Entries in Wisconsin public service commission (75)
5/17/11 Checking in on family life among turbines in DeKalb IL:Like a bad neighbor, NextEra is there AND Peter broke it, tells Paul to Fix It
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: NextEra, (formerly Florida Power and Light)currently has wind developers prospecting around Wisconsin, most recently showing up in Rock County in the Towns of Spring Valley and Magnolia. This diary, kept by a family with four children, details life in a NextEra wind project and paints a clear picture of what NextEra's response has been to their problems with wind turbine noise, shadow flicker and lack of sleep.
(CLICK HERE to see where wind developers are prospecting in our state)
DIARY: LIFE IN A WIND FARM
Checking in with a family living in a Next Era wind project in DEKALB, ILLINOIS
"[NextEra] is stating that any complaint will be addressed and they do an exhaustive analysis that helps in design. once again this looks good on paper, but we are living a different reality."
-diary entry on May 13, 2011
Thank you for visiting our blog.
Our home in rural DeKalb County, IL is where we wanted to stay for good.
We have put so much into our home to make it a place where we would love to live and raise our children, and unfortunately we are being forced to live differently.
We have been bullied by a large industrial wind company (NextEra Energy, a subsidiary of Florida Power and Light (FPL) and sold-out by the DeKalb County Board.
FPL told residents that these wind turbines only "sound like a refrigerator."
Well, we have found that this is not the case.
Often times our yard sounds like an airport. We hear and feel the low frequency sound on our property as well as in our home. We are bothered by the noise, whistling, contant swirling movement, and shadow flicker.
Complaining is not something that our family is known for doing and we teach our children to look for the positive aspects of life, but this has gone too far with the turbines.
Someone needs to speak up. These industrial wind turbines should not be built close to homes. They should be at least a mile away to avoid these issues. We have 13 within a mile. The closest 2 are 1,400 feet away.
READ ENTIRE DIARY AT SOURCE:http://lifewithdekalbturbines.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
shadow flicker
Monday, May 16, 2011
Noisy Tonight!
perspective
Shadow flicker again
Friday, May 13, 2011
what we were told - part two
Double Shadow Flicker
This video was taken this last Sunday am. Both turbine #30 and #31 are creating shadow flicker on our property. This lasted about 40 minutes start to finish.
FROM ONTARIO
MPP CALLS FOR ACTION ON AMARANTH TRANSFORMER STATION
READ ENTIRE STORY AT THE SOURCE:, www.orangeville.com
May 16, 2011
By Richard Vivian
During the TransAlta meeting, Whitworth said the company presented them with three options: live with it and adapt, sell your homes and move, or file a lawsuit.
The problem is too bad to stay, he said, and no one would want to buy their house given the situation. Nor do they have the money to file a lawsuit against a multi-national corporation.
For years now, two Amaranth families have endured a long list of ailments they claim are caused by “electrical pollution” from the neighbouring transformer station.
With no solution in sight, MPP Sylvia Jones is calling on Minster of the Environment John Wilkinson to step in and help them out.
“It’s gone on too long,” Jones, who made her request to the minister on May 6, said. “The minister must take responsibility and ensure this matter is resolved.”
It appears, however, like a resolution isn’t coming anytime soon — at least not one that satisfies the Kidd and Whitworth families.
Wilkinson insists his ministry has already taken steps to address their concerns and, in a statement provided to The Banner, made no commitment to do more.
“They changed the transformer to a quieter model, implemented acoustic barriers, landscaped the area for additional screening and provided three years of acoustic measurements,” the minister said.
“The transformer is now in compliance with our stringent noise requirements. We have not heard from either family about noise issues in over a year.”
The 10th Line families point the finger for their nausea, headaches, loss of balance, diarrhea and more at the nearby TransAlta transformer station, which connects 137 industrial wind turbines to the electrical grid.
“Finally, somebody is willing to try to do something to help us,” Terry Kidd said of Jones, not giving up hope an end is near. “I hope she’s able to do something.”
So far, attempts by Terry and Theresa Kidd, as well as Ted and Cheryl Whitworth, to find a solution to their situation — they now want to be bought out and compensated — have failed.
Representatives of TransAlta, which purchased the substation from Canadian Hydro Developers, deny any responsibility for the families’ illnesses.
According to Ted Whitworth, they’ve only met with TransAlta once, and all the changes referred to be Wilkinson were implemented by Canadian Hydro.
During the TransAlta meeting, Whitworth said the company presented them with three options: live with it and adapt, sell your homes and move, or file a lawsuit.
The problem is too bad to stay, he said, and no one would want to buy their house given the situation. Nor do they have the money to file a lawsuit against a multi-national corporation.
A consultant hired by the Kidds suggests there is a problem at their home.
“It appears that there is cross contamination of electrical pollution from the wind farm generation onto the electrical distribution system that supplies power to neighbouring homes,” David Colling, who brought in equipment to measure the electricity in the air, states in a reported dated Feb. 8, 2010, but based on measurements taken the previous April.
“What your family has been suffering from is likely electrical hypersensitivity,” it adds.
“You have 10kHz micro surges being introduced into your home, therefore it compares to living inside a microwave oven environment.”
After receiving the report, Terry and Theresa left their home, moving in with family near Dundalk. As a result, they said their symptoms have abated.
The Whitworths, however, have not left their home and continue to experience health issues.
Provincial legislation approved since the station was installed require they have a minimum setback of 500 metres from the nearest residence. The Kidds’ home is 390 metres from the station and the Whitworths’ is 490.
“Their family physician has said there is a problem,” Jones said, noting the doctor has the “added credibility” of being a former medical officer of health for the Region of Peel.
“(Wilkinson) kept bouncing it back to the regional office of the Ministry of the Environment,” Jones added of the concerns raised.
