Wind farms or tourism: it’s not an either/or 

I am writing in response to two pieces published in the Cape Gazette Oct. 29: “We must protect tourism from offshore wind power” by David Stevenson from the Center for Energy Competiveness for the Caesar Rodney Institute, and “Offshore wind farm raises economic, environmental issues” by Chris Flood, a reporter for the Cape Gazette.

Both pieces do a nice job informing the reader how the company Orsted received the go-ahead to submit proposals to build the Skipjack Wind farm off the Atlantic coast. As noted in each piece, two offshore wind power leases have been issued by the federal government, Maryland’s state government has approved the process, however Ocean City opposed the projects out of concern for lost tourism if windmills were visible on the horizon. 

Given that the energy generated by the wind turbines needs to be connected to a power grid, Orsted is now proposing that a transmission connection facility be built on the Little Assawoman Bay side of Fenwick Island State Park in Delaware. In return, Orsted will provide $18 million in improvements to the park.  

Mr. Stevenson notes in his commentary that “when shown visualizations of what the view could be when the leases are built out, and adjusting for the actual details of the proposed projects, 20-30 percent of beach lovers would go elsewhere and 30 percent of home owners would sell their homes.” (Stevenson did not note the reference for this quote.) Stevenson also says that his commentary “is not about whether wind or solar projects are built. It’s about where they are built”; however he gives no suggestions as to an alternative/s. 

Mr. Flood’s piece notes a study done by the University of Delaware’s College of Earth, Ocean and Environment (who may have been the authors quoted in Stevenson’s commentary) found that offshore wind farms may actually generate tourism secondary to curiosity trips.  Also noted by Mr. Flood are the concerns of a group called Save the Horseshoe Crabs. 

Apparently the turbines for the Skipjack Wind Farm would be built in the middle of the Carl N. Shuster Horseshoe Crab Reserve. This group provided a suggestion to move the farm out to the edge of the Reserve area. This is a positive suggestion/alternative…good for the horseshoe crabs and might solve the issue of tourism being affected by the view of large wind turbines on the horizon.

As well-written as both pieces are, neither spoke to the big picture of climate change. Creating more alternative energy sources presents some of the biggest opportunities to our country and world today.  Wind power will emit no pollution, and wind power will create many new, good jobs in the energy sector. We, and the rest of the world, are in a climate change crisis, and alternative energy sources like wind and solar power are presently our best way to stop, or at the very least slow down, the catastrophic effects of using fossil fuel energy. 

I believe that we, as citizens, have a right and obligation to voice our opinions on any issue that affects us and encourage folks to make comments, with suggestions, to DNREC regarding the proposed transmission site at Fenwick Island.

(www.destateparks.com/fenwickimprovements). But perhaps more important and my reason for writing this letter, is my belief that arguing whether beachgoers will, or will not, come to our beaches if they don’t have a pristine view of the horizon is overlooking  the big picture. 

Given the effects of climate change, both Maryland and Delaware will have portions of their state under water if we don’t commit to alternative energy sources now. It’s time for all sides to come to the table, bring alternative suggestions if appropriate and work together for solutions to effects of climate change.

Kathryn Burgwin
Rehoboth Beach