I'd prefer them to be coastal & suburban or at least close to where the energy is needed. Who travels 93, 95, 90, 84, 91 (in southern NE) to take in the views.
Southern CT's Scenic Ride, the Merritt Parkway is scenic because of the close scenery, it's tree lined, there are little or no long distance views. (Over the bridge near Sikorsky you get a view but there's a helicopter manufacturer there, it's not scenic - interesting maybe)
Wind towers in LIS instead of a floating LNG terminal, I'd make it trade, except around the towers & where you run the line, very limited (& site specific) impact to shellfish beds. An LNG spill of fuel spill from ships using an LNG terminal & the damage would be more dramatic.
I understand tides are being considered as a way to harness hydro power, I don't know much about it though.
As someone mentioned & I guess I'm not surprised, Plum Creek is figuring into the discussion. Historically they have logged the land & then sold land they had stripped to developers. With the housing market in the can & retirement accounts so beaten up (& wall streeters are unemployed) there is not much of a market for fancy ski area vacation homes. Once they log an area, put roads in, kudos to their economic model for finding an alternative market for selling the land.
Trying to get rights to (or finding) a large piece of land in a developed area would be tough, way up north, you can find large tracts owned by a single owner. In an earlier post, I mentioned Bolton CT has windy areas but you likely can't find more than one or two farms that haven’t been turned into developments that would be of appropriate size.
When doing Reddington a few years ago I noticed that the maze of logging roads, IMO, is almost ideally situated for a large vacation home development. (When solo, you have ample time to let your mind wander....
) It was easy to see where the streets would go & where the biggest houses with the biggest windows would go.
A few trails up Kibby in that picture & you could almost envision another Bretton Woods.
The wind farm on the back side of Wachusetts would seem to show a 300 foot tower does not have to sit on the top of the highest ridge. But if you have a landowner of a large tract of land who no longer finds it economically viable (there's no timber left) to keep the land and a utility wants to negotiate with a single owner who has no other options for the land besides paying taxes & waiting for the trees to grow back- at least in this housing market/economy, that's sound business.
Who's going to protest way up north? AMC, SC, NHSPF (wrong letters sorry), ATC, hunters probably not the state though.
Build them between the Cape & Nantucket & you may get the state to complain if they are within sight & realtors & vacation homeowners tell them they will lose business as the rich will go to Newport instead of Nantucket, Commercial Fisherman, Yachting/power boaters, bird watchers, politicians who have homes in the area
& other wealthy people who contribute to campaigns. Hunters may find that the animals have disappeared but no one is buying that they are hunting to feed their families unlike the commercial fisherman.
Where do Wind farms belong? Who knows.
Where will wind farms be built? Where ever the companies that will gain $ from the project will get the best ROI which also includes keeping expenses low. If land doesn't even have logging roads, I'm sure a partnership with a logging company will benefit both companies. If it's already been logged, as others mentioned, much of the land work has been done & the land is of little use to the timber company. (If they can swap land with logging roads for some pristine forest owned by the state or a Utility, they'd be willing to swap no doubt.