“He can’t continue to put it back onto the civil service.”
The BPRC Research Nerd
in Noise, Ontario, Wind developers behaving badly, Wind farm, Wind farm health effects, Wisconsin public service commission, health effects, property values, wind energy, wind farm health effects, wind farm noise, wind farm property value, wind farm sleep deprivation, wind farm wisconsin, wind power wisconsin, wind turbine
|
Comments Off
3/31/11 Local elections tied to wind development in Brown County AND Big wind lawsuit in little St. Croix county AND Wind Whirl over cancelled projects: How much of it is spin? AND Wind blade factory falls through: carrot on end of stick could have been a mirage AND Hello Windmill, Bye Bye Birdie
WIND FARMS REMAIN AN ISSUE IN GLENMORE, MORRISON
Source: Green Bay Press Gazette
March 31, 2011
By Doug Schneider
Wind farms remain a campaign issue in two southern Brown County towns, despite a company's recent decision to cancel plans for 100 wind turbines in Morrison, Glenmore and other nearby communities.
Invenergy LLC said it would not pursue permits for a wind farm in the area, but campaign signs related to wind energy continue to dot the landscape, and candidates say they still need to be prepared with future proposals that could affect residents' quality of life.
"We have to keep in mind that there are other projects like this out there, smaller developments," said Todd Christensen, who is seeking re-election as Morrison town board chairman, "and there could be more in the future."
Invenergy would have put 54 turbines in Morrison, four in Glenmore, and others in Wrightstown and Holland. Because some town officials expect there will be other developments proposed, towns are banding together to push for consistent regulations on issues related to windmills, and are asking state officials to consider their concerns. A handful of wind turbines were built as part of another project off Wisconsin 96 near the hamlet of Shirley.
But candidates also say there are issues beyond wind-energy regulation.
Cliff Hammond, who is challenging Christensen, said the next town board also will need to work to maintain a balanced budget as financial support from the state and county decline.
Kriss Schmidt, who is running for board chairperson in Glenmore, said board members will have to make sure basic services like snowplowing and road-patching are maintained.
Pat Kolarik, who also is running for Glenmore board chair, said the key for elected officials will be to focus on maintaining residents' quality of life whether the issue is wind energy or something else.
"There are going to be a number of challenges we have to address — budget, services, appropriate setbacks for any structure," she said. "The goal for me would be to work with residents on appropriate solutions."
ENERGY SOLUTION OR LEGAL TROUBLE?
March 31 2011
"The controversial energy project in Forest has come under fire and may be stopped by a federal lawsuit which was filed by a citizens’ group in February."
A legal battle in northeastern St. Croix County highlights the difficult issues of wind-generated power. Talk to anyone and they will, in general terms, talk about wind power as a good, efficient and cheap energy source for the times — be it today or tomorrow.
Try finding a location to construct wind generators and suddenly you’ve got yourself a first-class controversy, complete with arguments among neighbors, recalls and lawsuits.
Such is the case in St. Croix County in the town of Forest.
The controversial energy project in Forest has come under fire and may be stopped by a federal lawsuit which was filed by a citizens’ group in February. That suit was also supported by action of a new town board that was elected through a successful recall election. The former board had approved the proposed wind energy project last summer.
A citizens’ lawsuit was filed in February. In March, the new town of Forest board voted to rescind a wind energy development agreement and other approvals that had been granted to a wind developer. The project, being proposed by a private developer named Emerging Energies, is in jeopardy.
The project in Forest called for 39 wind towers. Each tower stands about 500 feet tall.
Many landowners in the town had signed leases with the wind firm, but were prohibited from discussing the project. When the rest of the town’s residents got “wind” of the deals, the uprising began.
Now there are battles over setbacks, noise, quality of life, health, property value, safety and more. Emerging Energies, LLC, has also threat-ened the new town board with legal action.
A similar scenario developed in the eastern part of the state when a Chicago wind energy developer, Invenergy LLC, dropped its plan to build a large wind farm near Green Bay.
Opponents in the Green Bay area are expressing the same concerns and claim they will continue to work to prevent the “irresponsible development of industrial wind projects.”
State energy regulators are now trying to come up with a plan to help support wind projects. Regulators may be asked to go back to the drawing board to develop statewide rules governing wind power projects, under a bill to be considered this week.
The Legislature’s joint committee for review of administrative rules voted earlier this month to temporarily block a wind farm site rule developed by the state Public Service Commission.
Supporters of wind energy development say legal problems will stall development, leading to a loss of jobs tied to wind turbine construction as well as revenue for host property owners and local governments. There seems to be plenty of controversy over, among other things, setbacks for wind towers.
A property rights bill introduced by Gov. Scott Walker in January would restrict wind towers from being placed less than 1,800 feet from a property line. That bill had the apparent support of wind farm opponents and the Wisconsin Realtors Association.
In its most recent wind farm decision, the PSC ruled that 1,250-foot setbacks be required for We Energies’ Glacier Hills Wind Park, now under construction in Columbia County.
The bottom line is, when wind towers begin popping up in either populated areas, or rural countryside, there is likely to be plenty of opposition. A group of wind towers doesn’t do much for the scenic value of any topography.
Despite all the virtues of wind power, developing a power source to a degree where it would have a significant impact could be difficult when facing “not in my backyard” neighborhoods.
MIDWEST WIND SUSPENDS DEVELOPMENT WORK IN STATE
"Wind industry representatives said the PSC rule was restrictive because it set specific decibel limits for turbine noise and shadow flicker restrictions as well as setbacks."
March 31, 2011
By Thomas Content
Midwest Wind Energy is suspending development of two wind farms in Wisconsin, the Illinois company said Wednesday.
