| |
Main
Date: 20 Oct 2006 18:34:45
From: Joe Bergeron
Subject: Cherry Springs
|
Here's a newspaper article about Cherry Springs State Park in PA, a
dark sky preserve and site of two annual star parties:
http://tinyurl.com/ybcj4h
--
Joe Bergeron
www.joebergeron.com
|
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 01:41:47
From: Dave Mitsky
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
Joe Bergeron wrote:
> Here's a newspaper article about Cherry Springs State Park in PA, a
> dark sky preserve and site of two annual star parties:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ybcj4h
>
> --
> Joe Bergeron
>
> www.joebergeron.com
Joe,
It's rather surprising how often this AP story, which first appeared
after the Cherry Springs Star Party back in June, has been resurfacing
of late.
Unfortunately, the real news concerning CSSP is the proposed "wind
farm" that may put the dark skies of "the Pennsylvania Wilds" in
jeopardy.
http://www.bradfordera.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17332245&BRD=52&PAG=461&dept_id=569780&rfi=6
Dave Mitsky
|
| | |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 15:20:34
From: George Normandin
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
"Dave Mitsky" < > wrote
...
> ...........
> Unfortunately, the real news concerning CSSP is the proposed "wind
> farm" that may put the dark skies of "the Pennsylvania Wilds" in
> jeopardy.
>
>
http://www.bradfordera.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17332245&BRD=52&PAG=461&dept_id=569780&rfi=6
>
Dave,
Gee I've never seen the wind farm we have in central NY at night, but the
windmills are rather innocuous looking during the day. The only "bad" things
I've heard about them is "noise", "they're ugly", "they might chop up
birds", and "only those 'city folks' are making any money on this, so I
don't want them". That's all balanced by the reduction in air pollution,
which brings haze and the resultant degradation in astronomical observations
(and astronomer's breathing), and the reduction in power bills. A tall
structure will certainly need aviation hazard lights, but that would have
little or no impact on light pollution. What am I missing? Give the fact
that the population is growing and we're going to generate more electricity,
which is worse: windmills or coal plants?
BTW, there is also a wind farm proposal for Gore Mt. in the central
Adirondacks, but that already has light problems from the ski center, so the
local opposition is mostly on "ugly" and "where's my $$ in this" grounds.
George N
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Oct 2006 15:32:08
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
On Sat, 21 2006 15:20:34 GMT, "George Normandin"
<georgepn@worldnet.att.net > wrote:
>A tall
>structure will certainly need aviation hazard lights, but that would have
>little or no impact on light pollution. What am I missing?
Aviation hazard lights can be a disaster for nearby observing. White
strobes are particularly bad, but both strobes and red blinkers can make
imaging difficult and visual observing unpleasant.
There's no reason that hazard lights couldn't be shielded in a way that
would significantly reduce their impact from the ground, but since these
are federally mandated, I think there's very little opportunity for
negotiation. Cherry Springs might be an exception to this, given that it
is a state park with a mandate to preserve dark skies. But most folks
are just out of luck if a tall tower of any kind goes in near an
observing site (let alone an entire wind farm!)
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 03:02:51
From: Dave Mitsky
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
Dave Mitsky wrote:
Edit
> George,
>
> I had always assumed that wind farms were a good thing environmentally
> speaking but I've found out that may be an unwarranted assumption.
>
> http://www.protectpendleton.com/nbw_index.htm
>
> http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050420/ai_n14591193
>
> http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=71
>
> Dave Mitsky
Here are a few more links on the con side of the issue.
http://www.fairwind.org.uk/
http://www.protectruralscotland.com/
http://www.countryguardian.net/
Dave Mitsky
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 20:19:35
From: George Normandin
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
"Dave Mitsky" < > wrote
> >
> > I had always assumed that wind farms were a good thing environmentally
> > speaking but I've found out that may be an unwarranted
assumption.............
Dave,
Well I'm certainly not a "proponent" of wind farms, but all of the websites
you mention seem primarily motivated by the "there're ugly and I don't want
them messing up my beautiful views" argument. I would be concerned by the
possible 'bird chopping' if there is evendence to prove it, but so far I've
not seen any real evendence, just supposition. Next time I drive by the wind
farm that is south of Utica NY I'll have to take a look on the ground for
chopped up birds. As far as the hidden economic costs: I'm not sure how
power economics works in PA, but here in New York, consumers buy their power
from the supplier of choice, and each supplier must disclose the source of
their power. Only one supplier in my area lists wind power, it's only 2% of
their total, and I don't use them because they charge too much. From the
point of view of astronomy and particularly Cherry Springs, the question is
more light pollution and how much. I would bet that the State's dark sky
designation for the park could keep the windmills at least a few miles away.
Here in south central New York the location of Kopernik Observatory (light
pollution) was the deciding factor for NYS refusing permission for gas well
drilling in a state forest two miles away.
