sell your ride
post your service
sell your stuff
post your class
browse all jobs
post a job
homes for sale
for sale by owner
post your listing
If you're looking for "I Spys," dating or LTRs, this is your scene.
If you're looking for full-on kink or group play, you'll get what you need here.
"It's not about me and my views," Ms Tierney said. "It's about public policy." So. Nothing new here. Ms Tierney should have called it "POLITICAL POLICY" not "public policy. Because the public has made it clear how they feel about the fracked gas pipeline and wind and it admittedly doesn't factor into the decision making process. I applaud the efforts to remove herself from the process...but this overlay of policy over everything else...including ANR's scientific analysis...has got to stop. Members of the Department of Public Service have instructed the public that the way to change the policy is to elect those that share your views. This is a blatant admission that science does not matter. Just doing what they're told. We have some impressive people in the administration. Let's let them do what they do well. Make decisions based on SCIENCE and FACTS and public opinion, not the whims of the politicians who are obviously swayed by corporate pressure.
My grandfather was a sexual abuser of children. So was my father. It's one of those things. It's part of growing up here in Vermont and not moving here from Connecticut.
Lifelong Vermonter here. Time to stop trapping. I would give my eye-teeth to see a bobcat on my property, to know that there's a family of bobcats up there on the hill. To think that there are people causing these animals or any animals to die tortuously for the sake of their fur makes me WEEP. You say you have a right. What about my right to see wildlife?
And if Lynx just duck in from Canada once in a while, what are two doing in Southern Vermont?
I don't think we should make it impossible for off-grid people who actually walk-the-walk to survive off the land. But I can't see any positives about trapping.
Great article about a great guy! Warren really does know every tree planted on every street in Burlington. We are so lucky to live in such a beautiful green town!
Warren is a great guy, mentor and leader. I had the pleasure of working for him and the tree dept. for five summers throughout my college years (I was the seasonal worker they couldn't get rid of). All together, It was a real eye opening experience, I had the opportunity to learn how to climb trees, run a wood chipper, engage with residents, inventory and plant trees throughout all of the neighborhoods in Burlington. I feel connected to Burlington in a way that most people cannot understand, having pruned trees on almost every street in Burlington. I imagine Warren and other city employees feel that connection too, they are the workings of the city and the people who make the parks what they are today.
It would be useful if there was ano icon link to share this article on linkedin. Many of my connections are in the horticulture industry.
Any discussion of wind turbines should include the context of sheer numbers that the industry wants to install. It's a lot like global warming as a future threat. It could become a "death of four million cuts" if people like Stanford's Mark Jacobson get their way. He sees turbine number limits because so much wind would be interrupted that efficiency would fall off, not because he cares about lost scenery or dead birds & bats. But he's a professor on environmental topics. It's insane.
Another stark example is Bill McKibben, who penned "The End Of Nature" and put a dead bird on the cover, but is now a wind turbine advocate. Were such people ever deep environmentalists, or was it just something to write about? They have become traitors to the physical landscape which many of us see as integral to the environment.
The Iberdrola PR guy says, "We don't normally encounter the kind of divisive, visceral tone and tenor that seems to be present."
Nonsense! The wind developers create the divisions, stoke them up, and exploit them. That’s the first lesson in the wind playbook.
And then Blittersdorf says, "It's an extremely small amount of people who are extremely vocal. It becomes a mob."
David, it's either small or it's a mob. Which is it?
I like to believe that most people when educated are capable of making sensible, fact-driven decisions. The bottom line is that the more people become truly educated on the "Windustry", the more resounding the opposition of this travesty is. David Blittersdorf simply doesn't tell the truth ... period.
Time to do it, Mr. Blittersdorf. Let's see a wind turbine proposal for Williston. The town plan invites it. Time for those who support wind energy to deal with what comes to communities when the wind developers come to town. Bring on those Champlain Valley and Chittenden County projects, in the population centers where the turbines can serve load instead of in the boonies far from load. Or this http://www.champlainwindpark.com/
I have not seen it reported anywhere but it is notable that in the primary, Peter Galbraith carried Windham, Grafton, Newark, Holland and Irasburg. When Vermonters get educated, the more they learn, the more opposed they become. That has been the story for more than a decade, going back to the Glebe Mountain Wind project. And now it's even worse because people learning about the issues go visit neighbors and learn that their complaints are completely ignored, or they are put through an absurd and endless paperwork process at the PSB that guarantees nothing ever gets resolved. Ask David Blittersdorf how much money he's spending on lawyers at the PSB dealing with the noise complaints from neighbors of Georgia Mountain Wind. This stonewalling of noise complaints is one of the most outrageous and frightening things Vermonters are faced with. There are problems nobody will deal with. Good luck selling wind energy to any Vermont community. There are few takers, and for those few it's all about the money. For me it's about being good neighbors. Wind turbines are bad neighbors.
"We, as a society, can't live into the future without renewables ... and wind is going to have to be in the mix."said David Blittersdorf.
Says you, Mr. Blittersdorf. Society can do just fine without wind in the mix, especially since wind turbines only last 15-20 years and require alot more carbon-footprint use than anyone even knows about, making them carbon-neutral at best.
I'm thinking you have more to gain than the average bear, so naturally, this is your line. One I just don't happen to believe. Or the people of Windham/Grafton.Or anyone who actually studies the true environmental COST of these projects.
