Taxpayer funded industrial wind projects may create jobs – but just not here in the US!

Posted on December 28, 2009 by morgan

Senator Chuck Schumer, who complained a month ago about stimulus funds going to China is again expressing concern that the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars used to subsidize industrial wind is being used to support jobs overseas.

From CNSNews:

Taxpayer-Funded Wind Farms Prompt Concern from Democrats and Republicans; Jobs for China?
Monday, December 28, 2009
By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com) – Wind-power projects funded in part by the $787-billion Recovery Act (stimulus law) are coming under scrutiny at a time when President Obama and other Democrats have promoted alternative forms of energy production.

Two New York Democrats – Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. Eric Massa – are among the lawmakers criticizing specific wind-power projects that are getting hundreds of millions in taxpayer subsidies.

A “definitive agreement” was reached on one of those projects two weeks ago, according to a Dec. 20 news release from the Austin, Texas-based Cielo Wind Power. The deal is between Cielo, U.S. Renewable Energy Group and China-based Shenyang Power Group.

The $1.5 billion project – which is getting $450 million in stimulus funds – is supposed to create 2,000 to 3,000 jobs. The problem is, most of those jobs will be in China, Sen. Schumer said, because that’s where the wind turbines will be constructed. Another 300 temporary jobs will be created in Texas.

“I’m all for investing in clean energy, but we should be investing in the United States, not China,” Schumer wrote in a Nov. 5 letter to Energy Secretary Steven Chu. “The goal of the stimulus was to spur job creation here, not overseas. This project should not receive a dime of stimulus funds unless it relies on U.S.-manufactured products,” the senator wrote.

The Cielo wind farm in West Texas is supposed to cover 36,000 acres and generate enough electricity to power up to 180,000 American homes each year.

Cielo Wind Power President Walt Hornaday, in a Nov. 10 statement, insisted that the project will grow the U.S. economy and would not be possible without federal assistance.

“A project of this scale will not only create hundreds of on-site construction and operational jobs, but it will also benefit a network of engineers, suppliers, and contractors all around the U.S. who will see hundreds of millions of dollars in additional work,” Hornaday said.

“Cielo plans to draw on the same American contractors from North Dakota to New York and New Mexico to California who have contributed to its past 10 wind projects. This planned project is an economic development lifeline to the wind industry during tough economic times.”

Hornaday did not deny Schumer’s assertions that most of the jobs would be created in China. However, a Cielo staff member told CNSNews.com last week that none of the stimulus funds (taxpayer money) would be used to pay workers in China. However, the spokesman declined to say any more about the project than has already been discussed in news releases.

Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond (R-Mo.) also wrote a letter to Energy Secretary Chu: “There is bipartisan concern that the Obama administration is using U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund green jobs in China and other foreign countries,” Bond wrote on Nov. 12. “As U.S. unemployment tops 10% during this time of economic distress for America’s families and workers, we must ensure that our government is not using American taxpayer dollars to create more green jobs in China than in the U.S.”

On another front, a Newton, Mass.-based company called First Wind reportedly is getting $115 million in stimulus funds to build wind farms in Cohocton, N.Y. and near Danforth, Maine.

Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) whose district includes Cohocton, had problems with U.S. tax dollars going to what he called “shell companies” for First Wind.

In a September letter to President Obama, Massa noted that First Wind is under investigation by the New York Attorney General’s office for alleged corruption. The actual appropriation is going to Canandaigua Power Partners and Canandaigua Power Partners II, subsidiaries of First Wind.

“This is one of the most volatile issues in Western New York, and the award of $74.6 million dollars to corrupt companies that have changed names time and again, forming new LLCs and new Inc.s but maintaining their business model of lie, cheat, and corrupt at the expense of taxpayers, has stirred great unrest in New York’s 29th Congressional District,” Massa wrote to the president.

Massa spokesman Jared Smith did not return phone calls last week.

On July 15, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced an investigation into the wind power industry. He cited First Wind as one of the two companies from which he had subpoenaed documents.

The other was the Essex, Conn.-based Noble Environmental Power. The investigation was to determine “whether companies developing wind farms improperly sought or obtained land-use agreements with citizens and public officials; whether improper benefits were given to public officials to influence their actions, and whether they entered into anti-competitive agreements or practices.”

“The use of wind power, like all renewable energy sources, should be encouraged to help clean our air and end our reliance on fossil fuels,” Cuomo said when he announced the probe. “However, public integrity remains a top priority of my office and if dirty tricks are used to facilitate even clean-energy projects, my office will put a stop to it.”

The First Wind projects already are up and running. The Cohocton plant began operating in late January, and by the end of September it had produced 133,370 megawatt hours of electricity for the region, First Wind Chief Executive Officer Paul Gaynor said in October.

Gaynor also said the New York attorney general is not currently investigating the company. “In fact, we have been advised by the attorney general’s office that we are not under investigation,” Gaynor wrote. “First Wind is proud to be one of the first two companies in New York to have signed a code of conduct with the New York Attorney General that establishes for the first time an industry-wide framework for wind development in New York.”

In October, Cuomo announced a new “Wind Industry Ethics Code” and established a multi-agency task force to enforce the rules.

