Ed Note: This post is based on a February 5, 2022, speech by Kevon Martis at Montcalm County Citizens United’s “Big Wind Go Home” rally in Trufant, Michigan.

“Lesson learned: Wind developers are not a reliable source of information when devising a wind ordinance. They will say whatever it takes to get their projects approved, even if they contradict themselves the next town over.”

The wind zoning regulations demanded by Apex Clean Energy company (APEX) in Montcalm County are demonstrably irresponsible and should be resisted.

APEX will no doubt make great hay out of my speaking at a rally called Big Wind Go Home and, in fact, APEX land agent Dan Paris already is. But I am here to tell you that it is your fundamental right to tell government-created, unnecessary, invasive Big Wind: You are not welcome here on the terms you propose.…

“The [Michigan] ordinances cite the potential negative consequences of wind turbines such as falling ice thrown by the blades of turbines, the flickering of shadows from the blades on nearby structures (shadow flicker), sleep disturbance caused by noise, and long-term health consequences of sound, also known as ‘infrasound’.”

When it comes to government-enabled, anti-consumer energy sprawl, local citizens have a say over unneeded, duplicative, invasive industrial wind projects. This is very bad news for the rickety supply-side strategy led by industrial wind. Real grassroot environmentalists are at war with Washington, D.C. Big Environmentalism, as well as the business rent-seekers making Bad Profit (as versus Good Profit).

The Progressive Left includes the pro-wind “investigative Watchdog Blog” Checks & Balances Project. Their “As Anti-Wind Zoning Ordinances Spread Across Michigan, Ordinances’ Language Varies Little” (November 10, 2021) recently reported on the growing movement against wind-turbine siting in a factual, lawyers-need-to-know basis.…

“The Interstate Informed Citizens Coalition …. uses false messages about wind and solar energy to engage biases against change, to stoke fear about renewable energy based on these false narratives, and incite otherwise good people into truly awful behavior.”

“The IICC will find local opposition, help them create social media pages, and provide misinformation links: studies done by fringe researchers, anecdotal stories of sleepless citizens, townships burning, counties abandoned, school buses bombarded with “ice-fling,” and two-headed chickens.” (Dan Paris, below)

His letter-to-the-editor “was written not under the direction or guidance of any wind development company, but in service to Dan’s God, his family, his community and humanity. In that particular order.” But one Dan Paris happens to be a longtime industrial wind developer in Gratiot Country, Michigan, and Kevon Martis (see yesterday) is getting in the way of his projects.…

“[Nuclear power] has been pretty reliable and very safe and compared to other energy sources, all told, reasonably priced …. and good…. It’s unclear if safe and reliable nuclear energy can compete with just where solar and wind are going …. That’s the reality.” (Other Lab Chief Executive Officer Saul Griffith)

“There’s more work to be done on nuclear than on any other area for it to be a competitor.” (Daniel Kammen, California Berkeley)

It’s a strange time when Yale University, up there with Harvard University atop the academic universe, publishes a rag of amateur analysis from the likes of one Peter Sinclair. (For Sinclair vs. Kevon Martis, see here.) But the Yale School of the Environment is in the business of publishing a newsletter of quick hits with double standards galore.…