Greenpeace Support's Cape Wind, America's First Offshore Wind Farm

Orwellian Group the “Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound”

We all know that social change never comes easy and a clean energy revolution is no exception. The wind farm proposed for Nantucket Sound has had some well-funded opposition. The main group opposing the wind farm is the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound (Alliance). This cleverly named alliance is "protecting" Nantucket Sound from clean energy. This wind farm project will provide 74 percent of Cape Cod's energy needs with clean and safe wind power. It could dramatically reduce the need for the Cape's current oil and gas burning power plant, which caused a major oil spill in Buzzard's Bay in 2003, dumping 100,000 gallons of oil into the water. We say to the Alliance, it's about the vision for a clean energy future, not the view.

The Alliance, funded in large part by owners of property overlooking the sound, is worried that the turbines will scar the scenic view from its coastal homes. These landowners consider wind farms to be an eyesore, while others see them as beautiful structures and a symbol of the future survival of this planet.

The Alliance, also known as `Save Our Sound', was formed in 2001 to oppose the Cape Wind project. Since then they have grown to a well-funded group that has waged an aggressive marketing and lobbying effort against the wind farm project.

In its four years of existence, the Alliance has come under intense review and criticism from environmental and health organizations and the news media for engaging in repeated instances of spreading false and misleading information about the Cape Wind proposal. Questions have been raised about the backgrounds of key-players in the organization that claims its long-term goal is the protection of Nantucket Sound.

Some Leadership of the Alliance

A few weeks after the Cape Wind proposal was announced in 2001, Wayne Kurker, the owner of Hyannis Marina, started the Alliance. The stated purpose of the Alliance was, and is, to stop Cape Wind and to prevent wind turbines from being located in Nantucket Sound. Mr. Kurker has been on the receiving end of criticism from members of the community over the years about his marina expansion plans and over his marina buildings giving the Hyannis Inner Harbor an industrial look. Months after forming the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, Mr. Kurker was advocating for high-speed cigarette boat racing to occur in Nantucket Sound.

As the Alliance grew in 2002 from an active fundraising campaign, it obtained an office, hired several full-time staff and announced the selection of a CEO, Douglas Yearley. Mr. Yearley had retired to a large home overlooking Nantucket Sound after a long career at Phelps Dodge, an international copper and uranium mining company that under his watch as CEO was rated as the biggest polluter in Arizona by the Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Yearley's tenure at Phelps Dodge was also recognized by Mother Jones Magazine

http://www.motherjones.com/news/special_reports/1995/07/piggies.html

in their 1995 article, “10 Little Piggies. Forget welfare moms and the unemployed. No one feeds at the public trough like these ten.”

In 2005 the Cape Cod Times http://www.capecodonline.com/special/windfarm/kochitxs7.htm

reported that the Alliance had selected Bill Koch as their new Co-Chairman, a part-time Cape resident who owns a multi-million dollar property in Osterville overlooking Nantucket Sound. In the article, Mr. Koch likened the appeal of wind turbines to exotic dancers at a strip club. A billionaire who made much of his fortune in the coal and oil industries, Mr. Koch spoke about Cape Wind in a recent interview, ''So what? I'm interested in my view and the value of my property on the Cape,'' he said. ''That's just as valid as Jim Gordon being interested in his own pocketbook. ''I freely admit I don't want to look at (the turbines).''

Although Mr. Koch began his energy business in Massachusetts, he moved his company to Florida for tax reasons. As reported in a St. Petersburg 2003 article entitled, “Big boys profit on mom-and-pops tax break, Many of Florida's largest private companies use tax exemptions created for small businesses, bypassing any corporate income tax”.

It seems Mr. Koch doesn't seem to object to energy projects in somebody else's back yard, http://www.sptimes.com/2003/12/28/State/Big_boys_profit_on_mo.shtml

The Alliance is repeatedly disseminates false and misleading information

Below outlines various incidents when the Alliance acted unethically or release misleading and false information about the wind farm.