The company developed the Butler Ridge wind farm in Dodge County and the Cedar Ridge project in Fond du Lac County, projects now owned and operated by other companies.
Midwest Wind said it was actively working on a 98-megawatt wind farm in Calumet County and another project for which a location had not yet been announced.
Midwest Wind cited development opportunities in other states at a time when Wisconsin policymakers are moving to restrict wind farm development.
"Most states are clearly open for renewable energy development and the economic development dollars and jobs that come with it,” said Stefan Noe, company president. “So long as there are states rolling out the welcome mat it doesn't make sense to devote significant dollars to a state that is creating unreasonable roadblocks for wind development."
The action came one week after Invenergy of Chicago canceled plans to develop a large wind farm near Green Bay, and one day after a legislative committee voted to introduce a bill sending wind siting rules back to the state Public Service Commission for more work.
Republican lawmakers and Gov. Scott Walker have said the PSC rule allowed turbines to be built too close to nearby homes. Wind industry representatives said the PSC rule was restrictive because it set specific decibel limits for turbine noise and shadow flicker restrictions as well as setbacks.
A bill that passed in the Legislature two years ago called on the PSC to set up a uniform standard for wind projects across the state, to replace a patchwork of local rules and moratoriums that were in place with regard to wind projects.
Keith Reopelle, senior policy director at the environmental group Clean Wisconsin, said the new chair of the PSC, Phil Montgomery, was a co-sponsor and supporter of the bill that called on the PSC to set statewide standards. He said he hoped the agency would move quickly to develop a workable set of rules.
When the bill was introduced in 2009, Montgomery – then a state lawmaker from Brown County and ranking Republican on the Assembly energy and utilities committee - released a statement in support of a uniform state standard.
“Wind power is job-creating power,” Montgomery said in April 2009. “A fair and uniform state standard for siting wind developments will create an environment of investment in our state while moving us closer to our green energy goals.”
WIND TURBINE PLANT ON HOLD
Source: Wisconsin Rapids Daily Tribune
March 31, 2011
By Nathaniel Shuda
"I think we had to give them every opportunity to succeed," council member Lee Albrecht said. "You have this carrot dangling out there that there are 600 jobs on the horizon; I think you have to do whatever you can to have that carrot come to you."
Wisconsin Rapids is ready to buy back land it sold to a local company that two years ago announced plans to build a wind-turbine blade manufacturing plant on the property.
Energy Composites Corp. faces a Friday deadline to either reach an agreement with Wisconsin Rapids or sell the nearly 94 acres of land back to the city at the original purchasing price, Mayor Mary Jo Carson said.
Carson said the sale doesn't necessarily mean the project is dead, but it won't happen right now.
"Obviously, ECC doesn't want to hold us up in reference to that land, which we thank them for," she said. "We appreciate their interest in their hometown."
Carson said City Attorney Sue Schill has been working with the company's attorney to reach a buy-back agreement.
On March 31, 2009, the company announced plans to build a 350,000-square-foot plant in the Rapids East Commerce Center that would create at least 400 local jobs. Since then, those plans expanded to 535,000 square feet and more than 600 positions.
To facilitate the project, the city later sold the Wisconsin Rapids-based company 93.7 acres of land in the Rapids East Commerce Center for $500 an acre -- a 90 percent discount from the typical asking price -- plus a $1,000 option fee, for a total price of $47,850.
Under the pending agreement, the city would buy back the land at the same price for which it sold it, Carson said.
"I'm glad to see it being sold back to the city at the original price," City Council member Marion Hokamp said. "The sooner they do it, the better it's going to be. Maybe we're going to get somebody else interested (in the property)."
As part of the original development agreement, the city would have paid $1.5 million for infrastructure costs, including extending city streets and expanding railroad access to the property, and $6,000 for each full-time job the company created on or before Dec. 31, 2012, up to $3.8 million.
At this point, Wisconsin Rapids has not invested any money in the project, city Finance Director Tim Desorcy said.
A decline in bond market conditions led company officials to put the project on hold while they searched for investors. Those efforts have been unsuccessful.
Hokamp, who has publicly criticized Energy Composites for a lack of action, said the city should have bought the property back sooner. She remained skeptical of the project throughout the process.
"Way back when they started, I never thought it was going to be done," she said. "They knew they weren't going to have anything out there a long time ago."
Other council members do not regret giving the company so long to bring the plan to fruition.
"I think we had to give them every opportunity to succeed," council member Lee Albrecht said. "You have this carrot dangling out there that there are 600 jobs on the horizon; I think you have to do whatever you can to have that carrot come to you."
WIND FARMS THREATEN MANY BIRD SPECIES WITH EXTINCTION
SOURCE Save The Eagles Foundation
STEI's president, Mark Duchamp, objects to the wind industry comparing bird mortality at windfarms to that from other causes related to human activities. These other threats have already reduced bird populations worldwide, he said, and are continuing to do so.
"But mortality caused by windfarms and their power lines is new and additional", he adds, "and like the proverbial last drop that spills the glass, its effects will be upsetting.
To wit the Tasmanian Wedge-tailed Eagle, which has been condemned to extinction by the construction of 7 windfarms in its habitat" (1).
Another important difference, says Duchamp, is that the other threats can't be easily stopped, whereas poorly-sited windfarm projects can. The Spanish Ornithological Society (SEO/Birdlife) recommended this month that windfarms no longer be built in natural areas, but in urban and industrial areas instead (2).
One week later, SEO/Birdlife revealed that bird mortality caused by windfarms and power lines was much higher than previously thought. For the Spanish region of Castilla La Mancha, they estimate it to be "1.3 million birds a year, many of them in danger of extinction like the Imperial Eagle, the Bonelli´s Eagle or the Lesser Kestrel". And they added: "(this is) a considerable number which proves that windfarms have a great capacity for killing birds". (3)
"This is what I have been claiming for 9 years", says Duchamp, "but only this month did SEO recognize the danger. During all that time I have been treated as a heretic, and was banned from ornithology forums where my whistle-blowing was causing discomfort in the profession."
