To the editor:
I do not live in Salem, so perhaps to Salem residents that disqualifies me from expressing an opinion about the proposed wind turbine on Winter Island. (For what it's worth, I was born in Salem and lived my first 29 years in the city.)
However, although I no longer live in Salem, I do live in this country and on this planet and certainly some of the considerations about energy forms and energy sources affect all American citizens and inhabitants of Planet Earth.
Arguments for the United States eliminating its reliance on nondomestic sources of energy have been made over and over, and by now it seems inconceivable that anyone could be unaware of them. Most Americans seem to appreciate those arguments and agree with them, at least in the abstract.
Likewise, arguments for shifting to renewable, non-carbon-based sources of energy have been advanced and are generally well-known, but often bump into more opposition than those for energy independence. Here, of course, we get into the issue of whether climate change is actually occurring and, if it is, whether burning fossil fuels is a contributor.
Those who doubt that climate change is real or that it is man-induced cite scientists who also doubt. Of course, many other scientists don't doubt.
My own opinion is that virtually nothing about the future is certain. After all, the sun may not rise tomorrow. However, many of the projected consequences of climate change are dire enough that, despite any uncertainties, a reasonable course of action would be to err on the side of caution.
Doubters — and I concede they may be right — also cite the expense attached to a conversion from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, but here I feel they are on shakier ground.
For example, often we hear in connection with other issues, especially those related to the economy, that we must act boldly and quickly so that our children and grandchildren will be spared the consequences of our mistakes. I certainly agree with those sentiments. Yet if we express the same advice about how we generate energy and its possible ramifications, including economic ones, on future generations, the doubts are raised, the expenses are cited, and the reasons for continuing down the carbon path continue to be trotted out.
Certainly in the short term we need a continued use of the traditional sources of energy until the problems inherent in the relatively new green technologies are resolved, but short-term needs too often become an excuse for avoiding or putting off what must sooner or later be done.
Which brings me back to Winter Island. One wind turbine will make only a small contribution to national energy independence and a small reduction in the carbon dioxide we pump into the atmosphere. However, from what I have read, the wind turbine could make a significant contribution to Salem's energy supply and to Salem's economy.
Change is unsettling, and doubts and uncertainties about something new are understandable. The concerns of those who live near Winter Island must be respected, but neighbors have lived for decades with a coal-burning power plant that is hardly a thing of beauty.
Recently, my wife and I drove to Newburyport and parked within perhaps 200 feet of a tall wind turbine there, which was merrily spinning. I shut off the engine, put down the windows, and we listened. We heard virtually nothing. Admittedly, I am hard of hearing, but my wife is not.
I feel strongly that the proposed wind turbine on Winter Island, even though it will generate far less energy than the power plant on Fort Avenue, will have a relatively significant and positive impact on the citizens of Salem. Perhaps equally significant is that it will be another incremental and symbolic step to a worldwide commitment that eventually must be made.
William Story
Peabody


