The white sand beaches and dunes of the Cape Cod National Seashore are an American treasure. Walking along the shore, with waves crashing and the open Atlantic Ocean stretching to the horizon, one can imagine the view is virtually the same as that seen by Henry David Thoreau when he walked the beach in the 1850s.

It seems reasonable that some people would want to protect that stunning scene from the visual encroachment of 130 wind turbines which have been proposed for Nantucket Sound. William Koch, who owns a home on the cape, is one of those people. In fact, he is co-chairman of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, the group formed to fight the Cape Wind project. So far, so good.

But Mr. Koch is also founder and owner of the Oxbow Group, a diversified energy company. One of the Oxbow Group’s subsidiaries, Oxbow Mining LLC, produces 6 million tons of coal annually. Is there a connection between coal mining and Cape Wind? As it turns out, there is. Barbara Hill, director of Clean Power Now, a group supporting the Cape Wind project because it represents clean, renewable energy, says Mr. Koch has spent more than $1 million of his own money to support the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound’s efforts to fight approval of the wind farm.

Could there be more at stake with the wind farm proposal than the views from Mr. Koch’s Cape Cod house? Ms. Hill says it’s all about connecting the dots. Those dots include wealthy summer residents (including Sen. Edward Kennedy) whose houses face Nantucket Sound. And they include rich and powerful CEOs like Mr. Koch who make their money in the fossil fuel business.

A group from “coal country” – Kentucky, West Virginia and Virginia – connected some more dots recently at hearings on the Cape Wind project in West Yarmouth, Mass. They told regulators that electricity produced by burning coal, which is part of the bundle of energy sources that supplies the cape with electricity, has had a devastating impact on their communities.

When strip mining stopped in the 1970s, coal extraction switched to mountaintop removal. Coal companies blast away the tops of mountains, fill streams and wetlands with the unused rubble, contaminate water wells, and fill the air with coal dust.

By traveling to the hearing on the cape, the coal country folks argued that preserving pristine ocean views for wealthy homeowners comes at a cost. In addition to the devastation of mountaintop removal, the cost includes global warming and air pollution from the 1,100 coal-burning plants in the U.S.

A draft environmental impact statement on the Cape Wind project found minimal or negligible threats to wildlife and the environment. The project has been under review for seven years, two years longer than the Iraq war, a war arguably fought because of the U.S. reliance on fossil fuel.

The fight over the Cape Wind project is more than beaches vs. mountains. The struggle is over what the nation’s energy future will look like. A visit to Appalachia might be just the ticket for Cape Wind opponents to see what our energy past and present look like.