The French naturalist, who lives in Spain, has been vindicated at last. He praises the American Bird Conservancy, Birdlife Bulgaria, and SEO for their firm stand against improperly sited windfarms, but laments that it will take more years before the most prominent bird societies do likewise. Conflicts of interests are at the root of the problem, he says.
STEI warns that, if we are to save our emblematic bird species from this new threat, it is urgent to impose a moratorium on windfarm construction and to call for a really independent commission to investigate the whole windfarm matter, starting with the effectiveness of this intermittent, unreliable, and ruinous form of energy.
Duchamp founded Save the Eagles International in 2009, to raise awareness and to publish inconvenient bird mortality statistics that most bird societies fail to make available to the public. He has launched today the STEI website where these numbers and their sources can be found:
REFERENCES
(1) - Wind farms: suspicious error by consultant condemns Tasmanian eagle to extinction.
(2) - SEO Birdlife: " Castilla-La Mancha "debe abandonar el viejo modelo de grandes centrales de generación eléctrica situadas en plena naturaleza y alejadas de los puntos de consumo y fomentar la generación eléctrica en suelo urbano e industrial".
Translation: "Castilla-La Mancha "must abandon the old model of large power plants located in natural habitats, far away from where the energy is consumed, and promote electrical generation in urban and industrial zones."
(3) - SEO Birdlife: "1,3 millones de aves al año... un número considerable con el que se demuestra que los parques eólicos tienen «una gran capacidad para matar aves»."
Translation: "1.3 millon birds a year... a considerable number which proves that windfarms have a great capacity for killing birds "
The BPRC Research Nerd
in BCCRWE, Bill Rakocy, Brown County, Calumet County, Columbia County, Emerging Energies, Invenergy, Midwest Wind Energy, Midwest Wind Energy, NIMBY wind, St. Croix County, St. Croix county wind, Town of Forest wind, Wind farm, Wind ordinances, Wisconsin public service commission, wind energy, wind energy wisconsin, wind farm bats, wind farm birds, wind farm lawsuit, wind farm wild life, wind farm wisconsin, wind power, wind power lawsuit wind farm lawsuit, wind power wisconsin, wind siting council, wind siting rules legislation and policy, wind turbine
|
Comments Off
3/30/11 This just in: Press Release from Midwest Energy says they're suspending their Big Wind game until rules are final in our state
According to MWE President, Stefan Noe, it no longer makes sense to invest significant development capital in a state that appears to be closed to the wind energy business. “Most states are clearly open for renewable energy development and the economic development dollars and jobs that come with it. So long as there are states rolling out the welcome mat it doesn’t make sense to devote significant dollars to a state that is creating unreasonable roadblocks for wind development.”
Noe cites the recent suspension of PSC 128 by the Wisconsin Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules as the most convincing evidence that Wisconsin is not interested in working with the highly lucrative wind energy industry. PSC 128 was the culmination of almost 2 years of work by the Wind Siting Committee and resulted in some of the most restrictive and detailed wind siting rules in the country. Although restrictive, these rules created a workable compromise between the wind industry and a range of stakeholders.
“Our four projects alone represent more than $600 million of capital investment in Wisconsin and more than 400 construction jobs and 40 permanent high-tech jobs. The industry as a whole has the potential to be a multi-billion dollar industry for the state. These projects also generate millions in local landowner payments and local government revenues, cash flow that is sorely needed in Wisconsin’s rural communities.” Noe said.
Midwest Wind Energy, LLC is a leading developer of utility-scale wind farms in the Midwest and Great Plains with seven projects totaling 649 megawatts currently in operation. MWE has an additional 5000 megawatts of projects in its development pipeline.
The BPRC Research Nerd
in Calumet County, Midwest Wind Energy, PSC wind rules, Wind farm, Wisconsin public service commission, calumet county wind, wind developer, wind energy, wind power, wind rules, wind siting rules legislation and policy, wind turbine, wind wisconsin
|
Comments Off
3/30/11 Wind rules head back to PSC under new Chairman AND Down under or up over, it's the same old song: secretive wind developers keep tearing up rural communities
PSC TO START OVER ON WIND SITING RULES
March 30, 2011
by Steve Prestegard
For the second time in less than a year, statewide wind siting rules developed by the state Public Service Commission were sent back for more work.
Tuesday’s vote nullifies the rule developed last year and requires the commission to start over.
Last year the PSC modified the rule slightly but not enough to satisfy groups who have mobilized to block wind farm developments, including the large Ledge Wind project in Brown County that developer Invenergy canceled last week.
At issue is how close turbines may be erected from nearby properties. Wind farms in Wisconsin have used setbacks of 1,000 feet from nearby homes, in the case of the Blue Sky Green Field wind project in Fond du Lac county, and 1,250 feet, in the case of the Glacier Hills Wind Park now under construction in Columbia County.
But opponents of wind farms, concerned about noise and shadow flicker from turbines, are seeking much bigger setbacks, and Gov. Scott Walker this year proposed a bill that would establish setbacks of 1,800 feet from a property line — which would mean even farther from a nearby residence.
Tuesday’s vote came one day after Gov. Scott Walker appointed a fellow Republican, former state Rep. Phil Montgomery, to chair the state Public Service Commission.
The wind siting issue will be among the key decisions facing Montgomery, along with a proposed biomass plant We Energies has sought to build at a Domtar Corp. paper mill in North Central Wisconsin.
Montgomery will start his term Monday, succeeding commissioner and former state Sen. Mark Meyer.
