by Caroline Howe:
Around the world, governments undertake projects that benefit society at large, whether providing energy, water treatment, or waste disposal. At the same time, these projects put certain individuals at risk by damaging their water, air, or quality of life. In some instances, these issues are considered significant environmental threats, particularly when certain communities regularly bear the burden of such projects. In other cases, however, citizen objections to proposed projects are regarded as “NIMBY,” or Not In My Backyard, reactions, in which communities theoretically support a project until it appears in their own neighborhood.
This phenomenon takes place on both the regional and community levels. In the case of Southeast Asia, wealthier and more industrialized countries, like Thailand, have a greater demand for energy, and yet also maintain a very active environmental community that has historically opposed detrimental hydroelectric or nuclear plants. Surrounding countries have not expressed such forceful opposition to having nuclear facilities in their region’s “backyard,” and thus the burden has shifted across national borders and into their own communities.
This same phenomenon has occurred domestically with Energy Management, Inc. (EMI) and its proposed construction of the United States’ first offshore wind farm, Cape Wind, in Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The project calls for the construction of 130 wind turbines in the Nantucket Sound that could provide up to 420 megawatts of energy, meeting three-quarters of Cape Cod’s electricity demand. Supported by environmental groups, businesses, investors, energy companies, and the Massachusetts government, Cape Wind initially seemed promising. But when vocal environmental activists, including Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a Cape Cod resident, began speaking out against the project and organizing a $12 million campaign to stop Cape Wind’s construction, the environmental community was left divided.
In an interview with the Globalist, Jim Gordon, President of EMI, said, “Most energy projects have some opposition to them. That seems to go with the territory.” But this project’s opposition seems particularly noteworthy, as it includes not only local residents, but also fervent environmentalists.
Those opposing the plan are particularly vocal about the Nantucket Sound’s natural and national heritage, while also claiming that the turbines will decrease property value in the area. Some conservationists also argue that Cape Wind would threaten migratory bird species and aquatic ecosystems. Many other activists have spoken favorably about wind power in the past but claim that Cape Cod is not the appropriate place for such a project.
Yet those supporting Cape Wind claim these are all excuses to rationalize a desire to protect their home surroundings from change. Those who support the project list many reasons why it is appropriate for the Cape, including the fact that Cape Cod has the worst air quality in Massachusetts. Supporters also argue that anthropogenic climate change, which results from carbon emissions largely from power plants, will negatively affect bird species and ecosystems far more than wind turbines will. Cape Wind project managers maintain that the visual impact will also be minimal, as wind turbines will show up as no more than a half-inch on the horizon.
Though most energy facilities face some form of opposition, major renewable energy projects create particularly significant debates. Few would argue with the worldwide benefits of renewable energy, and these projects can often offer local benefits of increased tourism, cleaner air, and greater regional energy independence. Yet opposition focuses on negative local economic and environmental impacts, as well as on the effects of changed sightlines. Renewable energy projects also pose a particular type of dilemma because, unlike the typical power plant that can be located virtually anywhere, only certain areas have appropriate natural resources for wind or substantial solar installations.
When activists take a NIMBY approach with renewable energy, there are fewer backyards available. More importantly, when they fail to address the world’s pressing energy and environmental concerns, it will not be just strangers’ backyards that will be affected, but eventually their own, as well.