For those of you concerned that the failure of industrial wind to perform as a reliable, on demand energy source, take heart! If we simply turn over every inch of available land to the industrial wind LLCs we won’t need nuclear, coal, natural gas, waves, geothermal, biomass or even static from balloons. Wind will do it all! Sorta …
And yes, I know there are only 300 million people in the US, not 3.6 billion. I only said that to get you here. But think of this … if, as pointed out in the two following articles quoting from the NREL estimates, wind could produce 10 to 12 times as much as is sourced from all available means today; and you reduce the massive capacity of wind they estimate down to say, what the Texas grid actually expects to see from IW (no more than 9%); we won’t need nearly as many fossil or nuclear plants as today. Of course, we’ll have to figure out the little things like how to get the power from the south to the north in the winter time, since the darned things seem to freeze up and produce 0%.
The wind giveth and the wind taketh away!
Anyway, according to Ms. Sandy Bauers at the Green Space blog at Philly.com, “The U.S. Department of Energy has just released new estimates of the nation’s wind energy potential. It’s three times what the agency had estimated before,” adding “Now, the department says the nation — not counting Hawaii and Alaska — could produce 37 million gigawatt hours of wind power annually. That nearly ten times the total power generated in the U.S. in 2009, which was four million gigawatt hours.” Ms. Bauers did point a few issues to consider: These studies of “wind potential” often are based on what you could generate if you put wind turbines on every realistic spot available, which is unlikely. There’s also still the question of reliability. Since the power grid has no storage, power has to be produced when it is needed, and the wind doesn’t always blow. And, yes, the question of how to get the power from where the wind is blowing to where it is needed.
Over at ECOGEEK.org, Megan Treachy posted that “The new number is over 12 times the amount of energy we consume each year. Americans consume 3 million GWh of electricity each year and in 2008 only 52,000 GWh came from wind.” Ms. Treachy points out that “The last study of wind power potential, completed in 1993, came up with an energy potential of about 10.8 million GWh. According to NREL, the reason for the dramatic jump is better wind technology (taller and more powerful turbines) and better data used in the assessment. In case you’re wondering, environmentally-protected areas were not included as potential sites.” (Gee: 52,000 divided by 3,000,000 is less that 2% – did I do that right???)
The estimates were produced by NREL, (National Renewable Energy Laboratory) and AWS Truewind LLC, both with absolutely no interest in the outcome of the report.
In its editorial, Maine: Myths, opinions, and facts, the Industrial Wind Action Group challenges former Maine Governor Angus King’s use of myths and half truths in his recent attempt to “correct the record” about wind power.
The Wind Action Editorial is here, for your convenience:
(Posted February 23, 2010)
This week, Angus King, former Maine Governor turned wind developer, set out to correct the record on what he termed ‘myths’ about wind power now circulating. His opinion piece, while devoid of any substantive proof other than his say so and a link to his project’s web site, in fact, was teeming with his own myths and half-truths that deserve clarification.
King first takes issue with Jonathan Carter of Forest Ecology Network and Carter’s description of mountaintop wind operations resulting in “the building of thousands of miles of additional power lines and roads [and]…the clear cutting of more than 50,000 acres of carbon-sequestering forestlands. Literally the tops of the mountains are blown-up in order to establish a bedrock base for the massive concrete pads needed to support 400-to-500-foot turbines.”
King quibbles over the petty claiming dirt and rock on the mountain top are not actually removed from the mountain but merely “moved from one place to another in building the gravel access road and foundations.” Perhaps the Governor missed the photos taken at the TransCanada wind site atop Kibby Mountain in Maine, where 50-60 foot ledge cuts into the side the of the mountain were required to construct roads stable enough to handle the weight and width of the turbine components. Or the more infamous photo of the Mars Hill wind site, also in Maine, showing just how much the mountaintop was blown off to make way for the towers. We believe that most people would agree with Jonathan Carter.
The next ‘myth’ King takes on is that of noise. He claims “our” law, presumably Maine’s law, is “pretty restrictive” but that “several of the early wind projects in Maine got waivers from the noise limits and there are neighbors who are hearing them and are pretty upset.” King would do well to check his facts. Only one wind project, Mars Hill Wind, was granted a variance that would permit the project to operate at 50 db(A) as opposed to the required 45 db(A). Nonetheless, his statement is not relevant to the project sites in Vinalhaven and Freedom, Maine — both of which are experiencing severe noise issues. Nor does it apply to the Stetson wind facility, approved by Maine’s Land Use Regulatory Commission, which follows different standards altogether for noise.
