On Tuesday, June 21, 2011, the Cape Cod Times printed my Letter to the Editor: “Cost of Cape Wind Pales Next to Cost of Status Quo."

Here's the short link: http://bit.ly/kthXHD

And, here's the letter:

In reading Audra Parker's June 14 commentary, "Why Cape Wind is Bound to Fail," I'm reminded of the many social conformists of our past who have decried innovation and adaptation to be too radical, too expensive and too controversial.

Parker's views are consistent with many skeptics before her who, rather than digging deeper to uncover the real facts, dismiss new research and peer-reviewed reporting as unproven and/or unverified.

Just as climate change skeptics refute the conclusive and repeated projections of a changing environment by science experts worldwide, clean-energy skeptics refute the conclusive and repeated projections of resource economists who, in 2011, have defined with excruciating detail the financial fortitude of low-carbon energy technology.

Independently funded Stanford and Harvard University researchers recently released reports that point directly to the exponential external costs of coal, oil and natural gas. When considering the impact these fuels have on creating and/or exacerbating respiratory diseases, killing coral and marine wildlife, and destroying worldwide ecological diversity, their actual costs far exceed any start-up investment dollars needed to support clean energy alternatives like wind, solar and tidal.

Stacy Clark writes in Dallas and Boston and is a Co-Founder of INKUBATE, an online showcase for writers and the editors and agents they want to reach. 

www.twitter.com/Stacy__Clark

www.facebook.com/StacyClarkWriter