In November, 2004, although not mentioning the Alliance by name, several environmental organizations issued a fact sheet to dispel misinformation being circulated by the Alliance about the Cape Wind Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The Alliance was conducting an intense paid advertising campaign in an effort to discredit the largely favorable Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The Conservation Law Foundation press release noted, “In response to an irresponsible misinformation campaign conducted by Cape Wind opponents, Conservation Law Foundation and other environmental advocacy groups are pushing to dispel myths about the project for citizens of the Cape and all of Southeast New England who stand to benefit greatly from Cape Wind through cleaner air and reduced dependence on foreign oil.”

http://www.clf.org/general/internal.asp?id=482

A Very Well-Funded Alliance

Although private affairs, there have been some newspaper reports of Alliance fundraisers held at posh country, golf, and yacht clubs on Cape Cod and Nantucket. The Cape Cod Times article Donors give wind farm foe big boost published on November 16, 2005 reported that the Alliance raised nearly $4.7 million in contributions in calendar year 2004, almost tripling the amount raised the year before. During a 12-month span the Alliance spent $2.68 million, according to tax returns and still ended 2004 with nearly $2 million in the bank. Of 5,000 contributions in 2002, 2003 and 2004, the Alliance says more than 86 percent were less than $500. But of the $4.67 million raised in 2004, $2.9 million came from 15 individuals.

.

The Alliance's funds have been spent on lawyers, public relations, direct mail, paid advertising, an office and paid staff, and to finance further fundraising. The Alliance has engaged in extensive radio, TV and print advertising in 2002 - 2004 in the Cape Cod and New England media markets and the Alliance sent several fundraising solicitation direct mail pieces to homes and businesses on Cape Cod.

The Alliance attempts to look `Green'

In December 2002, the Toxics Action Center in New England took the unusual move of awarding the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound with one of their Dirty Dozen Awards, see Barnstable Patriot article entitled Megawatts V. Megayachts, 12/6/02, http://www.barnstablepatriot.com/12-06-02-news/wind.html. Dirty dozen awards are usually given to industries that threaten public health by polluting our air and waterways.

In the Boston Herald article, Wind farm opponents blasted by `greens' on July 12, 2004, the Toxics Action Center stated, “The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound is not one of those industries, but it might as well be. This so-called environmental Alliance is attacking this [Cape Wind] innovative proposal with surprising and questionable zeal…they are using mistruths and misrepresentations to try and stop and block the regulatory process for the wind farm.”

In August, 2003 the Alliance experienced an embarrassing setback when Walter Cronkite publicly announced that he has asked the Alliance to stop using him in their advertisements and that Cronkite was withdrawing his opposition to Cape Wind after he learned that some of the information they had provided him was misleading.

In 2005 the Alliance has sought to recast its image as a credible environmental organization. They efforts paid off in the beginning of 2005 when they were recognized by the Waterkeeper Alliance as the “Nantucket Soundkeeper”. An August 7, 2005 Cape Times article reported, this recognition came despite opposition from some Soundkeeper members and other environmental organizations. http://www.capecodonline.com/special/windfarm/allianceexpands7.htm

The Waterkeeper Alliance has been a tireless advocate of our nation's waterways and a leader in pressing for stronger pollution regulations to protect communities and ecosystems across the continent. They actively fight against the burning of dirty fossil fuels that spew toxins into our air and water.

So as a Waterkeeper member, if the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound is concerned about the future of the Cape's waterways, why does it oppose a clean renewable-energy solution in their backyard?

Right Project, Right Place, Right Time

Greenpeace has 30 years history defending the world's oceans. We would be the first organization to oppose this proposal if we felt that it posed long-term threats to the marine ecosystem of Nantucket Sound. We agree Nantucket Sound is a beautiful place that is heavily used by tourists, locals, part-time residents, fisherpeople, and commercial interests. We support offshore wind in Nantucket Sound because we see it as an important step in our fight for renewable energy solutions to global warming.

The Global Warming crisis caused by our dependence on dirty fossil fuels is irreversibly harming communities across the globe, causing sea level rise, extreme weather, drought, and costing millions of dollars. We are seeing effects of global warming on Cape Cod; some examples are more severe storms, increased red tides, and beach erosion due to sea level rise. Offshore wind has been effective in Europe and Scandinavia for ten years. In fact, Denmark generates more than twenty percent of its energy from clean renewable offshore wind. Now is the time to move Massachusetts and the United States towards a clean energy future. It is the right project, in the right place, at the right time.