I was surfing and looking for opinions on the NIMBY phenomena when I came acrose this:
Some prime quotes:
“Opponents note that the lion’s share of the jobs created will be temporary, that the power will be delivered to customers south of the power line, that hydropower is not actually renewable, and that there are other ways to address future energy demand.
They also question the promise of economic benefit, noting that chambers of commerce along the proposed route believe it will hurt tourism and damage real estate values. But the key issue at stake for the opponents is not jobs or money, but beauty.”
Sound familiar? It’s exactly what opponents of wind have been saying all along.
“NIMBY name-calling also intimidates by provoking what psychologists call stereotype threat. Those of us who care about the natural environment and the health of our communities are often afraid of being labeled NIMBYs, so we bend over backward to insist that we are not anti-business, not anti-technology, and not anti-modern.”
She just admitted that all the labeling of NIMBY by wind advocates is a “stereotype threat”. Really? Wind opponents were right all along—they were and are being intimidated? The article has several other statements that so close to what wind opponents have been saying it is remarkable, or frightening, I’m not sure which.
Next time someone throws the NIMBY label out, it would be good to mention that one of the major players in the global warming push is now saying things virtually identical to the wind opponents.