MindMover
Lose wind farm or lose my hotel, warns Donald Trump
US TYCOON Donald Trump will warn the Scottish Parliament this week that his plans to build a luxury hotel alongside his Aberdeenshire golf course will be axed if ministers back a series of “insane†wind turbines nearby.
The billionaire property developer will appear at Holyrood on Wednesday to attack the Scottish Government’s renewable energy proposals, accusing Alex Salmond of “destroying†the country’s natural heritage.
His championship golf course, ten miles north of Aberdeen, is scheduled to open as planned in July, but the entrepreneur’s senior representative said additional plans for a major hotel and housing development could not “co-exist†with an offshore wind farm planned for the coastal waters nearby.
George Sorial, vice president of The Trump Organisation, said: “If there is an industrial power plant on the shore line, the concept of having a luxury hotel and resort is simply incompatible. The two can’t co-exist.â€
Sorial’s comments throw fresh doubt on the 500-hectare development, along with the job hopes of the thousands of workers which the Trump Organisation claims will be needed to build the entire project.
Not that anyone expects a DUmmy to be consistent, but what the hell... MichaelMcGuire
8. Trump’s lies about the wind turbines
Response to MindMover (Original post)
Darth_Kitten
10. Who the hell is this loser to dictate to Scotland?
View profile
What a smug, empty-headed son of a bitch.
lunatica
18. The word pig pops into my mind every time I see his name now
He's really a revolting human being.
Response to MindMover (Original post)
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 10:46 AM
jwirr
20. I hope the Scots tell him where to go. They have many fine hotels already.
Response to MindMover (Original post)
Taylor Smite
24. Here is what would happen if this was in the US
1. Fox News and talk radio would call Trump a champion of the people.
2. The municipality would publicly apologize and immediately cancel the project and pull all funding from the program.
3. The municipality would offer Trumps hotel an indefinite tax holiday.
4. The municipality would promise Trump that all labor would be welfare-to-work and minimum wage would be fair.
5. The schools in the area fail per lack of tax dollars. People become poorer and must rely on food pantries.
6. Trump is considered a successful businessman who should be celebrated.
Sounds like that wind farm is crucial to mankind. Except, of course, when you have the NERVE to put that thing near a KENNEDY:
dos pelos
Sun Jan-25-09 02:55 PM
Original message
Sen. Ted Kennedy,(hypocrite),says...no wind farm off Martha's Vineyard
Here is an excellent,critical review of Sen. Kennedy's hypocrisy regarding " green" energy policy.
He's all for it...just so it doesn't spoil his view and mar his yachting.Ir's from the Wall Street Journal;
JANUARY 24, 2009
Blowhards
The fabulous debate over wind power on Nantucket Sound.
For all the hype about the Bush Administration's oil-and-gas energy bias, one of its last official acts was to give the go-ahead to what could be America's first offshore wind farm -- thus enraging more than a few self-deputized environmentalists. Such are the ironies of the wilderness of mirrors known as the Cape Wind project.
For the last seven years and counting, the green entrepreneur Jim Gordon has been trying to build a fleet of wind turbines in federal waters near the upscale seascapes of Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. The site seemed ideal, given the stiff ocean breezes and the eco-friendly politics in Massachusetts. The company says its 130 towers could meet 75% of the region's electricity needs and reduce carbon emissions by some 734,000 tons every year.
The sort of people who can afford to use "summer" as a verb are in favor of all that. Completely in favor, really. But they did want to raise one quibble. Unfortunately, the wind farm would create "visual pollution" in Nantucket Sound, particularly the parts within sight of their beach front vacation homes.
Mr. Gordon went ahead anyway, and the opposition rose to gale force. Supposedly the wind farm will lead to everything from the disruption of seabird habitats to "desecrating ancient American Native burial sites," in the words of Glenn Wattley, the head of an anti wind outfit funded by the likes of Bunny Mellon. But what really upsets these well-to-do Don Quixotes is the thought of looking at windmills that would appear about as tall on the horizon as the thumbnail at the end of your outstretched arm.