He goes on to say that “our” experience shows that setback distances of around half a mile are adequate for addressing noise problems. Since King has never operated a wind facility we’re not sure whose experience he’s relying on, but he may wish to speak with Ethan Hall of Vinalhaven. Hall, who lives 3,500 feet from three industrial towers, recently explained that the noise penetrates his home where he is unable to read, work, or get good rest.
King’s third myth argues that Maine’s wind power law was not pushed through the legislature by wind proponents as claimed by some. What he doesn’t bother to tell his readers is that the “Expedited Permit” wind law was declared an emergency bill from the governor and it passed through the legislature in 15 days with very little scrutiny. And that State Representative Jon Hinck, co-chairman of Maine’s utilities and energy committee, who was responsible for giving the bill the emergency designation, is married to Juliet Browne, an attorney who represents wind interests in the State and who sat on the Governor’s Wind Task Force. This week, Hinck asked the Maine Ethics Commission for an advisory opinion on whether he has a conflict of interest when considering wind legislation. A litle late, but at least he’s asking.
Finally, King scoffs at the idea that wind turbines can make you sick. He makes vague reference to “independent analyses” including Maine’s own Dr. Dora Mills and the Maine Center for Disease Control in claiming turbines can annoy people but nothing more.
In December, Windaction.org reported on the Industry’s misuse of the term ‘annoyance’ in claiming that noise impacts are of no consequence.
Equally significant is the e-mail paper trail — one that King is well aware of — which begins February 10, 2009 after Dr. Albert Aniel of Rumford, Maine forwarded an open letter from the Rumford Hospital Medical staff, together with links to articles, to Dr. Mills asking for her support for a moratorium on new permits for wind turbine projects until further research could be done on possible health effects of wind turbines.
As detailed in the e-mails, Dr. Mills looked to Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Commissioner David Littell, and others at DEP involved in reviewing wind turbine projects, for assistance in refuting the health concerns of Dr. Aniel.
King then closes with some misrepresentations of his own.
In a subsection of his essay entitled “A Dangerous Dependence” he claims that Maine is “dangerously dependent upon fossil fuels ” citing 55 percent of its electricity coming from oil and gas with 100 percent imported “often from people who don’t like us.” But what he doesn’t tell you is that Maine’s net electricity generation is among the lowest in the United States with a large percentage of its energy exported to other states in the region. As with most of New England, natural gas — imported mostly from friendly Canada –accounts for around 40 percent of generation. And renewable sources, mainly wood and hydroelectric, account for almost half of Maine’s net electricity generation. In fact, nonhydroelectric renewable energy sources make up a larger share of net electricity generation in Maine than in any other State.
Maine is hardly the poster-state for dirty electricty!
Governor King is certainly welcome to respond to statements by those in his State who are raising concerns about wind, and of course he is entitled to his own opinion. But apparently, he also believes he’s entitled to his own facts.
You heard it right! Democrats and Republicans joined forces to defeat a resolution in the Colorado house which encouraged adding the renewable energy company to the 401k plans held by state employees.
The best line of the article which, for me, says all you need to know about resolutions even beyond the Colorado legislature, came from Rep. Joe Rice, D-Littleton, who complained that the state “passes resolutions all the time encouraging everything from going skiing to getting mammograms and that no one would run out and dump all of their money into a questionable fund just because of” this resolution.
Now, if this isn’t about the best argument for the elimination of legislative resolutions all across this great land, including the worst offenders in DC, I’d like to hear it. But then, there’s an argument that spending time on:
S.Res. 389 (is) Commending The University of Alabama Crimson Tide for being unanimously declared the 2009 NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision National Champions.
or
H.Res. 546 (ih) Recognizing the historical significance of Juneteenth Independence Day, and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that history should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and more effectively facing the challenges of the future.
actually keeps Congress from doing more damage than they are already have.
If you didn’t see the 60 Minutes segment discussing Bloom Energy’s “Bloom Box” fuel cell, go over to GreenBeat. A link to the article, which includes the video, is at the end.
