Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Contact Us | Home RSS

Don Quixote, Revisted

October 17, 2017
Emmetsburg News

Editor's Note: The?Letter to the Editor "Don Quixote, Revisted" will run in two parts due to length. Please read part two in Thursday's The Democrat.

The adverse impacts of wind turbines on receptors, or those residents in effected areas, are very complex. These impacts involve issues of vision, health, farmland, wildlife, massive subsidies, and more. Thus, I find it quiet disturbing that the proponents of these turbines, namely, Invenergy, county officials, and various supporters, have resorted to such cheap and loutish tactics as were demonstrated at the public hearing on Oct 5. Obviously, Invenergy organized a "rent-a-mob" at the country club by providing a large group of people with a free meal and numerous talking points. I wonder if they gave them free koozies and ball caps as well. The effort was obviously an attempt to overwhelm and intimidate the people merely trying to protect their health, homes, and farms from the ill effects of these wind turbines. If I had known this is the way serious business is conducted in Palo Alto County, I would have invited my buddies over for a free cold one and a hotdog so I could have responded with a suds drinking mob of my own. Further, the meeting was structured in a biased manner designed to give the paid Invenergy, "experts"(promoters) the final word by allowing them to issue a rebuttal to each point voiced by the receptors(affected residents). For example, when the topic of needing permission from the Iowa Utilities Board was raised, an Invenergy spokesman proclaimed "we don't need it". Well, I guess that supposedly settles that. When the issue of adverse health caused by noise and infrasound was raised, they simply stated "there are none". I guess that supposedly settles that.


Stephen Mathis, PhD Economics

Professor Emeritus Shippensburg University




I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web