An Oct. 30 release from Cuomo’s office said, “Both Noble and First Wind fully cooperated in the inquiry, and their assistance was instrumental in developing the Code of Conduct that is being announced today.”

Posted in Wind Energy Legislation, Wind Power subsidies | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Editorial: DOE wind farm study leaves out ‘ugly’

Posted on December 28, 2009 by morgan

Editorial from the Tri-City Herald:

DOE wind farm study leaves out ‘ugly’

It is not on the same scale, of course, but the now widely accepted assumption that wind power is “green” reminds us of Harry S. Truman’s attack against McCarthyism as “the big lie.”

The basic underlying truth of Truman’s argument was that if repeated often enough and loudly enough, in any context, even a blatant lie becomes accepted as truth by some.

We argue that the definition of wind power as green is disingenuous because it leaves out something that in the early days was an integral part of the environmental movement before it was ever even called green.

Visual pollution.

From debris in the roadway to overhead electric lines in neighborhoods or across the visual fields of great buildings or works of art, most people knew what visual pollution was.

They still know, but those who hold onto their “greenness” like a religious conviction simply ignore it.

Now we can count the U.S. Department of Energy among the extremist groups.

DOE commissioned a near-mindless study by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory to see if wind farms in nine states hurt nearby home sales.

Now the Livermore lab is already on record as supporting wind power — virtually no questions asked.

Here’s a recent example of a class being offered at the facility:

“Those windmills spinning away in California’s hills and mountain passes provide clean and renewable energy to our power grids. Today, the possibilities are even greater. As we face energy shortages and the effects of climate change, the wind is an inexpensive, inexhaustible and nonpolluting source that is becoming an important part of our energy future. This lecture will explain how wind turbines convert the forces of the atmosphere into electricity for our homes, businesses and even cars.

“It will explore how much power could be collected from the wind, how that amount compares to our demands, and how weather forecasts help wind turbines provide even more clean, renewable and reliable energy.”

Not one word about ugly.

Now we are aware that some people like the images of gigantic turbines on the horizon around here.

We cannot say that most people feel otherwise.

But we are certain that at least a substantial number of our citizens object to them.

DOE just seems to be brushing them aside with the new report.

“Wind farms have no measurable effect on nearby property values, according to a government report,” The Associated Press reported.

AP also reported that, “Questions about the integrity of the $500,000 Berkeley study were aired even before the report was released.

Anyone driving from the Tri-Cities to Walla Walla cannot fail to have noticed the windmills, looking not unlike Orson Welles fictitious “alien beings” marching out of the hills or like the giant heads of Easter Island.

DOE’s researchers say they took into account the recession and other factors, even including the number of bedrooms and location of schools in the study of sales of home within viewing distance of the turbines.

“That’s not to say there are not individual homes or small groups of homes that have been impacted by the presence of wind projects,” one of the researchers told AP.

Right. But still, the main criterion seems to be the exchange price “taking into account the recession and other factors.”

But not all the other factors, apparently.

The gorgeous hills flowing majestically around the Tri-Cities are, for many people, irretrievably spoiled.

But we’re told to brighten up.

After all, it’s green energy.

Subsidized, of course, by tax dollars from all of us, whether we like them or not.

Thanks, DOE, for such a thorough job.

Posted in Environment | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

OOPS – 187-ton windmill topples in Madison County

Posted on December 28, 2009 by morgan

Explain to me, just one more time, why we should be concerned about set-back?

From the Utica Observer-Dispatch:

By JENNIFER BOGDAN
Posted Dec 27, 2009 @ 07:41 PM
Last update Dec 27, 2009 @ 11:39 PM
FENNER —

A wind turbine weighing nearly 190 tons collapsed early Sunday morning in rural Madison County , leaving experts stumped as to what could have brought down the towering structure.

The windmill, located on Buyea Road in Fenner, northeast of Cazenovia and several miles south of Canastota, fell into a cornfield at about 4 a.m., shutting down the 19 other turbines in the wind farm operated by Enel North America, officials said.

No one was injured.

It was the first time the company had seen one of its turbines topple.

“This is just not an everyday occurrence,” Enel North America spokesman Hank Sennott said. “I’d rather wait until we have a chance to investigate rather than speculating as to what could have happened.”

However, Sennott said he doesn’t believe sabotage occurred. He also said he doesn’t believe the force of the wind could have knocked over the turbine, which soared more than 200 feet above the town’s rolling countryside. But he would not answer questions about what possibilities the company is considering for the cause of the collapse.

Buyea Road resident David Kalenak said the crumpled remains of the wind turbine attracted hundreds of onlookers throughout the day on the rural road, which usually sees just one or two cars each hour.

“I think a couple of my neighbors are a little nervous,” said Kalenak, who didn’t hear the crash. “This one was in a field, but others are in the line of homes.”

The turbine was one of 20 erected at Fenner Wind Farm in 2001. The farm’s turbines produce enough electricity to serve at least 10,000 homes, Sennott said.

Wind turbines have become an increasingly common feature of the Central New York landscape. In Lewis and Madison counties, there are five established projects, most along U.S. Route 20 or in the Lowville area.