Camille Ricketts writes that: Bloom Energy finally emerged from stealth mode, unveiling its “Bloom Box” fuel cell during a 60 Minutes segment with Lesley Stahl yesterday (click here for bonus videos). Capable of powering more than 100 homes while producing close to zero emissions, just one of these boxes could radically alter how people get their energy. But is it the godsend that some are saying it is?
Bloom touts former Secretary of State Colin Powell as one of the board of directors, and the client list includes Google, the first to use the Bloom Box, as well as EBay, FedEx, Wal-Mart and 16 other big names.
There are growing pains as for any new product and high potential for competition faces Bloom. Competition is a certainly a good thing plus, this is an adventure into new and advanced clean energy technologies, not a fall back to the ancient and unreliable wind as a source.
If Bloom is successful in its commercial venture and, in the next five to ten years residential models become available for less than $3,000, it is likely the GE’s and Siemens of the world would jump in. Then, perhaps the silly, ineffective tinker toys being plopped on mountain tops and in the plains can begin to come down and we can all have a good chuckle at the ridiculous adventure that was industrial wind. No, you can’t get your tax money back, but, if there is justice you’ll be able to greet the former legislators who enabled the high subsidies for wind when you go shopping at Wal-Mart. They’ll be the ones at the front door wearing blue vests and propeller beanies.
And right there is the problem. If wind turbines are a wake up call to a problem at Steens Mountain where “landscape, treasured by generations, is a haven for amazing wildlife” you would have expected the Oregon duo to be screaming about the existing and planned installations impacting the Appalachian Mountains. But, you see, they don’t really care about nature and the environment – they just care about theirs since, “Local landowners and taxpayers have invested tremendous effort and millions of dollars to protect the pristine natural character of the Steens.”
And here the writers try to have it both ways: “We couldn’t believe more strongly in the need to expand renewable power, including wind energy. We are proud of Oregon’s leadership in green technology. We also understand that new energy facilities will leave an unavoidable footprint wherever they’re situated.”
“But if industrial-scale energy plants — whether wind, wave, solar or geothermal — start going up in what are demonstrably the wrong places, our clean energy future and Oregon’s green industry are doomed.”
Yep! They believe in wind turbines as long as you put them waaaaaaaaaaay over there, where they don’t have to deal with them.
PURE HYPOCRISY!!! NIMBY AT ITS FINEST!!!
We are consistent here at Allegheny Treasures – We don’t want industrial wind turbines anywhere, unless you want to put one on your own property for your own use. When it comes to industrial wind, we’re not NIMBY (not in my back yard), we’re more NOWHERE (nowhere).
So a little suggestion for writers Russell Hoeflich, Oregon director of The Nature Conservancy and co-chairman of the Natural Resources Committee of the Oregon Global Warming Commission and Judi Johansen is president of Marylhurst University, former CEO of PacifiCorp and former administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration, when you get that “wake up call”, don’t hit the snooze button. Because when you do, you do a disservice to folks who are serious about industrial wind.
Victoria’s largest wind farm operation is attracting attention as the residents of Waubra, north-west of Ballarat, claim the turbines are causing health problems.
JOSEPHINE CAFAGNA, PRESENTER: It’s the biggest wind farm operating in Victoria and it’s putting the tiny town of Waubra on the map in ways the locals never predicted. It’s been dubbed the ‘Waubra Disease’, the health effects of living surrounded by wind turbines and it’s now becoming known around the world. As the State Government approves more wind farms, there are growing demands for serious investigation and for standards to be reviewed. Cheryl Hall reports.
DONALD THOMAS, WAUBRA FARMER: I thought it was probably the greatest thing to ever happen to the area. Visited wind farm up at Ararat and was quite impressed and came home thinking well, yeah, it’s a good thing. It’s not until the windmills started turning that we started to experience a few problems.
CHERYL HALL, REPORTER: And what sort of problems have you had?
DONALD THOMAS: We’ve had troubles, ear pressure, headaches, rapid heartbeat, high blood pressure.
CHERYL HALL: 20 families living around Waubra’s wind turbines have reported similar symptoms, but not everyone can talk about it. Those with turbines on their properties have signed agreements not to speak publicly.
