The answer to a greener New York City is blowing in the wind on Staten Island.

A year-long study has concluded that there is enough wind at the former Fresh Kills landfill to sustain seven 400-foot wind turbines that could generate enough clean, renewable energy to power as many as 5,000 homes.

How perfectly ironic that Fresh Kills, one of the country’s worst ecological nightmares, is poised to become New York City’s first wind farm, a free, limitless resource that will make a positive difference in the environment. Indeed, it appears that Fresh Kills may be the only location in the city that could support such a facility.

Mayor Bloomberg’s sweeping “Plan-NYC 2030” initiative has challenged us to think out-of-the-box to find solutions to tomorrow’s problems today. By 2030, nearly 70% of the city’s power plants will be more than 50 years old. Yet utility companies predict the demand for electricity will increase by as much as 50%.

The time has come to look for renewable energy sources for our city. Staten Island offers a “wind-win” solution. Wind power is a reliable alternative energy source, and it reduces America’s woeful dependence on foreign oil.

I applaud the New York State Energy Research and Development Agency and BQ Energy for pursuing my idea of a wind farm at Fresh Kills with a 14-month feasibility study. Their August 3, 2007 report determined that wind patterns at the former landfill are sufficient to proceed with a wind energy facility. Pending city and state approvals, the windmills could potentially supply the electrical grid with 17 megawatts. This electricity would power the planned Fresh Kills Park, nearly three times the size of Central Park, and any surplus would either be sold into the power grid or to local businesses.

Wind farms are growing in popularity

overseas and here in America because they’re clean and cost-effective. My staff compared Staten Island’s gas-fired Rosebank power plant to the proposed wind farm and found that the plant cost $50 million to construct, while the wind project would cost $40 million. Power plants release harmful pollutants such as carbon monoxide, ammonia, and nitrogen oxide into the air, while wind turbines do not.

More importantly, conservative calculations show that if we use electricity generated from this wind farm instead of from an average-sized oil-fired power plant we would eliminate the burning of almost 4.3 million gallons of fuel oil per year.

Our lucky neighbors in Atlantic City have been reaping the benefits of wind energy for the past two years. Five 260-foot turbines at the Jersey-Atlantic Wind Farm produce enough power to light 2,500 households, as well as provide half of the electricity needs for its city’s sewage treatment plant. Pleasing to the eye and relaxing to watch, these graceful “green” giants have captivated tourists to the gambling mecca, who are requesting hotel rooms facing the windmills.

Contrary to popular belief, the turbines do not pose a great danger to birds or make a lot of noise. The fact is, an average of one or two birds are killed per wind turbine annually, far fewer than those killed on the Verrazano Bridge or skyscrapers. Furthermore, the windmills run quietly with a faint “swooshing” sound similar to the ocean surf.

Regardless of objections from the “whatever it is, I’m against it” crowd, the potential benefits of wind energy to our economy, environment, and energy security are clear. A wind farm on Staten Island would signal New York City’s resolve to reduce dependence on foreign oil, the lifeblood of financing for terrorism in the Middle East.

Our children will be the first generation in more than 50 years to live in a “landfill free” Staten Island that today is transforming into the clean, renewable energy capital of New York. We all have Mayor Bloomberg to thank for showing the way to a greener city.

Mr. Molinaro is president of Staten Island.