There are no wind farms in Oneida or Herkimer counties, but three projects are pending in Herkimer County, according to data from New York Independent System Operator, a nonprofit organization that operates New York’s electrical grid. One plan for the Herkimer County town of Litchfield has raised the ire of residents near Sauquoit in Oneida County; they say turbines would mar the landscape and pose possible risks to home values and health.

Fenner town Supervisor Russell Cary he was shocked by the incident, but didn’t think it should spark cause for concern.

“I think it’s a freak thing,” said Cary, who noted he fielded calls from concerned residents throughout the day.

“This isn’t something that normally happens,” he said. “It’s been an exciting day.”

Sennott said the company is not concerned about the possibility of another turbine collapsing. Instead, he said, the company’s efforts will be directed toward securing the site of the crash and discovering what caused it.

Safety fencing was erected around the site of the crash Sunday night, and company workers planned to stand guard to ensure no one would be able to remove debris from the site. The company plans to hire security officers in the coming days to protect the site.

Replacing the turbine would likely cost between $2 million and $3 million, but it’s not likely a replacement turbine would be installed immediately, Sennott said.

“It’s not like we have an extra one of these things sitting in the backyard,” Sennott said.

Posted in Wind Tower Safety | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Op-Ed says WV Public Service Commission not doing enough to protect citizens against industrial wind.

Posted on December 26, 2009 by morgan

An Op-Ed piece from the Charleston (WV) Gazette-Mail:  Brad Taylor: Wind turbines cause health problems:

December 25, 2009

CHARLESTON, W.Va. — The Public Service Commission is failing to protect the people of West Virginia. By allowing wind turbine farms to locate near homes and neighborhoods, it is knowingly endangering the health and well-being of residents.

The PSC ignores the ample evidence on the turbine/bad-health connection and is choosing to turn a blind eye to the suffering caused by its siting decisions.

Wind turbines, as the PSC is aware, create noise, including penetrating low-frequency noise. This noise, in turn, creates health problems. According to the British physician Christopher Hanning, a renowned expert on the effects of noise on health, “There can be no doubt that groups of industrial wind turbines (wind farms) generate sufficient noise to … impair the health of those living nearby.” These negative health impacts might include fatigue, cognitive impairment, sleeplessness, depression, risk of diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease and cancer.

Wherever wind farms are located in the world, they generate noise complaints from nearby residents. Whether from Canada or England or Germany or the Netherlands or New Zealand, the complaints from people are always the same: their lives have been disrupted and their health negatively impacted by noisy turbines. Many people have been forced to vacate their homes to safeguard their health and that of their children. A woman from Ontario, Canada, described her heartbreak at having to leave her home: “What was once a beautiful place to live has been destroyed” by turbine noise. An Oregon community was assured by wind-farm developers that their newer turbines were quiet. After living near them, one local man characterized these assurances as a “crock.”

In Maine, two physicians who studied the noise problem at the Mars Hill wind farm have stated that “ill effects are likely when homes are placed within 3,500 feet of a ridgeline arrangement of turbines.” Many European governments with long experience with the bad effects from wind turbines commonly require a setback distance between 5,000 and 6,500 feet. In contrast, at the Pinnacle Wind Farm near Keyser, the PSC requires a paltry 627 feet between homes and turbines.

Unlike our PSC, many other government agencies have imposed rigorous requirements on turbine noise to protect the public’s health and welfare. In Shawano County, Wisconsin, for example, low-frequency noise is strictly regulated, and any wind turbine affecting the “habitability or use of any existing dwelling … shall be deemed unsafe and must be shut down immediately.” Some towns in Wisconsin, including Morrison and Rockland, totally prohibit the “pure tones” generated by wind turbines because of their deleterious impacts on health. In West Virginia, unfortunately, we have no such protections. Indeed, the PSC does not even employ an acoustic engineer who could properly evaluate the noise studies submitted by wind developers. According to many experts, these wind company studies are deeply flawed, and consistently underestimate the levels and impacts of turbine noise.

The choice is clear: either wind technologies must be improved so that they do not impact public health, or turbines must be placed at a sufficient distance from homes to ensure no harm is done to nearby residents. But since the Public Service Commission refuses to do its job, those who care about this issue will be obliged to use the federal courts. In the meantime, West Virginians will suffer.

Taylor lives in Keyser.

Posted in WV State Government | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Industrial wind opponents are selfish … or are they?

Posted on December 23, 2009 by morgan

Excellent post from the Jefferson’s Leaning Left Blog, Jefferson County, New York (thanks to Glenn Schleede and Jon Boone)

So, this lady stands up at a Public Hearing, Monday, about the Galloo Island Wind Factory. She lives near the Watertown border of Houndsfield and she spoke in favor of the wind factory which is 22 miles from her home. She even gave some reasons why she thought wind towers were good. But then, she declared that the outsiders attending and speaking at the hearing had no business coming to her town and telling her town what to do about this issue. She closed her testimony by stating that the resistance to turning Lake Ontario into a wind factory was coming from those rich people. They were selfish.

Geeze, Lady! I sure respect your opinion. In fact, yours was probably the only opinion that your board even listened to. If you recall, your board was not as quick to cut you off under the time rule as they were the speakers who were giving the reasons not to approve the site plan. And for the first time during their meeting, some members of the board perked up. Even the guy who said wind towers were good because he worked for a wind tower company did not get that kind of attention.

