Winds of Change

There are many trade-offs in the ongoing process of making changes to better the environment in this country. More efficient cars rarely have as much horsepower as less efficient ones, organic foods are more expensive than their non-organic counterparts, and so on. These compromises must be weighed, but when the environmental effects are profound and many of the others are petty, changes must take place. To bring this balance to the furthest end of the spectrum, we have an obligation to make a move that is both beneficial for the environement and for local communities. The Cape Wind project would be that sort of win-win situation.

The Cape Wind project has proposed to build 130 wind turbines in Nantucket Sound, the body of water south of the mainland of Cape Cod, bordered by Martha’s Vineyard to the west and Nantucket to the Southeast. When fully running, this project would meet three quarters of the electricity needs of Cape Cod and the islands. Although it boasts numerous benefits to the Cape and to Massachusetts as a whole, it has been met by protests, petitions, and complaints at all stages of its development.

Objections to this project are comprised of shortsighted and selfish views that epitomize the lack of understanding of the immensity and the importance of global warming. The Cape Wind Project would ameliorate many environmental and economic problems, according to every official estimate that has been made. The most substantial of these estimates is the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which was compiled by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. (EIS’s are required for any type of major project that will affect the environment.)

The 3,800-page document compiled by the Corps found that Cape Cod’s dependence on fossil fuels, foreign oil, and natural gas would all be reduced by the Cape Wind project. Additionally, the price of electricity in any market spot in New England would drop, and the Cape Cod economy would benefit from an influx of new and related projects. This study went on to research and analyze other areas of life on the Cape that this project might affect, and it found that there would most likely be no harmful effects on Cape Cod real estate or tourism, maintaining these foundations of the local economy.

The residents of Cape Cod are largely misguided in terms of their ideas for restoring the environment and their attitudes toward a sustainable lifestyle. Throughout the discussions of this project, many politicians and public departments have advocated that Cape Cod citizens act individually to lower their own use of electricity and be more environmentally friendly while they wait for the project to come to fruition.

These ideas, however, should not be specific to this location or this historical moment; environmental consciousness should be practiced regardless of financial or temporal details. The overall mindset of the American consumer—including Cape Cod residents—must be adjusted to a modern and earth-preservation based approach, and these large-scale projects will help to draw attention to environmental issues. Hopefully, they will also expedite the process of changing individuals’ approaches to energy.

The pettiest of all of the complaints about the Cape Wind project is that some of the ocean views that Cape Cod has to offer will be tainted by this wind farm. While the shores and beaches of Cape Cod are some of the most beautiful the state boasts, informed citizens must see the beauty in a different light. We must see the slowly rolling waves as a gift from nature that we would be wasting if left alone. Much like a sailor cannot stay inside when the whitecaps appear, a citizen concerned about the energy crisis should not be able to see the potential energy in those waves and not harness it. The bigger picture of the global warming crisis needs to take priority. When we save some of our natural wonders today, we are sacrificing all of nature for the future.



Marcel E. Moran ’11, a Crimson editorial editor, lives in Pennypacker Hall.