above). The transformation of ridgelines into vast fields of concrete with wide access roads is a recipe for catastrophe in these hills. Regarding this, Anthony might want to check out experiences near the Lowell industrial wind installation, if he remains in doubt on this score.

• “Displacing thousands of Indigenous people”: Not good, no doubt about it. But I wonder if Anthony cares about displacing Vermont residents who bought homes we thought were safe, and now find instead that we are prey to unlawful taking, without compensation, by a ruthless wind industry that is free to ignore collateral damage (i.e., us)? You might want to talk to real Vermonters, Anthony, turbine neighbors whose names are easy to find and whose lives have been severely affected by their proximity to turbine noise, vibration and shadow flicker.
• “Increasing mercury levels in fish”: Dang, nobody wants that. But while Anthony is bemoaning environmental poisoning that results from energy generation, I’d like for him to shed a few tears for the damage done by the rapacious and poisonous mining of the heavy metals needed for turbine construction. And I’d be real interested to hear how he decides which environmental degradation is an acceptable collateral cost, and which is not.
• “Emitting greenhouse gases”: Golly, that’s terrible. But what about the enormous fossil fuel expenditures required by raw material extraction and production, transportation, erection, maintenance, decommissioning, and disposal of wind turbines, as well as the use of fossil fuels as backup when the wind doesn’t blow?
• And of course, my personal favorite: “Changing forever the land, the ecosystem and the culture.” Couldn’t have said it better, Anthony. This is exactly what has happened and would continue to happen to Vermont communities with the arrival of so-called “wind farms.”

And by the way, not to carp, but Anthony’s closing is wrong. There is a big wind turbine proposed for Vermont, in Stamford, a 2.2 MW proposal by Norwich Solar Technologies. So we  wind-warriors can’t afford to rest on our laurels.

It would be real nice if the point of view Anthony Pollina is fronting for were truly “progressive” and not empty “green” cant.