But, to tell a citizen he or she has no right to comment at a public hearing when the Galloo project affects them, their home values and their businesses is wrong.

Blame it on the rich?

Call them selfish?

Let me remind you, Lady, that the wind developers who are about to take control over your town are very, very rich. And, that lawyer guy? Wind development has brought him riches you and I will never see.

Let me also remind you that wind developers are outsiders, too. So far outside that they have to cross big oceans to get to Houndsfield. And the next time they come, they will use a bigger plane because they will be bringing many of the wind tower workers with them.

And the lawyer guy? He is from the outside, too. In fact, he has been spending much of his time on the other side of New York filing law suits against towns who don’t want to cooperate with his rich outsider wind developer friends from other countries.

And let me remind you that they are the ones that are selfish as hell. There is nothing more selfish than a corporation with carfully laid plans to make as much money as they can before they reorganize, sell out, or go bankrupt and disappear. And if you think these outsider rich guys are here to share significant amounts of their good fortune with you and your town taxpayers, think twice. The real generosity will be showered on the politicians who have made this project possible for the rich- outsider multi-national wind developers and their investors.

Posted by RWiley   at 5:00 AM

(AT note:  Seem familiar?)

Posted in Wind Energy Shenanigans | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Falling price of renewable energy certificates threatens Australia’s industrial wind industry.

Posted on December 23, 2009 by morgan

From The Sidney Morning Herald:

$800 million wind farm in doubt

CLANCY YEATES

December 23, 2009

AGL Energy says its plans to build the $800 million Macarthur wind farm in western Victoria are under ”enormous pressure” because of a collapse in the price of renewable energy certificates, which is threatening the entire industry.

AGL managing director Michael Fraser warned yesterday that the project was just one of many wind farms that might not go ahead if the Federal Government could not tackle the level of uncertainty facing renewable energy investors.

The threat highlights the risk to $30 billion of expected investment in renewable energy needed to reach a Federal Government target of 20 per cent of Australia’s power from renewable sources by 2020.

To encourage green investment in the absence of a price on carbon, energy companies receive renewable energy certificates in return for producing green power.

But the value of the certificates has almost halved, from near $60 to about $30, since the Government issued them to people who install solar hot water systems and other products that do not generate power. Those certificates are issued because the home owner is not using ”dirty” power – and the solar power used instead is counted in the 20 per cent renewable energy target.

Mr Fraser yesterday launched a sweeping attack on the policy, calling the Government’s approach a ”fraud” that threatened the industry’s ability to meet the 2020 target.

The oversupply of certificates had caused investment in renewable energy to stop, he said.

”The reality is that you’ve seen virtually no new announcements around large-scale investments in the renewable sector from anybody for months now,” he said.

In September, Solar Systems, the company that planned to build the world’s biggest solar power station, near Mildura, was placed in receivership, a victim of the difficulty raising loans in the global financial crisis. Its 154-megawatt solar farm would have powered 45,000 homes.

The 350-megawatt Macarthur wind farm, about 50 kilometres from Hamilton, with a planned 150 turbines 90 metres tall – making it the southern hemisphere’s biggest – was expected to create 500 jobs during its three-year construction and power 150,000 homes. Mr Fraser said up to seven other wind farms being considered by the company were under threat.

The only new wind farms AGL would definitely build were those required under contracts to the Victorian and South Australian governments to supply power to desalination plants. ”Beyond that, you simply won’t see us invest until this issue gets resolved,” he said.

Mr Fraser’s comments come after the Council of Australian Governments last month launched an inquiry into the fall in the certificates’ price. Its report is expected soon.

The renewable energy industry has called for a regulator – a ”carbon bank” – to act like the Reserve Bank, intervening and buying up certificates when the price is threatened by market fluctuations.

Mr Fraser cast strong doubt on Australia’s capacity to meet the target of 20 per cent renewables by 2020, saying the volatility of the market in certificates would create a ”boom and bust cycle” in renewable investment.

”By definition we are not going to see investment in renewable electricity generation when we are creating renewable certificates from technologies that don’t produce electricity,” he said.

AGL is the country’s largest renewable energy operator and developer.

Posted in Wind Energy Shenanigans, Wind Power subsidies | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Camp Allegheny Update – 12/22/2009

Posted on December 23, 2009 by morgan

From Brightside Acres:

What Happened Today?

Tuesday December 22, 2009

This morning, the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) Hearing Examiner asked the legal counsel for both the Department of Historic Resources (DHR), represented by the Attorney General’s office, and Highland New Wind Development (HNWD), represented by Lenhart Obenshain, to provide a chronology of the discourse between them, beginning in June, 2003 through December 4 of this year, with all exhibits attached (estimated to be more than 50). He requested that such chronology be provided by the end of business today.

He further requested that both parties submit legal briefs by January 4, 2010.

Such briefs are expected to fully explicate the position of both parties in regard to the complaint, filed with the SCC on August 19, 2009, by the Department of Historic Resources, that Highland New Wind has failed to comply with the SCC’s Final Order directing the utility to cooperate with the agency in identifying and mitigating impacts to historic resources, namely, Camp Allegheny Battlefield.