The bill that was introduced and passed by the committee on Tuesday would give the PSC six months to come up with a new wind siting rule. But the PSC won't have to meet that deadline until six months after the bill is passed, signed by Gov. Walker, and published, said Jason Rostan, the legislative committee clerk.
The Legislature’s joint committee for review of administrative rules voted Tuesday to punt the thorny issue of how close wind turbines should be from nearby properties back to the state Public Service Commission.
The committee voted 5–3 to introduce the bill along party lines, with Republicans in support and Democrats against. The same committee had voted earlier this month to block the PSC wind siting rule from taking effect.
Tuesday’s vote essentially ends development of the rule it drafted last year, and requires the commission to start over on a new one.
Wind energy developers said they wanted to see the rule go into effect because it gave developers guidance on how to proceed with investments in wind projects.
But Republicans sided with wind-farm opponents and the Wisconsin Realtors Association and Wisconsin Towns Association, which considered the PSC rule to favorable to wind-industry interests and too restrictive from a property rights perspective.
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: This story could have been written about any Wisconsin community targeted by wind developers: Sneak into a community and offer the big landowners big money to agree to host turbines and most importantly keep their mouths shut about the plan. These moves are straight from the wind developers playbook.
PUTTING THE WIND UP THEM
SOURCE: Goulburn Post, www.goulburnpost.com.au
March 30, 2011
by Alby Schultz
There was a public meeting in the small town of Boorowa in my federal electorate of Hume a short while ago.
A good percentage of the population packed the ex-services club to hear first-hand about the rumours swirling through the community that this area was to be the site of a massive wind generation project.
There were audible gasps from the audience as it was revealed that the project was indeed real, that it would span some 35 kilometres and involve the construction of more than 100 turbines.
There were more gasps when it became apparent that the wind energy developer had actually been in negotiations with some of their neighbours for many months.
The meeting heard that the farmers who had been quietly persuaded to host the turbines would reap tens of thousands of dollars in rental a year.
They heard about pilots who wouldn’t fight fires or dust crops if they had to fly in the vicinity of the giant swirling blades.
They heard about possible health effects for those on neighbouring land ranging from heart palpitations to migraine headaches.
But this is not an argument against wind power. It is also not a criticism of farmers who have struggled through a decade of drought and see the way clear to make some alternative income.
There may indeed be areas where wind turbines can be built and where the impact is minimal. But there are many areas where they should not be constructed. As things stand though I truly fear our rural social capital – as fragile as our topsoils – is in places being chopped to pieces by turbine blades.
We need to start by calling a spade a spade. These turbines are not ‘farming’. That is Orwellian nonsense. This is industrial scale power production in green clothing. These are major commercial developments and should be considered in the same way as any major development.
A decade ago wind turbines were almost human in scale. But the turbines which some of the Boorowa farmers will have built near their homes (the closest will be just over a 1000 metres away) are truly gargantuan. If one of these turbines was standing on Sydney Harbour, its blades would be well clear of the top of the Harbour Bridge.
I warrant that should a neighbour decide to build a two storey extension overlooking the backyard of one of these Sydney bureaucrats there would be an immediate cry of “you can’t destroy my amenity and land value like that!”
And yet when a farming community raises concerns about mega turbines they are labelled ‘nimbys’ (not in my backyard).
Local decision making must be put back into prime place. At present it is hopelessly biased towards the developer. The state government boasts that large wind developments are considered ‘critical infrastructure’ and given the red carpet treatment with a guaranteed four month approval processes.
Communities are provided just 30 days to digest and provide comment before the Minister gives the project a tick. Better still the states should all revisit the National Wind Code which the Howard Government proposed in 2006 and which they rejected.
The code would have seen legislation eventually produced right around the country better protecting local community rights.
Wherever large wind generation projects arrive the plot is predictable. A wind company identifies an area with good wind resources and reasonably close to the national grid. They begin quiet negotiations with landowners.
In my view, these power companies preying on landholders who in most case have had no cash-flow as a result of nine years of heartbreaking drought. Well down the track others in the community find out.
Those who have done the deals face bitterness and anger. Those who missed out feel betrayed and angry. Sydney based bureaucrats need to understand the impact this has in small rural communities.
There is precious little interaction when you live on a property an hour or more from your rural centre – perhaps just at special events or football or cricket matches. Wind turbine money in my electorate has poisoned those relationships.
Families stop talking to each other. Animosity and bitterness run deep. Whole rural farming communities are fractured and it lasts for years. The NSW Industry Department’s website says that whilst planned or operating wind power installations in NSW will deliver 960 megawatts at present there is potential to grow that to 3000 megawatts (a 300 per cent increase)!
The implication of that for rural communities in Hume, and elsewhere, are truly frightening unless we give local communities far more say over whether or not they want wind turbines of this scale in their area.
The BPRC Research Nerd
in Public Service Commision Wisconsin, Setbacks, Wind developers behaving badly, Wind farm, Wisconsin public service commission, wind contracts, wind developers, wind energy, wind farm legislation, wind farm noise, wind farm setbacks, wind power, wind siting council, wind siting rules legislation and policy, wind turbine, wind wisconsin
|
Comments Off
3/28/11 Was it the regulatory environment or "Naked-Wind Farm" situation that caused Invenergy to cancel Brown County project AND Big Wind+Big Money+The Mob = True Love AND Why a stroll in the prairie might be a bad idea
Note from the BPWI research nerd: In wind-industry speak, a wind project that does not have a power purchase agreement with a utility is known as a "Naked Wind Farm"
Use of term “Naked wind farm”:
"NextEra Energy Inc., the largest U.S. generator of wind power, said it hasn't been able to obtain multiyear contracts for about $1 billion in turbines capable of generating 612 megawatts of electricity. These so-called naked wind farms increased as cheaper natural gas and the lack of a federal clean-energy mandate reduced pressure on utilities to buy renewable power.
SOURCE: Stamford Advocate"
Without a utility committing to a long term power purchase agreement, financing for a large wind project becomes very difficult. Was this the real reason Invenergy pulled out of the Brown County wind project?
Although Invenergy claims it's Wisconsin's regulatory environment that caused them to cancel the project, in the same letter to the PSC they make it clear they will continue development of other wind projects in Wisconsin.
Meanwhile, Invenergy and wind lobbyists push a media spin on the story that does not stand up to scrutiny.
Examples of spin on Invenergy’s cancellation of wind project
Now Wisconsin Loses a Wind Farm – CleanTechnica: Cleantech ... <http://cleantechnica.com/2011/03/26/now-wisconsin-loses-a-wind-farm/>
Large Wisconsin Wind Farm Killed By Politics | EarthTechling <http://www.earthtechling.com/2011/03/large-wisconsin-wind-farm-killed-by-politics/>
Wind Power Wilts in Wisconsin, Surges in North Dakota <http://cleantechnica.com/2011/03/27/wind-power-wilts-in-wisconsin-surges-in-north-dakota/>
Developer Pulls Plug on Wisconsin Wind Farm Over Policy .. <http://solveclimate.com/news/20110323/wisconsin-wind-energy-renewable-portfolio-standard>
Teamster Nation: Developer cancels plan for WI wind farm because of Walker <http://teamsternation.blogspot.com/2011/03/developer-cancels-plan-for-wi-wind-farm.html>
Regulatory Flux Blamed for Canceled Wisconsin Wisconsin Farm ... <http://midwest.construction.com/yb/mw/article.aspx?story_id=157119321>
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker ruins everything, including wind power ... <http://www.grist.org/article/2011-03-25-wisconsin-gov.-scott-walker-ruins-everything-including-wind-powe>
Better Plan noted that reporter Thomas Content did not mention Invenergy's plans to continue development of wind projects in our state when he first reported the story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal. We are glad to say he has included this critical piece of information in the following story:
RULES MAY CHANGE FOR WIND FARM SITES: LEGISLATURE LIKELY TO ASK PSC TO CREATE NEW SET OF GUIDELINES
SOURCE: Journal Sentinel, www.jsonline.com
March 27, 2011
By Thomas Content
State energy regulators would be asked to go back to the drawing board to develop statewide rules governing wind power projects, under a bill to be considered this week.
The Legislature’s joint committee for review of administrative rules voted earlier this month to temporarily block a wind farm site rule developed by the state Public Service Commission.
But that action was only good for 30 days. To keep the rule from taking effect Friday, the committee will meet again Tuesday to consider a bill that would send the issue back to the PSC and direct the agency to develop revised guidelines within six months.
After the rule was suspended, Chicago wind energy developer Invenergy LLC dropped its plan to build a large wind farm near Green Bay.
Invenergy’s proposal would have included setbacks of 1,000 feet, which is less than the 1,250-foot minimum sought by the PSC in its rule. The PSC rule that’s been blocked from taking effect also would have provided specific noise and shadow flicker requirements for wind farm turbines.
A property rights bill introduced in January by Gov. Scott Walker and supported by wind farm opponents and the Wisconsin Realtors Association would restrict development unless a turbine is placed 1,800 feet from a neighbor’s property line.
That bill threatens to stall wind power development in the state but was welcomed by a citizens group that has fought the Invenergy proposal.
The Brown County Citizens for Responsible Energy said it was pleased that the Invenergy proposal was dropped. Group spokesman Steve Deslauriers said the 1,000-foot setbacks were “irresponsible” and would have harmed nearby homeowners.
The local group mobilized against the Invenergy Ledge Wind energy project, and residents near the Invenergy project were well represented at public hearings earlier this year on wind farm siting.
The property rights group is seeking an even stricter statewide standard than that sought by Walker – 2,640 feet, Deslauriers said.
“Our hope is that real world experience of existing wind project residents be heard and addressed in the new statewide wind siting rules,” he said.
Invenergy’s decision “will benefit the taxpayers and ratepayers of Wisconsin, as well as preserve the health, safety, and property values of those who would have been forced to live within the industrial turbine project,” the Brown County group said.
The organization said it “will continue to work vigilantly to prevent the irresponsible development of industrial wind projects.”
Supporters of wind energy development say the state of flux on wind rules will stall development, leading to a loss of jobs tied to wind turbine construction as well as revenue for host property owners and local governments.
The PSC rule would not have applied to large wind farms like Invenergy’s, although Walker’s bill would have. Utility observers expect the PSC to adopt consistent standards for all wind projects.
In its most recent wind farm decision, the PSC ruled that 1,250-foot setbacks be required for We Energies’ Glacier Hills Wind Park, now under construction in Columbia County.
Alissa Krinsky, Invenergy spokeswoman, declined to say whether the 1,250-foot setback imposed in the We Energies case would have been acceptable for the Brown County project.
Invenergy said last week it would increase its development efforts outside Wisconsin, in light of regulatory uncertainty here. At the same time, Invenergy said it planned to develop other in-state projects that “do not require as significant an investment during an unstable climate.”
Jeff Anthony, vice president of business development at the American Wind Energy Association, said he realized there was significant opposition to the Invenergy project, but he said the state’s regulatory climate likely proved to be “the last straw” for the Chicago firm.
“This is not rhetoric. This is real, in terms of lost opportunity for jobs and economic development in the state of Wisconsin,” he said.
Asked about the possibility of compromise, Anthony said wind developers already compromised during the drafting of the PSC rule. Along with the setbacks, the noise and shadow requirements set by the PSC “were going to be very tough rules to meet” but provided the industry a framework to proceed with projects, he said.
Next Story
HAWAII WIND DEVELOPER TIED TO LARGEST EVER ASSET SEIZURE BY ANTI-MAFIA POLICE
Monday March 28, 2011
by Andrew Walden
Paul Gaynor, CEO of First Wind stood comfortably with Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie, Rep Mazie Hirono, and HECO CEO Dick Rosenblum at the grand opening of the Kahuku Wind energy project on Oahu’s North Shore Thursday. As he should.
First Wind–formerly known as UPC Wind--got its start in wind energy by launching Italy’s IVPC--a company now subject to a record breaking asset seizure by Italian police. The Financial Times September 14, 2010 explains:
Italian anti-mafia police have made their largest seizure of assets as part of an investigation into windfarm contracts in Sicily. Officers confiscated property and accounts valued at €1.5bn belonging to a businessman suspected of having links with the mafia.
Roberto Maroni, interior minister, on Tuesday accused the businessman – identified by police as Vito Nicastri and known as the island’s “lord of the winds” – of being close to a fugitive mafia boss, Matteo Messina Denaro.
General Antonio Mirone, of the anti-mafia police, said the seized assets included 43 companies – some with foreign participation and mostly in the solar and windpower sector – as well as about 100 plots of land, villas and warehouses, luxury cars and a catamaran. More than 60 bank accounts were frozen.
Until his arrest last November, Mr Nicastri, based in the inland hill town of Alcamo, was Sicily’s largest developer of windfarms, arranging purchases of land, financing and official permits. Some projects were sold through intermediaries to foreign renewable energy companies attracted to Italy by generous subsidy schemes….
The renewable energy sector is under scrutiny across much of southern Italy. Some windfarms, built with official subsidies, have never functioned….
Mr Nicastri sold most of his windfarm projects to IVPC, a company near Naples run by Oreste Vigorito, also president of Italy’s windpower association. Mr Vigorito was also arrested last November on suspicion of fraud and later released. He denied wrongdoing.
Of course the folks who started IVPC know nothing about any of this. Reacting to an earlier round of arrests, First Wind founder Brian Caffyn told the November 15, 2009 Boston Herald: “I read about it in the papers, and I was very surprised.”
Will Hawaii’s windfarms actually work? The “Clipper Liberty” wind turbines installed at Kahuku and on Maui are made by a company founded by a former Director of Enron Wind. Clipper Liberty Vice President of Engineering is also an Enron Wind veteran.
Gaynor and Caffyn were once much more public about their corporate ties to Vigorito’s IVPC. First Wind was originally known as UPC. The UPC Solar website touts “Mr. Caffyn personally oversaw the establishment and construction of the largest wind energy company in Italy — Italian Vento Power Corporation.”
IVPC’s english-language website states: “The Group came to light in 1993 from an idea of Oreste Vigorito who formed the company I.V.P.C. S.r.l. on behalf of UPC, an American company which operates in the wind sector in California.” (Emphasis added.)
The UPC Solar website explains: “UPC’s earliest wind farm developments were built in 1995 in Italy. At the time UPC sold IVPC, its Italian wind business, in 2005, it had built approximately 650MW of capacity representing over 50% of the total installed Italian wind capacity.”
The Worcester Polytechnic Institute News Summer, 2005 reports on the activities of WPI alumnus Gaynor:
"...As president and CEO of UPC Wind Management, located in Newton, Mass., Gaynor was tapped to bring the success of the parent company, UPC Group, to North America. In Europe and North Africa, UPC affiliates—including Italian Vento Power Corporation—have raised over $900 million in financing and installed some 900 utility-scale wind turbine generators (WTGs), with a total capacity of more than 635 megawatts. UPC subsidiary companies, positioned across the United States and in Toronto, are currently pursing some 2,000 megawatts in projects from Maine to Maui..."
In March, Gaynor secured financing for a $70 million project on the island of Maui. [The project is a joint venture with Makani Nui Associates, which owns 49 percent.] The 30-megawatt wind farm at Kaheawa Pastures will be Hawaii’s first utility-scale project to be put into service since the 1980s. Plans call for 20 towers, 180 feet tall, with 1.5-megawatt General Electric turbines. Construction is expected to begin this summer, and the project should be completed by the first quarter of 2006. When operational, the wind farm will supply up to 9 percent of demand to customers of Maui Electric Company.
The Kaheawa Pastures site is situated on state conservation land, between Ma’aleaea and Olowalu, at elevations ranging from 2,000 to 3,000 feet.
Makani Nui is also a partner in the Kahuku Wind project.
Business Week reports that Caffyn is a Director or Partner in dozens of Limited Liability Corporations tied to wind energy projects. These include Hawaii’s Kaheawa Wind Power, LLC, Kaheawa Wind Power II, LLC, Hawaii Wind Construction, LLC, and UPC Hawaii Wind O&M.
Caffyn is also listed as a Director or Partner of Italian Vento Power Corporation (IVPC), Srl, IVPC 4, Srl. (Italian Vento Power Corporation), IVPC 6, Srl, IVPC 2000, Srl., IVPC Energy B.V., IVPC Energy 3 B.V., IVPC Energy 4 B.V., IVPC Energy 5, B.V., IVPC Energy 6, B.V., IVPC Energy 7, B.V., IVPC Gestione, Srl, IVPC Management, Srl, IVPC Management 2, Srl and IVPC Marche, Srl. Mr. Caffyn served as Director or Partner of IVPC Marche 2, Srl., IVPC Puglia, Srl, IVPC Service, Srl, IVPC Service 2, Srl, IVPC Service 3, Srl, IVPC Service 4, Srl, IVPC Service 5, Srl, IVPC Service 6, Srl, IVPC Sicilia, Srl., IVPC Sicilia 2, Srl., IVPC Sicilia 3, Srl., IVPC Sicilia 4, Srl., IVPC Sicilia 5, Srl., IVPC Sicilia 6, Srl., IVPC Umbria, Srl., IVPC Wind, Srl.
The UK Independent September 16, 2010 reports:
After decades of drug-running, extortion and prostitution, the Mafia appears to have found a rather more ecological way of laundering their money: green power.
And if the assets of the Italian police's latest target are any indication, the Mafia is embracing the renewable energy business with an enthusiasm that would make Al Gore look like a dilettante. The surprising revelation of organised crime's new green streak came as Italian police said yesterday they had made the largest recorded seizure of mob assets – worth €1.5bn (£1.25bn) ($2.1bn US) – from the Mafia-linked Sicilian businessman Vito Nicastri, who had vast holdings in alternative energy concerns, including wind farms.
Organised crime in Italy has previously been notorious for trading in environmental destruction – principally earning billions of euros by illegally dumping toxic waste. But most of the newly seized assets are in the form of land, property and bank accounts in Sicily, the home of Cosa Nostra, and in the neighbouring region of Calabria, the base of the rival 'Ndrangheta crime syndicate.
So naturally, First Wind is very comfortable with Hawaii politicians and business leaders.
THE FUTURE: Wind Energy's Ghosts
The list First Wind owned companies (some inactive) registered in Hawaii includes the following:
- FIRST WIND CONSTRUCTION, LLC
- FIRST WIND ENERGY, LLC
- FIRST WIND ENERGY MARKETING, LLC
- FIRST WIND HAWAII
- FIRST WIND O&M BATTERY SERVICES, LLC
- FIRST WIND O&M FACILITIES MANAGEMENT, LLC
- FIRST WIND O&M FACILITIES MANAGEMENT LLC
- FIRST WIND O & M, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER II, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER II, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER, L.L.C.
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER, LLC
- KAHEAWA WIND POWER VENTURES, LLC
- KAHUKU WIND POWER II, LLC
- KAHUKU WIND POWER II, LLC
- KAHUKU WIND POWER, LLC
- HAWAII HOLDINGS, LLC DBA FIRST WIND HAWAII
- HAWAII HOLDINGS, LLC DBA HAWAII HOLDINGS, LLC (NV)
- UPC HAWAII HOLDINGS, LLC
- UPC HAWAII HOLDINGS, LLC
- UPC HAWAII WIND
- UPC HAWAII WIND CONSTRUCTION, LLC
- UPC HAWAII WIND O & M, LLC
- UPC HAWAII WIND PARTNERS II, L.L.C.
- UPC HAWAII WIND PARTNERS II, LLC
- UPC HAWAII WIND PARTNERS II, LLC
- UPC HAWAII WIND PARTNERS, L.L.C.
- UPC HAWAII WIND PARTNERS, LLC
- UPC KAHUKU WIND POWER, LLC
- UPC KAUAI WIND POWER, LLC
- UPC WIND MANAGEMENT, LLC
ND WIND TURBINE ACCIDENT PEGGED TO BOLT FAILURE
Source: CBS MONEY WATCH
BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) — Bolt failures caused a wind turbine's rotor and blades to fall from a tower in north-central North Dakota, and six other turbines have been shut down while their bolts are replaced, a state regulator said Thursday.
Members of North Dakota's Public Service Commission, which oversaw the development of the 71-turbine wind farm, said Thursday they would seek more detailed information about how widespread the problems may be.
"That's a fair bit of equipment concern that I would have, quite frankly," Commissioner Kevin Cramer said.
The wind project, which was dedicated last October, is located near Rugby in Pierce County. It is capable of generating up to 149 megawatts of electricity.
It is owned by Iberdrola Renewables Inc. of Portland, Ore., which is a unit of Iberdrola Renovables SA of Valencia, Spain. The turbines themselves were manufactured by Suzlon Wind Energy Corp., a unit of Suzlon Energy Ltd., based in India.
Spokeswomen for Iberdrola and Suzlon did not immediately reply to telephone and email requests for comment Thursday. Suzlon has previously described the accident as an isolated incident.
Jerry Lein, a commission utility analyst, said Iberdrola officials told him that bolts that attached the wind turbine's rotor and blades to a power shaft had failed. The shaft transfers the energy generated by the turning blades to an electric generator.
No one was injured when the rotor and blades toppled from the tower March 14 and crashed to the ground.
Lein said the wind farm was shut down and its turbines inspected. The turbines that did not need bolt replacement have been restarted, he said. The damaged material has been sent to a lab for analysis.
"They want to look further into the mechanism there that was failed before," he said. "They said that, specifically, they're replacing the bolts that hold it together."
The bolts are normally checked every six months, Lein said.
Commissioner Brian Kalk said the agency should seek to examine the wind farm's maintenance records. He wants to hear more information from the companies within two weeks, Kalk said.
"I'd like (the companies) to get back in front of us as quickly as possible ... and give us their best estimate of what is going on," Kalk said.
The commission's president, Tony Clark, said the agency should hold an informal hearing on the incident.
"Nobody has a greater incentive to find out what went wrong than the company does," Cramer said. "But, at the same time, the citizens of Pierce County, they're probably a little bit concerned too. ... You might not want to go hiking in the prairie for a while."
The BPRC Research Nerd
in BCCRWE, Brown County, Invenergy, Invenergy, Thomas Content, Wind farm, Wisconsin public service commission, Wisconsin public service commission, Wisconsin wind power, wind energy, wind farm accidents, wind farm accients, wind power, wind siting council, wind siting rules legislation and policy, wind turbine
|
Comments Off