DONALD THOMAS: In the yard here you can feel the ones on the hill there. They get into sync and every minute or two you’ll get this – there may be three or four big whooshes that you can actually feel.
CHERYL HALL: The most high-profile case of so-called “Waubra Disease” was Trish Godfrey, who spoke to Stateline last year.
TRISH GODFREY, WAUBRA RESIDENT (Sept. 2009): Basically, the best way I can describe it is that you feel that you’ve got motion sickness, but it’s not just for a little while, it’s all the time in varying degrees. It feels like my head is in a vice. I can’t remember the last night that I had a full night’s sleep. Usually we wake up at least five or six times during the night.
CHERYL HALL: Last week she won her battle when the wind farm company Acciona bought her property, but it came at a price.
Trish and Victor Godfrey have signed a confidentiality agreement and can’t speak publicly, but the company Acciona has issued a statement denying they suffered health effects from the turbines.
BRETT THOMAS, ACCIONA: No, that certainly wasn’t the issue that they contacted us about. As I said, their concern when they contacted us was about the visual impacts.
CATHY RUSSELL, WESTERN PLAINS LANDSCAPE GUARDIANS: Absolutely ridiculous, because we all know, and as well as the media knows, as well as the greater community who reads the papers knows, Trish was very much suffering. And there’s no question of a doubt it would open the floodgates effectively with regards to liability.
CHERYL HALL: Just down the road from Donald Thomas’s house this property is deserted. The Deans haven’t lived here for 10 months.
NOEL DEAN, WAUBRA FARMER: I won’t go out there while the turbines are there. I can’t afford to. I just get too ill.
CHERYL HALL: Noel Dean has moved to Ballarat. His son works on the farm but won’t live there.
NOEL DEAN: It’s cost us approximately $400,000, of buying this shed, relocating and expenses occurred in the monitoring and investigation of the problem, which the wind farm won’t do. I’ve asked compliance from the State Government for at least six months and they won’t give any confirmation that they’ve complied with their duty.
BRETT THOMAS: We’re carrying out all of the compliance obligations that we are required to carry out at that wind farm.
CHERYL HALL: The responsibility of enforcing the permit conditions has been transferred from the Planning Minister Justin Madden to the local council. But the Pyrenees Shire Council has been unable to do its job. It says it has neither the technical skills or the financial resources to enforce the conditions. The council has received many complaints and wants the State Government to investigate them.
DAVID CLARK, PYRENEES SHIRE MAYOR: I honestly don’t know, and again all the official evidence says that no, there isn’t an impact. My personal view is very simple. My personal view is I’ve known these people all my life and a lot of them I’ve gone to school with and I trust ’em with my life. And they’re saying to me they’ve got an issue and to me that issue needs to be investigated.
CHERYL HALL: The Planning Minister Justin Madden declined a request for an interview, but he issued a statement saying complaints regarding noise levels at the Waubra wind farm have been investigated and no breach of the conditions has been found. The Health Department says it has reviewed current research and believes there is no direct evidence that wind farms cause health problems. The Clean Energy Council agrees.
MATTHEW WARREN, CLEAN ENERGY COUNCIL: The issue of infrasound comes up in these debate, but after 20 years of wind farm development round the world and 100,000 turbines erected and studied around the world, there is no medical evidence of infrasound causing illness.
CHERYL HALL: Noel Dean has commissioned an independent report on noise levels at his property.
NOEL DEAN: I’m waiting for an independent, peer-reviewed report which at the moment indicates that there’s non-compliance at our property several times over 10 days. There is pulsing of low frequency, highly suspected of causing the illnesses we are getting.
CHERYL HALL: The report will be presented to a court case in New Zealand next week to demonstrate widespread complaints about health effects. It will include information on Waubra as well as complaints from 750 people who live near a wind farm in Makara in New Zealand.
CATHY RUSSELL: I’ve got information effectively from Makara Windfarm in New Zealand, the affidavits from the people who live near that particular wind farm, and similarly, questionnaires of a similar nature with regard to health from Waubra that back up – the same people in the same situations.
CHERYL HALL: Donald Thomas fears his problems are about to get worse. There are plans to make the Waubra wind farm even bigger, with more turbines to the north.