Read the DHR Complaint.The depth and breadth of each party’s position would seem to have been rather thoroughly delineated in the Motion’s and Responses filed in recent days. (And accessible via yesterday’s post, Update on December 22 Hearing.) Given the tone of these missives, one can only imagine that whatever is filed on January 4 will make, at the very least, quite entertaining reading.

Interestingly, the Hearing Examiner made rather vague mention of what he called the “somewhat relevant” footnote in the SCC’s Final Order, wherein the SCC rejects HNWD’s request for limitations and/or modifications to the DEQ Report, stating: “Rather, we find that requiring Highland Wind to comply with the above conditions recommended by DEQ is desirable or necessary to minimize adverse environmental impact.”

The 41-page DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) Report referenced is dated June 30, 2006, and provides a summary of all of the recommendations submitted to the SCC by thirteen reviewing agencies, including the Department of Historic Resources.

Read the DEQ Report. See pages 28(8)-30(8e), 39(2b), 40(6).Of additional interest is the fact that during this morning’s short hearing, no statements were made by any party regarding DHR’s authority to demand mitigation for adverse impacts to historic resources located outside the Commonwealth of Virginia, nor the SCC’s responsibility to consider such resources in service of the public interest.

Perhaps the Hearing Examiner has decided it more “efficient” to consider such matters while in possession of legal briefs rather than in the presence of actual attorneys.

We’ll see.

This accounting is, at best, a superficial summary of what occurred today and where things stand as of this moment.

As Brightside gains additional information and greater understanding, we will share it in these pages.

Please check back and stay in touch.

Posted in Camp Allegheny, Environment | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

USFWS Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee Synthesis Workgroup, or Drafting Subcommittee – 6th Draft

Posted on December 22, 2009 by morgan

Thanks to Art and Pam Dodds for alerting us to the availability of the 6th Draft of the USFWS Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee (which follows the text), and for providing us their introductory comments.  The Dodds are highly regarded for their contribution to a better understanding of the impact of industrial wind on the environment.

Comment begins:

We have provided public comment to the committee and we have provided additional written comments for several committee meetings, emphasizing that their basis is incorrect. We have researched the history of each member and have determined that all the members, except possibly one, promote wind energy. Some of the members are aware of the environmental problems which result from wind energy, but they are receiving research money from wind companies.

Additionally, in the first meeting, Dr. Paul Cryan of the USGS provided evidence that male bats have a mating behavior in which they fly to the highest tree. (His PowerPoint presentation is linked here for your convenience.)The male bats evidently regard the wind turbines as the highest tree and they fly upward, being slaughtered by the blades.  Please see, especially, page 67 of Dr. Cryan’s presentation and please note that the narrative is in the upper left corner if you point your “mouse” arrow on the icon on the slide.

Arthur and Pamela Dodds

Pamela C. Dodds, Ph.D., is a Registered Professional Geologist who has worked as a geologist/hydrogeologist for the Virginia DOT, Virginia DEQ, and an environmental firm near Bristol, Tennessee.  She has concentrated on groundwater contamination investigations and is currently conducting hydrological investigations in watersheds which will be impacted by industrial-scale wind turbine projects and by extensive high voltage transmission lines.  Dr. Dodds is also certified by the West Virginia DNR as a Master Naturalist.  Mrs. Dodds serves as Treasurer of the Laurel Mountain Preservation Association.

Arthur W. Dodds, Jr., is a professional cartographer who worked for NOAA as a supervisor managing the instrument approach procedures charts for airports throughout the U.S.  His credentials include training and management concerning the heights of objects which could impact flight patterns; electromagnetic field impacts on RADAR; and viewshed analysis.  Mr. Dodds is also certified by the West Virginia DNR as a Master Naturalist.  Mr. Dodds serves as President of the Laurel Mountain Preservation Association.

Note to readers:  Please write to the Wind Turbine Guidelines Advisory Committee to let them know their work is being monitored by people who understand that their basic premise is incorrect.

Send comments to the attention of:

Rachel London
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 840
Arlington, VA  22203

Phone:  703-358-2161
rachel_london@fws.gov

6th Draft follows:

Posted in Bat/Bird Kills, US Fish &Wildlife | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

OPEN LETTER TO THE NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY Re: CAPE WIND

Posted on December 22, 2009 by morgan

OPEN LETTER TO THE NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY

December 22, 2009

RE: ‘National Audubon Society Shows Support for Wind Power’

http://www.enxco.com/article_audubonsociety.php

An open letter response to the National Audubon Society:

National Audubon’s shameful pandering to the wind industry is punctuated by President John Flicker’s remarks in ‘National Audubon Society Shows Support for Wind Power’: “When you look at a wind turbine, you can find the bird carcasses and count them,” he said.”

Contradicting John Flicker is the federal regulator participating in the offshore Cape Wind NEPA environmental review; and in the ESA Section 7 permit review process of Cape Wind, US Fish and Wildlife Service. New England FWS comments to lead federal Minerals Management Service MMS on the project draft EIS state the Adaptive management effective monitoring techniques “simply do not exist” to count Cape Wind produced avian carcasses.

Yet, the condition of MA Audubon’s “support“ for Cape Wind is the permitting agencies’ acceptance of AM Adaptive Management monitoring and mitigation-handled by contract.

