Letter: Missing the point about the Northern Pass
Re “Rerouting the debate,” (Monitor Forum, Nov. 24):
Ayn Whytemare missed the most obvious point about the Northern Pass: The opposition is based upon the aesthetic impact of hundreds of ugly, 100-foot towers that would march from Canada through the most beautiful parts of New Hampshire in order to bring power to southern New England.
People with properties facing the route have lost tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars in the value of their real estate. If the towers are constructed, the beautiful approach to the White Mountains along Interstate 93 and many rural communities will be scarred irretrievably; tourists and second-home buyers will spend their money elsewhere if they see towers looming above the tallest pines. And these impacts are so unnecessary.
If Hydro Quebec and Northeast Utilities responded to public concerns, they would bury the line, just as similar lines are being buried in New York, Vermont and Maine. If the unnecessary assault of industrial towers on dozens of New Hampshire communities was eliminated, then Whytemare’s article would be relevant. But right now, I imagine her 11-year-old son saying something like this: “But Mom, the opponents aren’t trying to stop the electricity, they just want it to go underground, like cable TV.”
Whytemare is right to talk about the need for conservation, the lack of understanding of environmental issues, carbon footprints, etc., but the Northern Pass debate is not about generating electricity, it is about the transmission of electricity. And on this topic, the opponents are right, Whytemare is silent and the out-of-state corporations are wrong.
CARL D. MARTLAND