Vineyard Wind to appeal permit denial

8
Richard Andre of Vineyard Power talks to selectmen about what's next for Vineyard Wind. — Brian Dowd

Vineyard Wind plans to appeal the Edgartown conservation commission’s decision to deny a permit that would allow two underground cables to run through the Muskeget Channel.

Vineyard Wind proposed to bury two 400-megawatt export cables one mile off Chappaquiddick from its proposed wind farm 15 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard to a site in Barnstable.

The cables had been approved by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission, but at the conservation commission hearings, fishermen pushed back strongly against them, saying that the cables might have detrimental marine effects.

Richard Andre, the president of Vineyard Power, informed selectmen of a vulnerability workshop over the winter that addressed impacts from climate change like flood surges, rising sea levels, and more intense storms. He said two members of the conservation commission attended that meeting. 

“In light of that as a priority for the town as a real threat, for them to vote against the project that’s actually going to be the first project to reverse climate change in the U.S. just seems there’s a disconnect between the select board appointees to the conservation commission and the conservation commission’s vote,” Andre said.

Edgartown residents Sandy Pimentel and Daryl King both expressed their support for Vineyard Wind after Andre spoke. 

Vineyard Wind will now appeal the conservation commission decision to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Office of Appeals and Dispute Resolution in Boston. The conservation commission is no longer allowed to put its own conditions on the project because it denied the permit.

“Our town of Edgartown loses the rights to put its own orders of condition on to the approval,” Andre said. “There was a real chance for Edgartown to step up and say, Well if there’s a concern about the cable or the fishermen … we stand out as somebody who’s not standing up to climate change.”

8 COMMENTS

  1. Richard Andre has no proof that this project will “reverse climate change.” He is using this narrative as a way to manipulate well intentioned people who may not know a lot about the power grid or the shortcomings of wind energy. He has a lot on the line here, as he arrived a decade ago on the island to start grooming islanders to accept this massive project by getting folks to buy into the concept of “Vineyard Wind.” This massive project, and our local acceptance of it, has always been the entire reason for “Vineyard Wind” to exist in the first place. The end game was always to get these massive projects approved with as few local roadblocks as possible.

    As far as wind energy reversing climate change – unfortunately, it won’t. There are many reasons why, which I’d be happy to go into in greater detail if anyone is interested. Once you start understanding it is a mirage, you start looking deeper into the core issues. Scary, yes, but necessary if we truly are to survive what lies ahead.

  2. How can the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection rule on any wind turbine project?
    MassDEP brokered the financing of Falmouth Wind Turbine # 2 with federal ARRA funds and all state and town officials were aware prior to the installation of Falmouth Wind II the second turbine that the turbines would generate 110 decibels of noise. MassDEP represents the interest of the wind industry not the citizens of Massachusetts

  3. HUGE EXPECTATIONS FROM AN EXPERIMENT .. I’D RATHER BE LAST AND KNOW that the solution to climate change had proven itself around the world .. which it has not .. EXCERPT: “In light of that as a priority for the town as a real threat, for them to vote against the project that’s actually going to be the FIRST PROJECT TO REVERSE CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE U.S. just seems there’s a disconnect between the select board appointees to the conservation commission and the conservation commission’s vote,” Andre said.” THIS IS SOMEWHAT “OLD” (2017), BUT, yet to be proven wrong: Report: Renewable Energy Is Bigger ‘Scam’ than Bernie Madoff and Enron http://bit.ly/2NoafAh via @BreitbartNews REMEMBER, THEY PLAY AND PROFIT$$$ AND YOU/WE PAY .. “One of the more pernicious side-effects of the enormous government subsidies for renewable energy, Conca found, is that they actually increase the cost of energy. This cost, however, is transferred from the energy consumer to the taxpayer, “and so goes unnoticed by most Americans,” he stated.” .. BEWARE, ALSO, THAT WHILE WE PONDER VINEYARD WIND PROJECT THIS IS GOING ON IN THE BACKGROUND (more they play we pay) EACH OF THESE BILLS FURTHERING SUPPORT OF THE WIND INDUSTRY AND DESTRUCTION OF OFFSHORE NATURAL RESOURCES WERE “MOVED FORWARD” ON 6/25/2019 AND 6/26/2019 .. THEY MUST BE STOPPED/THE WIND EXPERIMENT MUST BE STOPPED: (ink: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-116s1988is/pdf/BILLS-116s1988is.pdf)
    govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BI… ; …….. S.1988 A BILL To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the energy credit for offshore wind facilities.
    BILL 2: PTC EXTENSION/TAXBILL BILL 3473 Offshore Wind Incentives (Introduced 06/25/2019) (Markey et al) XXX

    • Why are tax credits okay for Big Oil? Who should foot the tab for their executive year-end bonuses? Hint: it’s not the investors.

Comments are closed.

Previous articleTime for VTA board to show up
Next articleSponsored: ACE MV Introduces Offshore Wind Power Technician Certificate Program