DONALD THOMAS: There’s no way known we can allow Waubra north to go ahead, having lived next to the biggest wind farm in the Southern Hemisphere.
CHERYL HALL: But the Waubra wind farm will be dwarfed by the Stockyard Hill proposal, west of Ballarat, of more than 200 turbines. Like Waubra, the communities of Beaufort and Skipton are divided over the wind farm. 300 public submissions have been received about the plan.
CASSIE FRANZOSE, WESTERN PLAINS LANDSCAPE GUARDIANS: The lack of information, the refusal to have a public meeting. There is no chance that this will not be approved. I mean, it is an absolute given. This process is – absolutely favours the deployment and widespread deployment of inappropriate wind farms across Victoria.
CHERYL HALL: Victoria currently has 10 operating wind farms, but another 27 are under development. One of those at Bald Hills in Gippsland was this week granted approval by Planning Minister Justin Madden to increase the height of its turbines by 20 per cent to 135 metres.
CATHY RUSSELL: It’s like a new frontier, effectively, because turbines, when the noise standards were set for example, were based on turbines that were around 36 metres high and now they’re 136 metres high and reaching into parts of the atmosphere never chartered before.
CHERYL HALL: But Environment Minister Peter Garrett laid the responsibility firmly with the State Government.
PETER GARRETT, FEDERAL ENVIRONMENT MINISTER: Wind farms, there are a broader range of issues, sitting issues, amenity issues, noise issues and the like, and I certainly think that it’s important that they are taken into account by local authorities and state governments in any of the states of the Commonwealth when they’re actually approving wind farms.
CHERYL HALL: Cathy Russell and Noel Dean met with Peter Garrett last night. They asked him to take their health issues seriously and fund an independent investigation.
CATHY RUSSELL: We’ve told them repeatedly, and so ultimately, he’s ignoring that advice at his peril, as he has done with insulation and solar. It’s just a minefield and it’s a time bomb waiting to happen, especially with the deployment of so many of these things throughout western Victoria.
Joining the list of states telling residents to “BUTT OUT!” on industrial wind projects there’s this from Wisconsin. Plus, I think we have a front runner for the industrial wind Eeyore of the week contest. Read on and see if you agree.
The article says that Local solidarity is driving a Holland wind farm moratorium that has no chance of success if the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin approves a project in the town.
Yep, here’s what the PSC has to say, according to the article: If the town wants a moratorium, the state has no reason to disagree, said PSC spokeswoman Teresa Weidemann-Smith. “It’s the community’s right to make those decisions,” she said. “But ultimately, the decision by the PSC will take precedence.” In other words, don’t waste your time, folks!
You see, The PSC has authority over projects expected to generate more than 100 megawatts of electricity. Weidemann-Smith said the Ledge project is expected to generate 150 megawatts. According to state law, if the PSC approves a project, it can proceed despite any local ordinance prohibiting the project.
Nyah, Nyah Na Na Na!
And what do we hear from the town officials: “We know the PSC will have final say in this project,” said Holland Supervisor Michael Geiger. “We’re just letting them know how we feel about it. When it comes to town politics, we’re about as grass roots as you get. The people that live next door want to know you’re supporting them. That’s what I’m doing.”
Well, good! At least Mr. Geiger is standing up for the folks … isn’t he? “The residents at the last two meetings have said they’re prepared to fight,” he said. “I don’t know how they’ll do that, and I don’t really want to know. All I know is with the moratorium, I’m doing something the majority wants. If you don’t do something they want, they’ll get somebody who will.”
Congratulations Mr. Eeyore Geiger! If you don’t win, be assured of an honorable mention.
Another item on the Ethics Commission’s agenda this Thursday stems from the controversy — at least among some Mainers — over industrial wind power.
Rep. Jon Hinck, D-Portland, is seeking the commission’s advice on whether he could have a conflict of interest when considering wind power legislation. Hinck’s wife, Juliet Browne, is an attorney whose clients include wind energy developers and other regulated industries that do business with the state.
Hinck is co-chairman of the Utilities and Energy Committee, which reviews legislation dealing with wind energy and regulation of power producers. Hinck requested the advice after some critics of Maine’s growing wind energy industry raised the issue.
Article ends!
AT Note: Does this seem to be a growing issue around the country?
