The PSC announced on Thursday it had approved both the US Wind, Inc. proposal, which will put 62 turbines as close as 12-17 miles from the coast of the resort in its first phase, and Deepwater Wind’s Skipjack project, which is considerably smaller in scale at 15 turbines as close as 17-21 miles off the coast.
The thinking all along was the PSC would pick one or the other, but Councilman Tony DeLuca last week warned his colleagues the regulatory agency could choose to approve both and that scenario played out on Thursday. The timing was also surprising because it has been said for weeks the decision would be made by May 17 and the final approvals were handed down on Thursday almost a full week earlier.
The PSC decision comes just a week after the Mayor and Council fired off another strongly worded letter to the regulatory agency expressing a desire to have the offshore turbines sited at least 26 miles off the coast, or a distance determined to far enough out to have a zero visual impact from the shoreline.
More
24 comments:
Question, how will this effect commercial fishing and clamming because in New Jersey there is a trans atlantic cable and there is no clamming allowed within 5 miles of either side of that cable. That is a 10 mile wide stretch of ocean where no clamming is allowed and it is patrolled and your boat can be seized if you are caught working in that area. I think commercial fishermen and clammers should be very concerned about that and I am sure they are.
So the OC whiners are going to have to get their binoculars out so that they can complain about the visual pollution. At least there won't be oil rigs where there are windmills. Maybe they'll put them closer to shore. That'll teach them crybabies who think they own the ocean (and the view).
1:05 You keep citing that as a reason to have the windmills. Having to look at both sucks. When is the last time an oil rig has been erected where it can be seen from shore? Crybabies/whiners?.....Sorry, I don't want to look at ugliness thrown on beauty. Put them in another location.
Didn't have enough rich people to complain I guess.All of us poor people have no say.
Settle down folks. It's not about YOU. It's the MONEY! Next time vote!
How many square miles will no longer be accessible to recreational fisherman? Ridiculous. Look at the number of eagles killed by windmills in the West. Relatively speaking, little payoff is received. Except for the politicians that is.
Bull crap. We don't want that garage in the ocean
Plenty of visual pollution on the boardwalk and streets of OC.
You're gonna have to have pretty good eyesight to spot white turbines 17-21 miles away from shore. Especially with the typical high humidity summer haze on the ocean. Probably only noticeable on the crispest of low humidity winter days.
Windmills are the rooftop TV antennas of the 21st Century...pretty much a blight on the horizon.
I wonder why - what the cost would be - per mile, to move them further out?
One other thought: How about putting them in front of all those mega-rich people's houses along the private beach area of the Lower Delaware Shore?
Then you would just aggravate about 200 homeowners instead of aggravating millions of visitors that come to the free beach of Ocean City.
They don't like it? Then open your damn beach to the public!
Stupid is as stupid does.
Windmills don't work and offshore windmills will certainly not work.
Do they generate electricity? Sure, but at what cost?
They will never break even over their lifetime.
May 11, 2017 at 1:29 PM:
I don't know when the rigs were put there, but they are clearly visible from shore out in California. Maybe you should travel more.
May 11, 2017 at 1:29 PM:
All of OC is "ugliness thrown on beauty" of a pristine barrier island. All for money. No different than windmills, or oil rigs. What's your point? If you live on the island, leave and take your ugliness with you.
2:18. I don't think anybody wants a "garage" in the ocean. 🤣🤣🤣
1:29 - So we took the beauty of the island beach and destroyed with buildings, roads, and the trash from visitors (some of the visitors are trash)!! And, someone is now worried about the view from the beach. This is some funny stuff.
"Call some place paradise,kiss it goodbye". The Eagles
3:41 and 3:57. Ahhhh the real ugliness comes out.....environmentalists.
3:37. I actually travel a lot and lived in San Diego for years. Since obviously you don't know the answer it was the 70's. stop your stupid scare tactics that if we don't accept inefficient windmills that we will have to accept oil rigs. Nonsense.
Lots of European countries getting significant portions of their energy from wind. Like some have said. Follow the money. If they weren't making money they wouldn't be building them. As for government subsidies, there are few industries that get more subsidies than the oil and gas industry.
For those of you that like "Feel good" laws and government investments.
Here's an article from Europe about windmills.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05/wind-turbines-are-neither-clean-nor-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/#
James Mathias and his liberal legislature buddies have sacrificed Maryland's Ocean front. How does it feel Ocean City to be betrayed by your own?
Wind and solar are not making money...they are taking taxpayer money. And when the costs can no longer be hidden, electricity rates increase. And not by a little, by a lot. Germans pay 3 times more than we pay. Following the money is good advice because it goes to out of state developers and politicians while local residents pay for transmission to ship this power to other areas. PSC Case #9393 is a good example. Please read the testimony of Dwight Ethridge.
Its not necessarily about cost and what's cheapest. Its about finding ways to create energy for future generations. Coal and oil won't be around forever, and projects like this evovle into other ways to produce energy as technology advances. Don't be so narrow minded.
3:16,then why did all the rich at Martha's vineyard get them canned?
Post a Comment