The opinion expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Crescent City Times.com By Investigative Reporter, Linda Sutter – September 5, 2025 I went to their website (www.vineyardoffshore.com/resource/barnstable-case-study) and here are my conclusions. What the Article Actually Says The case study is not a news report but a promotional/advocacy piece from Vineyard Offshore (the developer behind Vineyard Wind 1). It describes the history of community opposition to earlier offshore wind proposals in Nantucket Sound (such as Cape Wind) and how Vineyard Wind sought to “win over a skeptical community.” The article emphasizes outreach, town meetings, host community agreements (HCA), and financial benefits to Barnstable ($1.5 million/year plus $16 million over time for wastewater projects). Litigation and opposition history: Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound was abandoned after years of lawsuits, which many locals considered a “disaster” in terms of wasted money and community division. It details collaboration during construction, efforts to minimize disruption, and praises from local officials about transparency and cooperation. It repeatedly frames the project as a success story, with 80% of federal public comments in support What It Does Not Say Nowhere does the case study claim that offshore wind turbines caused an environmental, economic, or community “disaster” in Nantucket or Barnstable. It does not mention negative impacts such as harm to fisheries, tourism, marine ecosystems, or property values — concerns often raised in opposition. The document is essentially marketing material, designed to show how Vineyard Wind overcame resistance and set a “model for industry engagement.” In closing Litigation and opposition history: Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound was abandoned after years of lawsuits, which many locals considered a “disaster” in terms of wasted money and community division.