Then there is the political saga, with the Kennedy family as the Hyannis Port Sopranos, supplying the muscle. While Ted Kennedy was castigating President Bush for destroying the environment, the Senator was working furiously behind the Congressional scenes to kill Cape Wind. He even had the inspiration of getting former GOP colleague Ted Stevens of Alaska to slip wording into a spending bill that would have handed a veto to then-Governor Mitt Romney, another aesthetically minded opponent. Robert Kennedy Jr., a Time magazine "hero of the planet," tried to get the Sound designated as a national marine sanctuary to bar development.
Incredibly enough, this political sabotage has so far failed. And last week the Interior Department issued its long-awaited regulatory study, mostly finding "negligible" environmental impact -- apart from a "moderate" impact on the scenery. If the Obama Administration signs off, construction could begin next year.
Mr. Kennedy blustered that the report was rushed out: amusing, considering it runs to 2,800 pages. Bill Delahunt, the windy Cape Democrat, also denounced the action as "a $2 billion project that depends on significant taxpayer subsidies while potentially doubling power costs for the region."
Good to see the Congressman now recognizes the limitations of green tech, such as its tendency to boost consumer electricity prices -- but his makeover as taxpayer champion is a bit belated. Green energy has been on the subsidy take for years, including in 2005 when Mr. Delahunt was calling for "an Apollo project for alternative energy sources, for hybrid engines, for bio diesel, for wind and solar and everything else." The reality is that all such projects are only commercially viable because of political patronage.
Tufts economist Gilbert Metcalf ran the numbers and found that the effective tax rate for wind is minus-163.8%. In other words, every dollar a wind firm spends is subsidized to the tune of 64 cents from the government. The Energy Information Administration estimates that wind receives $23.37 in government benefits per megawatt hour -- compared to, say, 44 cents for coal. Despite these taxpayer crutches, wind only provides a little under 1% of U.S. net electric generation.
We'd prefer an energy policy that allows markets to shape the sources that predominate -- which would almost certainly put Cape Wind out of business. But President Obama seems determined to unload even more subsidies on green developers as he seeks to boost renewables to 10% of the U.S. electricity mix by the end of his first term and 25% by 2025; their share today is about 9% (5.8% of which is hydropower).
We wouldn't be surprised to see the President's green future wrestled to the ground by the likes of Mr. Delahunt, the Kennedy's and other anticarbon Democrats. Environmentalists love the idea of milking Mother Nature for power, but they hate the hardware needed to make it work: huge windmills, acres of solar panels, high-voltage transmission lines to connect them to the places where people live. Of course, they still totally, absolutely, wholeheartedly support green energy -- as long as it gets built where someone else goes yachting.
Why those bad old WIND FARMS! CreekDog
Sun Jan-25-09 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Protecting the environment also includes protecting the beauty and aesthetics of a place
Edited on Sun Jan-25-09 03:12 PM by CreekDog
you can't erect a bank of windmills on a flat place like Martha's Vineyard without harming those things.
further, what will it do to the birds that fly through there?
you've got a lot of nerve calling Ted Kennedy a hypocrite.
dkf
Sun Jan-25-09 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
5. Low vibration noise from Windfarms are causing health problems.
I'm glad he is fighting this. I don't find it hypocritical at all.
liberalmuse Sun Jan-25-09 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
12. Good for him!
Wind energy is good if you have acres of land that aren't being used for anything (like old landfills), but otherwise, it isn't very efficient. I certainly would not call someone a 'hypocrite' for not wanting to put a bunch of windmills on their property.
Avalux Sun Jan-25-09 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
13. This article is hit piece on Kennedy.
There are certainly pros and cons for placing a wind farm on Martha's Vineyard and those can be debated without attacks on Kennedy and his family.
No need to post this garbage.
Imagine the wind farm that was created when Kennedy finally died and his sphincter finally gave...holy shit. That assblast could power a small town for a year.