NEPA analysis should avoid taking on a project advocacy position.  Accordingly, the condition of MA Audubon’s “support” for Cape Wind signals the corruption of the NEPA environmental review process in which MA Audubon is involved.  Even more troubling is that MA Audubon’s Cape Wind support condition is “doomed to failure” according to the federal regulator with purview over the endangered species.

“In his column, Flicker noted how Mass Audubon, an independent state Audubon organization in Massachusetts, recently completed an extensive review of the Cape Wind project, a study that “set a new standard for analyzing the potential effects of wind turbines on birds.”

National Audubon President John Flicker lauds MA Audubon for setting “…a new standard for analyzing the potential effects of wind turbines on birds.” Yet, MA Audubon’s approximate $8 million dollar, future contract condition of “support” for Cape Wind, calls for the implementation of effective techniques that “simply do not exist” according U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that has purview over the endangered and migrating species present in Nantucket Sound.

Taber Allison and Jack Clarke of MA Audubon state in their “Challenge” press release: “Monitoring and mitigation should be funded by Cape Wind with contributions from independent institutions and government agencies as appropriate“.

Indeed.

While Mr. Flicker emphasizes the importance of prudent siting, the Cape Wind project is imprudently sited in an Important Bird Area, and migratory flyway with endangered species present.  MA Audubon sets the table for immitigable harm to endangered and migratory wildlife by offering their “support” of Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound, and with the unfortunate blessing of National Audubon.  The new standard set by MA Audubon ignores Best Science that states to avoid siting wind turbines in IBAs, migratory flyways, and in areas where endangered species are present, perfectly describes Nantucket Sound.

MA Audubon’s Dr. Taber Allison has flatly denied MA Audubon’s testimony to federal regulators on bird kill by Cape Wind by his 8/30/06 published statement, “Mass Audubon scientists have never concluded that up to 6,600 birds, or any number of birds, would be killed if this project is permitted…”

As the President of Mass Audubon, Laura A. Johnson, submitted Mass Audubon’s comments on the Cape Wind DEIS on February 23, 2005:  “By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year.”

I wonder how many National or MA Audubon members understand that their dollars support the practice of killing then allegedly counting dead birds in an Important Bird Area and migratory flyway, with endangered species present.

Implementing techniques that “simply do not exist” to count Cape Wind produced avian carcasses for profit strikes me as an easy but repugnant way to earn a living; while courting extinction and the wind industry, Mr. Flicker.

It begs the question, “Who Is supporting bird life?”

Sincerely,

Barbara Durkin

Northboro, MA  01532

Supporting Evidence:

‘Alameda County approves new bird-monitoring contract for Altamont Pass wind Turbines’

http://www.insidebayarea.com/localnews/ci_9962700

Upper Cape Codder: 4/20/06 (MA Audubon’s “Challenge” press releases)

Allison & Clarke: Challenge to Cape Wind: Get it right
By Taber Allison and Jack Clarke

“Mass. Audubon challenges the developer of Cape Wind and its PERMITTING AGENCIES TO ACCEPT comprehensive and rigorous MONITORING AND MITIGATION CONDITIONS that will reduce the risk to birds and other wildlife. IF THESE CONDITIONS ARE ADOPTED and remaining significant data gaps are addressed, MASS AUDUBON WILL SUPPORT CAPE WIND, the largest, clean, renewable-energy project in the Northeast.

We also propose adoption of an Adaptive Management Plan that includes a rigorous monitoring program beginning at the construction phase and continuing for at least three years post-construction, mitigation measures in the event that the project results in significant adverse environmental impacts, compensation for the use of public lands and waters and enforceable procedures for decommissioning any abandoned turbines.

An independent panel should be responsible for collecting and analyzing data collected during monitoring and preparing reports for peer review and dissemination to relevant agencies, Cape Wind and the public.

Finally, an independently administered mitigation fund should be established for conservation of bird habitat around Nantucket Sound. MONITORING AND MITIGATION SHOULD BE FUNDED BY CAPE WIND with contributions from independent institutions and government agencies as appropriate…” [cut]

Mass Audubon’s testimony on Cape Wind to the USACE:

The President of Mass Audubon, Laura A. Johnson, submitted Mass Audubon’s comments on the Cape Wind DEIS on February 23, 2005; to Ms. Karen Kirk Adams, the Cape Wind Energy Project Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District — Reference File No. NAE-2004-338-1, EOEA No. 12643:

“By utilizing other bird mortality data provided in the DEIS, Mass Audubon staff scientists arrived at avian mortalities that ranged from 2,300 to 6,600 collision deaths per year.”

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/CapeWindDEIS.pdf

Mass Audubon’s testimony on avian mortalities by Cape Wind to the USACE is denied by Dr. Taber Allison of MA Audubon:

SouthCoastToday: 8/03/06 LTE-Letter writer gets bird facts wrong by Taber Allison of Mass Audubon: ‘Letter writer gets bird facts wrong’

“Barbara Durkin repeatedly misquotes our public comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Study for the proposed Cape Wind project in Nantucket Sound as she does most recently in her July 26 Letter to the Editor. Mass Audubon scientists have never concluded that up to 6,600 birds, or any number of birds, would be killed if this project is permitted…”

The consequence of lacking transparency in the Cape Wind review process is potential extinction:

Cape Cod Times 4/22/08

Roseate terns: ‘On the brink of extinction’

“The roseate tern is listed as endangered, but we believe it is on the brink of extinction,” said Jack Clarke, public policy director for the Massachusetts Audubon Society.” Cape Cod Times 4/22/08.

Mass Audubon comment to the USACE on the Cape Wind DEIS:

“This area of Nantucket Sound is within the eastern U.S. migratory bird flyway and hosts high concentrations of wintering waterfowl, and is in close proximity to nesting, foraging and staging areas for federally endangered roseate terns and threatened piping plovers. Substantial numbers of federally endangered sea turtles and protected marine mammal species frequent the proposed project site. In addition, the proposed site provides habitat for federally regulated finfish and shellfish populations.”

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/CapeWindDEIS.pdf

Mass Audubon:

“First, for some avian species, such as the Roseate Tern or Piping Plover, a single death as a result of the project could be regarded as an unacceptable level of impact under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.”

Mass Audubon on the Roseate Tern:

“In 2001, 1,826 pairs of Roseate Tern, representing half of the entire North American Population of this species, nested in Buzzard’s Bay. During the breeding season the adults of this species are known to forage heavily between Wood’s Hole and Nantucket. From July to September even a higher percentage, perhaps as much as 75% of the entire North American population stages at the following beaches in Nantucket Sound—South Beach, Chatham; Monomoy National Wildlife Refuge, Chatham; Great Point, Nantucket, Cape Pogue, on Martha’s Vineyard, and a variety of smaller beaches between Hyannis and Mashpee.”

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/
advocacy/editorial/MEPA_windfarm.pdf

April 21, 2008 USFWS provided to Dr. Cluck, Cape Wind Project Manager of MMS, this comments on the Cape Wind MMS DEIS:

“The current framework that MMS is proposing would forgo refinement of pre-construction study protocols and set in motion an adaptive management process that would be doomed to failure because effective techniques to perform post-construction monitoring simply do not exist.”

Best Scientist Donald Michael Fry, PhD Director, Pesticides and Birds Program
American Bird Conservancy:

“We may never know what the magnitude of the problem will be at Cape Wind, because the monitoring planned for the project is inadequate.  The radar studies conducted by Cape Wind were inadequate.  The Fish and Wildlife Service review of the project and of MMS PEIS was quite critical.”

Cape Wind draft EIS NE USFWS comments continue:

“With respect to natural resources for which Fish & Wildlife Service is responsible, we find that there is considerable need to correct inaccuracies, explain inconsistencies, clarify ambiguities, fully articulate the limitations of the available science, and reach logical conclusions about the extent of impacts or the inability to predict them in the absence of information,” said Michael Bartlett, supervisor of Fish & Wildlife’s New England field office in Concord, N.H.”

“The Draft Environmental Impact Statement repeatedly and inappropriately draws conclusions regarding anticipated environmental impacts, or lack thereof, in the absence of important site-specific information on natural resources in…Nantucket Sound.” Chief among these are migratory birds and the benthic and pelagic resources the birds depend on.”

CAlifornians for Renewable Energy President-Michael Boyd:

“The Cape Wind project is sited over water so there is no way to quantify the impact of wind turbines on avian species because we have no way to count bird and bat carcases like we do in the Altamont Pass California where the turbines are over land. This also means that adaptive management will not work since we have no way to gage the impact of mitigation measures for these wind turbines.”

By Chris Metinko, Inside Bay Area 4/24/07 (answering, Who is Michael Boyd?)

“A lawsuit filed against the county in October by the Golden Gate Audubon Society, Californians for Renewable Energy and four other local Audubon chapters challenged the county’s decision o renew permits for Altamont Pass wind turbines. A subsequent settlement forces the wind industry to commit to a 50 percent reduction in raptor deaths by November 2009, and remove the deadliest turbines and continuing winter shutdowns of the wind machines.” [cut]

Minerals Management Service FY 2006 Cooperative Conservation Project’

“Project Title:

Cape Wind Energy Project

Examples of Key Partners

Cape Wind LLC, State of Massachusetts, Cape Cod Commission, Massachusetts Audubon Society, Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Aviation Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head, and the U.S. Minerals Management Service.”

http://www.mms.gov/offshore/PDFs/CooperativeConservationReport2006.pdf

————————————————————————————————————————–

US Department of the Interior

Minerals Management Service

Environmental Assessment Branch (MS 4042)

381 Elden Street

Herndon, VA 20170

Re:  Comments on the Cape Wind Draft Environmental Impact Statement, January 2008

Dear Minerals Management Service:

“Mass Audubon thanks the U.S. Department of the Interior’s (DOI) Minerals Management Service (MMS) for the opportunity to comment on the Cape Wind Energy Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), January 2008.

Mass Audubon has previously and formally commented to the federal government on an earlier DEIS for this project and issued a Challenge Proposal to permitting agencies and the applicant on the same (citations below).”

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/advocacy/MMS_DEIS_MAS_Comment.pdf

editor BJD note: this document provides a chronology of MA Audubon’s involvement in the review of Cape Wind and in the creation of wind energy regulations.