I guess this full-seasoned reasoning makes me a member of the so-called "mob".
Industrial Wind Turbines in Vermont is nothing short of ecocide. Someone needs to better explain how removing ridge lines, forest habitat, destroying clean headwaters is green. The loss to endangered species, Golden and Bald Eagles, Bats and songbirds is not green. The mining, manufacturing, and distribution is not green. A 500' turbine requires an one acre concrete pad each,28 times, here in Grafton/Windham. Concrete accounts for roughly 5% of man carbon footprint. The only thing green about IWT is the tax subsides. 👣
David Blittersdorf's comments are not only offensive, but extremely inaccurate. He repeatedly shows that he doesn't care about Vermont's sense of community, nor the opinions of the residents of our State. He also is a PAC-supporting member of the "Big Wind" lobby.
The Doyle Poll from this past March's election showed that 90% of the 10,708 people who participated want communities to have more say in the siting of industrial energy projects. Only 4% said "no". This was one of the highest percentages for any Doyle Poll question EVER. These results were similar in every community, even those not near any proposed wind projects.
Wind projects are not "green". They blast and build roads on our ridges, destroy ecosystems, kill birds and wildlife, degrade habitat, create noise, and cause erosion that impacts water quality.
It's time our leaders started listening to the people they represent, and fully discredit Mr Blittersdorf as being both misinformed and an individual who intentionally distributes falsehoods.
"David Blittersdorf said the opposition is so "misleading" he doesn't think he could get a fair vote from community residents. "It's an extremely small amount of people who are extremely vocal" "It becomes a mob." " Seriously, David? belittling & trying to minimize your opposition. Entire town have voted no to the rape of their ridgelines, but you do not care. It's all for the public good, & if the money falls into your pocket, so much the better for you. Lets hope this doesn't end with torches & pitchforks, because Vermonters are fed up with the "policy makers" who throw you the money they pick out of our wallets.
The photo Ms. Jickling and Seven Days chose for this story is deceptive. The photo shows solar trackers, the type that are mounted on a single pole and turn to face the sun. Ranger Solar has at no point stated that they will install their 90,000+ panels on solar trackers. These mega-projects will be installed on fixed frameworks in very long and continuous rows.
Ranger Solar tells people at their community meetings that they are a Maine based company, but they are registered in Delaware, and are backed by Wall St. investors. Being that they are only a year old, how can anyone trust they will stick around to run these massive projects for the long haul, and not just flip them in the investment market as soon as they are up and running?
These solar projects will do absolutely nothing to help VT attain it's goal of 90% renewables. Make no mistake about it, a huge part of Ranger Solar's profit motive is the selling of the Renewable Energy Credits on the open market to the highest bidder, and that is something Vermont will not be able to compete against when states like CT And MA are bidding on the RECs.
This is the colonization of Vermont for CT utilities - cheaper to build massive solar projects on cheap and open VT farmland than on crowded, developed, expensive suburban land in CT! So CT utilities will get to claim they are producing "renewable energy" (in VT), while they continue to pollute the environment with their current power plants. The selling of RECs is a shell game, and VT gets screwed in the process.
"A 100-acre solar farm seems a little out of scale for Vermont..." Since when is an Industrial scale commercial solar production facility a "farm" or an "orchard"?
"The 95,000 solar panels needed for each $29 million Ranger project would cover an area up to the size of 75 football fields and could power 5,000 homes".
What a nightmare. Vermont is doomed.
If McKibben spent more time working on his turbine project and less time on his fossil fuel intensive revival tours, then Middlebury Gap would already be festooned with 500-footers. Then he could learn what turbine neighbors around the world already know. His neighbors would revile him for advocating the pointless destruction of their environment and the ruination of their homes and lives.
Go for it Bill!
Please do, Annette. I walked beside Bill on that march, but he seems to not understand that while he may favor huge wind turbines on the ridges near his house, many environmentalists who have been in the trenches for a long time...some longer than he...do not. The Doyle Poll this past March showed that 90% of Vermont voters want towns to have more say in project siting.
Vermonters identity is in those Green Mountains. For many, many generations. And those ridges have been here for millennia.
Big Wind doesn't make sense for much of Vermont, as it does not produce power when we need it the most...on hot, sunny, typically calm days. And there are serious environmental consequences for these massively tall wind towers, such as blasting roads on our ridges, killing of birds and wildlife, permanently destroyed habitat, degraded ecosystems, water runoff, and noise from their operation. Not to mention the profit largely going to out-of-State interests, rather than local Vermonters.
Overconsumption, wasteful practices, inefficient transportation, and a lack of conservation are the real elephants in the room. Bill would be wise to focus on this, rather than alienating the dedicated folks who walk-the-talk by having a small energy footprint and care about our environment, wildlife, water quality, and the mountain ridges that have been here most likely before any humans even walked the Earth.
Bill McKibben vs. Annette Smith vs. Peter Shumlin. Who's the most self-important person in the state? There's not enough room in tiny Vermont for all of these ginormous egos, for all of these self-appointed saviors of Vermont. How about if you ALL leave?
I was not aware that Seven Days accepted Commentaries. Why is one person getting special treatment? Can I submit a response of equal length that will be published?