Vermont in Open Revolt Against Wind Power Developers

RIDGELINE DEFENDERS: Local resident Christine Lang and Republican gubernatorial candidate Phil Scott discuss their opposition to a proposal to build seven giant wind turbines on Rocky Ridge behind them.

Christine Lang and Republican candidate Phil Scott
join forces to protect Vermont’s Rocky Ridge.


Vermont has become a political battle ground, as political hopefuls team up with dogged community defenders. Republican candidate for Governor has called the great wind power fraud for what it is; much to the delight of Vermont’s rural communities. Here’s the latest from Vermont’s battle front.

Phil Scott vows to protect ridgelines against Big Wind if elected governor
Vermont Watchdog
Michael Bielawski
9 September 2016

SWANTON, Vt. — Facing the prospect of having seven 499-foot industrial turbines built on their prized Rocky Ridge hillside, local residents stood with Republican gubernatorial candidate Phil Scott to declare opposition to the project.

On Thursday, as wind energy developers Travis and Ashley Belisle filed an application for a certificate of public good with the Public Service Board, a crowd of residents, activists, state lawmakers and candidates for office stood with Scott as he doubled-down on his pledge to stop new wind energy projects in Vermont.

“I’m in favor of a complete ban on ridgeline development,” Scott said to much applause. “It’s very divisive, and we just don’t need that in Vermont.

“We need to come together, because I feel as though we need to be focusing on the economy, we need to focusing on jobs, we need to be focusing on other things besides this.”

If approved, the $40 million project would be built within a one-mile radius of 134 homes. The developers expect the project to deliver up to 20 megawatts of energy on windy days and generate about $150,000 in annual tax revenue for the town. Residents voted 731-160 to reject the project in a non-binding election last November.

Scott said if there were no alternatives to industrial wind then he could see a need for it, but he added that solar and other renewable technologies are advancing and wind is not. Lieutenant gubernatorial candidate Randy Brock, also on hand, said wind power is not the energy of the future.

“That’s one of the risks of doing a headlong rush into last century’s technology that’s only going to last into the middle of this century,” Brock said.

Some residents expressed worries that no amount of grassroots effort, or even legislative effort, will break the grip that wind energy lobbyists seem to have over Montpelier. Brock said he hears the same concern everywhere as he campaigns across Vermont.

“I’ve been to quite a number of the sites all over the state … and there’s a recurring theme throughout all of this: people feel that they have no power. People feel that they have a government that doesn’t listen to them.”

Scott cautioned that most Vermont residents do not live near big turbines and therefore tend to approve of wind energy development.

“If (wind developers) frame the question right, and they have the resources to do it, and they ask everyone across Vermont, ‘How do you feel about renewable energy and wind and so forth?’ The polls say we’re in favor of it.”

He added that if he wins the election he would use an executive order to stop new projects. Such a moratorium would likely last for as long as Scott remains in office. His opponent, Democrat Sue Minter, has been a strong advocate for wind energy development out on the campaign trail.

Brian Dubie, a local resident and Vermont’s former lieutenant governor, noted that Green Mountain Power opposes the project. Vermont’s top utility has no room in its portfolio to take on new wind power and wants to keep rates low for ratepayers, Dubie said.

“It has a negative impact when Vermonters are going to end up paying the bills for these things for decades,” he said.

Brock called the wind industry’s higher energy costs a “social justice issue.” He explained that low income Vermonters pay over 20 percent of their income on energy costs and would be hurt by expensive wind power. “For all intents and purposes, it’s Robin Hood in reverse,” he said.

Other concerns discussed at the gathering included the project’s impact on property values, wildlife, water runoff, turbine noise and more. Numerous residents noted that the rocky landscape would carry sound to more homes. Others said the use of renewable energy credits would cancel out any green benefits to the state.

Scott’s parting message was to not give up, to not be discouraged, and to know that he would do everything in his power as governor to put a halt on new projects.
Vermont Watchdog


About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.


  1. It grieves me immensely to find myself agreeing with a Republican about anything.
    Well, other than Senator Mark Hatfield and Senator Lowell Weicker, a long time ago, and is it still Christine Todd Whitman’s party?

  2. estherfonc says:


    I started a PETITION “SA PREMIER JAY WEATHERILL : Demand the RESIGNATION of the Energy Minister for HIGH POWER PRICES CAUSING SA’s JOBS CRISIS and 15,000 household POWER DISCONNECTIONS, frequent POWER BLACKOUTS and the JULY 2016 POWER CRISIS” and wanted to see if you could help by adding your name.

    Our goal is to reach 100 signatures and we need more support.

    You can read more and sign the petition here:

    Please share this petition with anyone you think may be interested in signing it.

    Thankyou for your time.

  3. The issue of the loss of property values is mentioned in this article. This issue alone ought to have people living near this project doing everything in their power to stop this development. In Ontario, in Huron County, along the gorgeous shore of Lake Huron, a real estate agent recently wrote this, ” I work with many clients who want nothing to do with the turbines both in distance and sight lines. That in itself is affecting property values. (I am seeing up to 40%).”
    Meanwhile these residents are still having to pay their full taxes on the assessed rate, before the turbines were sited there.
    This is so unfair!

  4. For those who are not aware of the intensity of this struggle for safe energy in Vermont, here’s an article that might give you some important background information.

  5. Reblogged this on citizenpoweralliance.

  6. Jackie Rovensky says:

    Headlong rushing into something that communities who will be affected feel and know they have very little if any power to prevent, while those living long distances and in places they will never have to live in close proximity with them, but shout that those clambering to stop them are just not wanting them in their backyards, and the bowing to the money grabbing companies assisted by the diehard fools who do not care who has to suffer these things as long as its not them are the same no matter where these things infest.
    These things which are spread by a disease of thick headed stupidity, avarice and moronic pursuit of money before life, with a war cry of a need to ‘save the earth’ no matter if it’s destroyed in the process. All while companies continue grab money to fill their pockets – all until one day there is no more to be had, one day when Governments run out of it and their citizens are living in the dark ages – attempting to live of the land which has been so degraded its hard to grow anything to feed their families, becoming hunters and gathers with little to hunt and even less to gather.
    Will those ‘green’ thinkers be happy then? Will they be content with pockets overfull of money which is worth nothing more than something to light a fire with?

  7. … “That’s one of the risks of doing a headlong rush into last century’s technology that’s only going to last into the middle of this century,” Brock said …

    Wind was first used to make electricity in 1888 (by Charles Brush). By 1941 they were making 1 Megawatt wind turbines (by Smith & Putnam). The whole rationale for renewable energy subsidies, mandates, and feed-in tariffs (FITs), was that the technology is young and needs a leg up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: