Better Plan, Wisconsin

FROM MINNESOTA

DEBATE GROWS OVER WIND TURBINES IN THE PATH OF EAGLES

READ ENTIRE ARTICLE AT THE SOURCE: KARE11.com

July 26, 2011

By Trisha Volpe

GOODHUE COUNTY, Minn. -- Next to the crops, an environmental debate is growing in Goodhue County farm country - green energy on one side and saving wildlife on the other.

"Like a lot of farmers in the area, it's pretty deep in tradition," says local dairy farmer Bruce McNamara.

The McNamara farm has been in the area for 60 years. Bruce and his wife Marie are now worried about what could happen to their land and the birds they share it with, when a wind turbine project moves forward.

"Energy facilities should be sited in an orderly manner and they're clustered right over eagles' nests," says Marie, who is also a member of a local citizens group against a project to build wind turbines in the area.

The developer, AWA Goodhue Wind, plans to build 50 to 60 wind turbines over several thousand acres. Some residents and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are concerned the turbines will interfere with eagles nesting and feeding. There are at least four confirmed nests in the area according to fish and wildlife officials.

"The issue we're more concerned about is the birds flying into them and being killed," says Mags Rheude of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The developer says it's done everything possible to protect the eagles and doesn't believe their travel patterns bring the birds in the path of the turbines. The company has conducted several environmental studies, many still ongoing.

"We're probably 150 hours field time watching and monitoring eagle movements," says Ron Peterson, Director of Environmental Services for Westwood, the environmental consultant working with Goodhue.

Company officials say the issue may be about more than just eagles. Many landowners have bought into the project and turbines will be located on their farms.

"People who aren't participating or benefitting financially... don't want to look at them or listen to them if they're close enough to them," says Peterson.

The project has the go-ahead from the Public Utilities Commission, but in order to receive its permit Goodhue Wind has to conduct more studies and come up with a bird and bat management plan.

Goodhue hopes to start construction on the turbines by the end of the year.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is recommending a two mile buffer zone between turbines and the eagles.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD:

 The photo below was found on the Westwood Land and Energy Development Consultants website where the 'company biologist' Ron Peterson (mentioned in the previous article) is said to work. Wind companies often employ the services of one-stop-shopping 'consulting' firms like Westwood. The caption for the photo below reads: "We've been dancing through the years!"

Photo from Westwood Land and Energy Website

Emerging Energies, the wind developers responsible for the controversial Shirley Wind Project in Brown County, are now prospecting in New Haven Township in Dunn County and have expressed interest in siting turbines on the Town Chairman's land, according to sources in the area.

Emerging Energies was named in a federal lawsuit filed by St. Croix County residents.

 The suit alledged that former town board members had conflicts of interest and illegal and secretive dealings with Emerging Energies, LLC, in order to reach the agreements for the approval of the project.

According to the attorney representing Town of Forest residents, they were not notified that the former town board members- who lost a special recall election on February 15, 2011,- had approved an agreement in 2008 and another one on August 12, 2010, to proceed with the proposed wind energy project.

Landowners who signed contractual leases with Emerging Energies to allow wind turbines on their properties are said to be prohibited contractually from talking about the leases and the proposed project.

The first public notice of the controversial wind energy project arrived in the form of a postcard which was mailed to each Town of Forest property owner with postage paid out of Town funds, announcing the project and a planned bus trip to Glenmore, Wisconsin, to view the “Shirley Project”–which was represented as having “the same wind turbines that are coming to Forest, WI.”

According to the lawsuit, no public hearing was ever held by the defendants during a three-year development period marked by secretive deliberations between the former town board members and Emerging Energies, LLC.

Emerging Energies has filed an application with the Public Service Commission for its "Highland Wind Farm" project in St. Croix County. [CLICK HERE TO VISIT PSC WEBSITE: Type in docket number 2535-CE-100 to see Emerging Energy's application. The docket does not appear to be open for public comment at this time]  

Residents believe Emerging Energies wants to bypass the local wind ordinance enacted by the Town Board of Forest. The Town of Cylon is reportedly part of the project.

Bill Rakocy, who is one of the founders of Emerging Energies is well known to Better Plan. He served as one of the Wind Siting Council members charged by the PSC to come up with rules to regulate the siting of large wind turbines in our state.

The Shirley wind project developed by Emerging Energies has already Bill Rakocy of Emerging Energiesresulted in one family abandoning their home because of noise and other problems that began once the Shirley turbines went on line. The turbines in the Shirley wind project are fifty stories tall, making them the largest in the state.

The project has since been 'flipped', and purchased by utility giant, Duke Energy of North Carolina. The amount of money Mr. Rakocy made from this transaction is unknown.

However, the price paid by the Enz family who were forced to abandoned their home due to noise and vibration caused by Rakocy's project is very clear.

       Dave Enz lived near the hamlet of Shirley, 12 miles from Green Bay, since 1978. Last year, wind turbines arrived, several within a half-mile, and he had no inkling they’d be trouble.

Then, he and his wife endured months of earaches, nausea and unexplained anxiety until they realized, when their symptoms vanished on vacation, that it was probably the turbines.

“It’s not the noise that gets you, the audible noise,” said Enz. It’s vibration: “It makes you want to run away.” He and his wife did, to their kids’ house. “We never expected to be homeless while we owned a home,” he said. The couple, in their upper 60s, are now looking for a campground to live in.

And the house? Enz says that in good conscience they can’t sell it.

SOURCE: SOURCE: www.jsonline.comMilwaukee Journal Sentinal 4/27/11

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Here in the U.S. we often hear about how wind development has been fully accepted in Europe, particularly in Denmark where it is often said there have been few complaints.

So why are these Danes risking their lives and risking arrest by laying down in front of the construction equipment for a new Danish wind project?

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE VIDEO

From Minnesota:

Investigators | Wind Power Struggle in Minn.: MyFoxTWINCITIES.com

From Minnesota

BILLS INTRODUCED TO TOUGHEN WIND FARM REQUIREMENTS

The first proposal would prohibit wind turbines from being built within a half mile of a homeowner’s property line in a township where there are at least 3 1/2 homes per square mile.

SOURCE The Post-Bulletin, www.postbulletin.com 

March4,  2011 By

Heather J. Carlson,

ST. PAUL — Two lawmakers introduced a pair of bills yesterday that would place new restrictions on wind farm developments.

Reps. Tim Kelly, R-Red Wing, and Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, are backing the bills. The first proposal would prohibit wind turbines from being built within a half mile of a homeowner’s property line in a township where there are at least 3 1/2 homes per square mile. The second bill would no longer allow larger wind farms to qualify for Community-Based Energy Development (C-BED) status. That status allows wind companies to charge utilities premium rates for the energy they produce.

Kelly said he supports alternative energy, including wind, but there need to be more protections in place for landowners and utility ratepayers. In particular, he said he is concerned about large wind companies with limited ties to Minnesota getting the C-BED status, which allows them to build in areas that may not otherwise make economic sense.

“I really have a problem with the way that (C-BED status) has been hijacked. It’s been manipulated,” Kelly said.

From Ontario

ANTI-TURBINE ACTIVIST STANDS FIRM

“It seems that both bodies are trying to pass the buck. Meanwhile, there’s no justice for the people who are suffering physically from the presence of the turbines. There’s no justice.”

SOURCE: Better Farming, www.betterfarming.com

March 4, 2011

By Pat Currie,

An appeal of a Chatham-Kent wind power development continues despite this week’s defeat of efforts elsewhere in Ontario to overturn a provincial law governing distances between wind turbines and dwellings

Don’t count it as a legal watershed for battles over other wind farm proposals.

That’s a Chatham-Kent anti-turbine activist’s perspective of the Ontario Divisional Court’s decision this week to quash a challenge to provincial law that sets minimum distances between power-generating wind turbines and human habitations.

“All I see is one court passing the buck to another,” said Monica Elmes, speaking for the Chatham-Kent Wind Action Group. The group is appealing approval of Suncor Energy’s proposed Kent Breeze wind farm project near Thamesville, about 20 kilometres northeast of Chatham, on the grounds it is a health hazard.

Suncor is proposing to place eight turbines on farmland to generate 20 megawatts of power.

The Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT) is hearing the appeal. It has been shifting proceedings back and forth between Chatham and Toronto since early February.

In the Ontario Divisional Court’s decision, issued Thursday, three judges wrote that they did not consider it the proper jurisdiction to rule on the constitutionality or wisdom of the province in setting the 55-metre setback.

“I find it kinda funny – the MOE (Ministry of the Environment) lawyers at first said that Ontario Divisional Court was where the challenge should be heard and now the court is saying it should be heard by the ERT,” said Elmes.

“It seems that both bodies are trying to pass the buck. Meanwhile, there’s no justice for the people who are suffering physically from the presence of the turbines. There’s no justice.” BF

From Maine:

WIND FARM DEVELOPER OFFERS $120,000 TO SAVE TEACHING JOBS

“One of the PTA members looked at him — and this was in the middle of the budget stress they were having — and said, ‘Do you have $120,000?’” he said.

“Tom wasn’t able to say yes or no at that point, but we thought about it and we’d be happy to help out, basically, if we can go forward with our wind project for Woodstock this spring,”

Sun Journal, www.sunjournal.com

March 5, 2011

By Terry Karkos, Staff Writer,

WOODSTOCK — A Massachusetts-based wind developer announced early Friday evening that it has offered to donate $120,000 to SAD 44 to save three teaching jobs at Woodstock Elementary School.

Todd Presson, chief operations officer of Patriot Renewables LLC in Quincy, confirmed the gift but was unsure of the process that either the school district or town must go through to use the money as intended.

“We had been looking for ways for a while now at becoming part of the community of Woodstock, where we’ve been for a couple of years developing (a wind farm),” Presson said.

On Oct. 5, 2010, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection approved a land-use permit for Patriot Renewables to build 10 wind turbines and the necessary power lines and access roads along the ridgeline of Spruce Mountain.

Presson said the project coordinator, Tom Carroll, attended a few meetings of the school’s Parents-Teachers Association, and asked if there was anything the company could do to work with the community.

“One of the PTA members looked at him — and this was in the middle of the budget stress they were having — and said, ‘Do you have $120,000?’” he said.

“Tom wasn’t able to say yes or no at that point, but we thought about it and we’d be happy to help out, basically, if we can go forward with our wind project for Woodstock this spring,” Presson said.

He said the company has money budgeted and allocated for legal challenges.

“As long as we don’t have any further legal challenges, we can use that money to help the school out, but it sounds like something we should be behind and we’d like to be behind,” Presson said.

He said that on Feb. 4, the Maine Board of Environmental Protection denied an appeal by Friends of Spruce Mountain against approval of Patriot’s estimated $37 million Spruce Mountain Project.

By the end of next week, a 30-day period to appeal that decision to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court expires, Presson said.

David Murphy, SAD 44 superintendent, declined comment Friday evening on the donation, saying he hadn’t been aware of it.

But Linda Walbridge, director of the Western Maine Economic Development Council in Paris, said the money would save three teaching jobs cut earlier this year.