———————————————————————————————————————————

Position Statement on Wind Energy Development

John J. Clarke, Director of Advocacy May 12, 2003.

“Mass Audubon Involvement”

“Mass Audubon has submitted comments to federal, state, and local agencies and project proponents in response to several wind energy projects including the Cape Wind project, and we will continue participate in the environmental review and permitting processes.”

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/advocacy/Windpower2.pdf

————————————————————————————————————

Boston Globe

‘Get balance right with Cape Wind’

By Laura Johnson  | April 9, 2006

“THE FEDERAL review of the proposed Cape Wind project in Nantucket Sound will set the standard for future offshore wind projects in the United States, so it is important that we ”get it right.” Renewable energy will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and combat global warming, which, if unchecked, will lead to rising sea levels, and may one day wash away coastal habitat and popular beaches.”

“While the Massachusetts Audubon Society recognizes the need for ”green” energy, no purpose is served if the project causes greater harm than good. Mass Audubon has taken a leadership role in analyzing the potential environmental impact, with particular attention to the birds that live in the sound’s Horseshoe Shoal or fly through this area.”

“After five years of project review, including three years of ornithological fieldwork, we released Mass Audubon’s Challenge, a detailed set of standards that will guide our final review of this important project…”

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/04/09/get_balance_right_with_cape_wind/?p1=email_to_a_friend

———————————————————————————————————————————

“Mass Audubon is one of many who have and will continue to comment on one of the most important, precedent-setting renewable energy projects in the nation.  As one of the largest conservation NGO’s in the Northeast, MA Audubon will continue to be involved in the public environmental review of this project, especially its avian aspects.”

http://www.massaudubon.org/PDF/capewind/MAS-TheChallenge-3-06.pdf

————————————————————————————————————

Best Science:

The Department of the Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines for siting wind towers in 2003:

“–Avoid placing turbines in documented locations of any species of wildlife, fish, or plant protected under the ESA.

— Avoid locating turbines in known local bird-migration pathways or in areas where birds are highly concentrated, unless mortality risk is low (e.g., birds rarely enter the rotor-swept area). Examples of high-concentration areas for birds are wetlands, state or federal refuges, private duck clubs, staging areas, rookeries, roosts, riparian areas along streams, and landfills.

— Avoid known daily-movement flyways (e.g., between roosting and feeding areas) and areas with a high incidence of fog, mist, low cloud ceilings, and low visibility.”

(Avoid siting wind turbines in Nantucket Sound in other words)

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Feds comment on Ocean Plan : Martha’s Vineyard Times : December 17, 2009

MA Audubon’s Jack Clarke is appointed by Governor Patrick as Advisor on the environment.  Mr Clarke is helping to create the state Ocean Plan that Fish and Wildlife Service said lacks details on protected species.

Feds comment on Ocean Plan

Plan lacks details on protected species

“…Thomas R. Chapman, FWS New England Field Office supervisor, included the criticism in a seven-page letter, dated Nov. 23, to Deering Babb-Brott, assistant secretary for oceans and coastal zone management in the state Executive Office of Environmental Affairs (EOEA).

“Overall, we find the concept of the Plan to be valuable and timely,” FWS said. “The Plan is essentially a zoning map for the offshore waters under the state’s jurisdiction.”

But FWS found the plan lacking in detail, particularly with respect to laws and federal requirements in place to protect migratory birds…”

MA Audubon should be disqualified an MMS identified “Key Partner” and participant in the Cape Wind NEPA environmental review process.  As they have undermined the NEPA review by offering their “support” of the Cape Wind project as they are involved in the project permit review process.

(COURTESY OF JON BOONE)

Posted in Bat/Bird Kills, Cape Wind | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

“Firewood”

Posted on December 22, 2009 by morgan

An oldie but still a goodie:

It’s late fall and the Indians on a remote reservation in South Dakota asked their new chief if the coming winter was going to be cold  or mild.

Since he was a chief in a modern society, he had never been taught the old secrets. When he looked at the sky, he couldn’t tell what the winter was going to be like.

Nevertheless, to be on the safe side, he told his tribe that the winter was indeed going to be cold and that the members of the village should collect firewood to be prepared.

But, being a practical leader, after several days, he got an idea. He went to the phone booth, called the National Weather Service and asked, ‘Is the coming winter going to be cold?’

‘It looks like this winter is going to be quite cold,’ the meteorologist at the weather service responded.

So the chief went back to his people and told them to collect even more firewood in order to be prepared.

A week later, he called the National Weather Service again. ‘Does it still look like it is going to be a very cold winter?’

‘Yes,’ the man at National Weather Service again replied, ‘it’s going to be a very cold winter.’

The chief again went back to his people and ordered them to collect every scrap of firewood they could find.

Two weeks later, the chief called the National Weather Service again. ‘Are you absolutely sure that the winter is going to be very cold?’

‘Absolutely,’ the man replied.  ‘It’s looking more and more like it is going to be one of the coldest winters we’ve ever seen.’

‘How can you be so sure?’ the chief asked.

The weatherman replied, ‘The Indians are collecting firewood like crazy.’

Posted in just for fun | Tagged | 1 Comment