George N
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 02:55:38
From: Dave Mitsky
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
George Normandin wrote:
Edit
> Dave,
>
> Gee I've never seen the wind farm we have in central NY at night, but the
> windmills are rather innocuous looking during the day. The only "bad" things
> I've heard about them is "noise", "they're ugly", "they might chop up
> birds", and "only those 'city folks' are making any money on this, so I
> don't want them". That's all balanced by the reduction in air pollution,
> which brings haze and the resultant degradation in astronomical observations
> (and astronomer's breathing), and the reduction in power bills. A tall
> structure will certainly need aviation hazard lights, but that would have
> little or no impact on light pollution. What am I missing? Give the fact
> that the population is growing and we're going to generate more electricity,
> which is worse: windmills or coal plants?
>
> BTW, there is also a wind farm proposal for Gore Mt. in the central
> Adirondacks, but that already has light problems from the ski center, so the
> local opposition is mostly on "ugly" and "where's my $$ in this" grounds.
>
> George N
George,
I had always assumed that wind farms were a good thing environmentally
speaking but I've found out that may be an unwarranted assumption.
http://www.protectpendleton.com/nbw_index.htm
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050420/ai_n14591193
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=71
Dave Mitsky
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 02:54:29
From: Dave Mitsky
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
George Normandin wrote:
Edit
> Dave,
>
> Gee I've never seen the wind farm we have in central NY at night, but the
> windmills are rather innocuous looking during the day. The only "bad" things
> I've heard about them is "noise", "they're ugly", "they might chop up
> birds", and "only those 'city folks' are making any money on this, so I
> don't want them". That's all balanced by the reduction in air pollution,
> which brings haze and the resultant degradation in astronomical observations
> (and astronomer's breathing), and the reduction in power bills. A tall
> structure will certainly need aviation hazard lights, but that would have
> little or no impact on light pollution. What am I missing? Give the fact
> that the population is growing and we're going to generate more electricity,
> which is worse: windmills or coal plants?
>
> BTW, there is also a wind farm proposal for Gore Mt. in the central
> Adirondacks, but that already has light problems from the ski center, so the
> local opposition is mostly on "ugly" and "where's my $$ in this" grounds.
>
> George N
George,
I had always assumed that wind farms were a good thing environmentally
speaking but I've found out that may be an unwarranted assumption.
http://www.protectpendleton.com/nbw_index.htm
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050420/ai_n14591193
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=71
Dave Mitsky
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2006 02:30:57
From: Dave Mitsky
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
George Normandin wrote:
Edit
> Dave,
>
> Gee I've never seen the wind farm we have in central NY at night, but the
> windmills are rather innocuous looking during the day. The only "bad" things
> I've heard about them is "noise", "they're ugly", "they might chop up
> birds", and "only those 'city folks' are making any money on this, so I
> don't want them". That's all balanced by the reduction in air pollution,
> which brings haze and the resultant degradation in astronomical observations
> (and astronomer's breathing), and the reduction in power bills. A tall
> structure will certainly need aviation hazard lights, but that would have
> little or no impact on light pollution. What am I missing? Give the fact
> that the population is growing and we're going to generate more electricity,
> which is worse: windmills or coal plants?
>
> BTW, there is also a wind farm proposal for Gore Mt. in the central
> Adirondacks, but that already has light problems from the ski center, so the
> local opposition is mostly on "ugly" and "where's my $$ in this" grounds.
>
> George N
George,
I really didn't know very much about wind farms until a short time ago.
I had always assumed they were a good thing environentally speaking
but I've found out that that was an unwarranted assumption.
http://www.protectpendleton.com/nbw_index.htm
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20050420/ai_n14591193
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=71
Dave Mitsky
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2006 05:17:32
From: Dave Mitsky
Subject: Re: Cherry Springs
|
George Normandin wrote:
> "Dave Mitsky" <> wrote
>
> > >
> > > I had always assumed that wind farms were a good thing environmentally
> > > speaking but I've found out that may be an unwarranted
> assumption.............
>
> Dave,
>
> Well I'm certainly not a "proponent" of wind farms, but all of the websites
> you mention seem primarily motivated by the "there're ugly and I don't want
> them messing up my beautiful views" argument. I would be concerned by the
> possible 'bird chopping' if there is evendence to prove it, but so far I've
> not seen any real evendence, just supposition. Next time I drive by the wind
> farm that is south of Utica NY I'll have to take a look on the ground for
> chopped up birds. As far as the hidden economic costs: I'm not sure how
> power economics works in PA, but here in New York, consumers buy their power
> from the supplier of choice, and each supplier must disclose the source of
> their power. Only one supplier in my area lists wind power, it's only 2% of
> their total, and I don't use them because they charge too much. From the
> point of view of astronomy and particularly Cherry Springs, the question is
> more light pollution and how much. I would bet that the State's dark sky
> designation for the park could keep the windmills at least a few miles away.
> Here in south central New York the location of Kopernik Observatory (light
> pollution) was the deciding factor for NYS refusing permission for gas well
> drilling in a state forest two miles away.
>
> George N
George,
If you read more deeply on the economics and the realities of power
generation from wind farms, the picture is not a very rosy one. Wind
turbine power does not seem to make economic sense, except for a very
select few. Please have a look at what a Republican Congressman, no
less, has to say about wind energy -
http://www.stopillwind.org/lowerlevel.php?content=GoodAndBad
The current governor of Pennsylvania is pushing wind power so I am not
very sanguine about the possible outcome of this situation.
Dave Mitsky
|
|