Opinion from Steven Moultrup – (Saturday, February 20, 2010 2:27 AM EST)
Local town boards seem to be finally taking a hard look at the destruction wind-turbines are creating in upstate New York. The Aurora Town Board is considering a six-month moratorium on wind turbines. Councilman (Jeffrey) Harris of Aurora doesn’t believe the town should ban wind turbines entirely but remarked, “I’d like to see them not so big like you see when you drive to Warsaw.”
The Town of Victor recently passed a similar moratorium and the Town of Huron in Wayne County officially took a position opposing the New York Power Authority’s plan for wind farms and voted 5-0 against it. In Genesee County the county planners said “no” to just one proposed turbine because it would pose a safety hazard for planes that use the county airport. Is anyone in Wyoming County considering the two private airstrips (Attica and Warsaw) bordering Orangeville?
Residents of Wales just west of Sheldon are worried about wind turbines as recently reported in the East Aurora Advertiser. In Wales the issue is taking on added importance in the community that borders the Wyoming County line, “which has seen a proliferation of wind turbines on nearby hills.”
It was further reported that at the Town Board’s Jan. 26 meeting Councilman (Gerald) Klinck thinks that Wales could be in for the same fate unless the current law is modified. The Wales zoning code requires wind energy systems (turbines) to be a minimum of 2,650 linear feet from any residential dwelling regardless of the zoning classification. “He also expressed fear for the wellbeing of people whose homes might be near future wind turbines.
“‘If people live too close to these things, the cumulative effect on their health’ may be negative, Klinck told the board. ’I don’t think that you want any of our residents going through what these people have.’”
In the Town of Allegany the Town Board has determined that wind turbines should be set back 2,500 feet from homes and schools. In Orangeville the Town Board passed a zoning law that allows turbines to be sited 700 feet from property lines and 1,320 feet from residences. What were they thinking?
Please read the latest Olean Times Herald where they reported at the last Allegany Town Board meeting citizens raised issues concerning noise, aesthetics and environmental issues pertaining to a proposed wind farm in their town. A citizen posed a question: “Why are there so many complaints and lawsuits by people because of the sound that keeps them up at night from wind turbines? … Why is it such a big problem?”
As reported, Mr. (Dan) Spitzer replied, “‘Define big … is it 100 people’ complaining about the noise.” The citizen responded, “If you’re the person who can’t sleep at night, it’s big.” This citizen became offended at Mr. Spitzer’s comments and asked him what right he had to make derogatory comments about others.
“‘I’m their lawyer, that’s who,’ Mr. Spitzer said of his role as town board and planning board attorney.”
“‘Knock it off. I’m the town board’s lawyer and the planning board’s lawyer,’ Mr. Spitzer yelled.” Following more arguing the Town Board called for a recess.
Orangeville residents, this is the same lawyer who represents Invenergy and is working with our Town Board to site wind turbines throughout our town.
Yeah! Go ahead and have your little meetings, write some letters. Heck, you can even call and leave a message if you want!
But here’s the message for you private citizen pipsqueaks and local yokel politicians, “the state of Minnesota has the final say!” So, whatcha got to say for yourself now Mower County? “County Coordinator Craig Oscarson says, “the state is the permitting authority for the wind farm itself. So, I know some of our commissioners will attend because they represent that area, and are interested in this. But we really don’t have any say whether its permitted or not.” So there!
I know a lot of you folks like these wind farms but for those of you NIMBYs out there who don’t, here’s how it’s going to be: the Pleasant Valley Wind Company, a subsidiary of Renewable Energy Systems Americas Inc., is going to plop a 300 megawatt wind plant of some 130 to 200 turbines and they’re going to use up 70,000 acres to get it done … so shut up!
Oh, yeah … don’t even think about asking about how much electricity they will actually produce, how many full time jobs will remain, how many tons of greenhouse gases they will reduce, how many coal plants they’ll close or how much of your tax money they’ll pick up on the way out of town. That’s none of your business either!
Any questions?
Oh, by the way … it’s pretty much the same way over here in West Virginia, but we’re used to it. Politicians have been giving our resources away for decades.
American Battlefield Trust
The American Battlefield Trust preserves America’s hallowed battlegrounds and educates the public about what happened there and why it matters
Allegheny Treasures 