Better Plan, Wisconsin

Part 1: Wind proposal dividing communities, May 4, 2010

MORRISON – Imagine dozens of wind turbines, standing 400 feet tall, stretching across the farm fields of southern Brown County.

They’d be spinning, day and night, for at least the next 30 years.

Some believe it’s a picture of progress.

“Of course it is. Wind has been used since the beginning of time,” said Glen Martin, a landowner in the town of Morrison.

Others see it as a major misstep.

“What do you do when the wind don’t blow?” said Dick Koltz, a landowner in Wrightstown.

Nine commercial wind farms are already up and running in Wisconsin, but on the table is a proposal for the largest project yet: 100 wind turbines in southern Brown County. It’s known as the Ledge Wind Energy Project.

The project has been proposed by Invenergy, a private wind developer from Chicago.

“The beauty of wind, once it’s installed, it just runs and runs and runs without harmful commodities having to be used up,” said Kevin Parzyck, the project development manager for Invenergy.

“We’re not claiming this is the end all for all power needs. It’s one component of the mix,” said Parzyck.

Parzyck said the electricity generated by the wind turbines would be sold to utility companies in Wisconsin.

The current proposal places 54 turbines in the town of Morrison, 22 in Holland, 20 in Wrightstown and 4 in Glenmore.

One would be on Glen Martin’s farmland in the town of Morrison. He believes the wind turbines are a necessary step towards energy independence.

“We have to produce this electricity and power some place, just like we have to grow a crop some place, just like we have to mine coal some place. This all has been to be done some place and this is a good place to do it,” said Martin.

But it’s not just about going green. Landowners would be paid as much as $10,000 per year for each turbine on their property. That’s quite the bonus, especially for farmers who have seen their share of struggles.

“Let’s face it, it would be nicer and times are tough. I’m sure the last couple of years swayed some of them into doing it. It is attractive,” said Dick Koltz.

Koltz signed a contract to have one turbine on his farmland in the town of Wrightstown, but said he’s now having serious doubts. His opinion changed drastically after seeing the wind turbines up close on a trip to Fond du Lac County.

“It just sort of hit me that this should never be. Not this close and not the area. It just wasn’t a good feeling,” said Koltz.

The feeling was so bad, in fact, Koltz is trying to get out of his contract with Invenergy.

Many of his concerns are being voiced loudly by the group Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy. Spokesman Jon Morehouse says the group is made up of neighbors who think the turbines are unsightly and unsafe.

“It can have mental and physiological effects on your body. There is also the low frequency sound waves as well as the sounds waves that you can hear and those have negative effects from sleep depravation to increase blood pressure,” said Morehouse.

Invenergy denies those claims.

“There’s anecdotal evidence of certain people with problems but there are no scientific studies that there are problems with wind noise,” said Kevin Parzyck, the project development manager for Invenergy.

The opposition group’s more than 200 members still aren’t convinced. They continue to show up at town hall meetings to voice their concerns.

The group’s spokesman turned down an offer to have three turbines on his property. It could have made him nearly one million dollars.

“I would never do something on my land that would negatively affect somebody else in our community,” said Jon Morehouse.

Others say they just don’t care if their neighbors don’t like the project.

“If I decide to go ahead and put something up like that, that’s my right,” said Glen Martin.

Even though Invenergy has been signing up landowners to participate in the project, the company is still in the process of modifying its application with the state. That application will ultimately be reviewed and voted on by the Public Service Commission — a process we’re told is likely still several months away.

Part 2: Wind blowing up storm of opinions, May 5, 2010

MALONE – If you walked out of your home every morning and saw wind turbines in every which direction, is it a sight you would get used to?

“You don’t even notice them anymore. They’ve been here two years and it’s just a part of life now, I guess,” said Ken Krause, a farmer in the Fond du Lac County town of Marshfield.

Or, is it a site you would grow to hate?

“Not these big, industrial turbines. They just don’t belong here,” said Al Haas, a farmer in the Fond du Lac County town of Malone.

It’s something many neighbors in Fond du Lac County will never agree on. Opinions are even more polarized among those who live on the Blue Sky Green Field wind farm . With 88 wind turbines, it is currently the largest wind farm in the state.

Haas has three turbines spinning on his farmland. He makes about $15,000 a year just for having them there. That’s a nice side income with no extra work involved.

“We were told we would basically be able to farm right up to it. We were told there would be basically no land loss to speak of, it just sounded like a good deal,” said Haas.

That extra money? Haas now says it isn’t worth it. He blames the wind turbines for damaging his crops and interfering with his TV reception.

But his main complaint is the noise. He says it keeps him up at night and has led to stress.

“It can sound like a freight train going through the other end of town. The problem is that freight train don’t have a caboose. It don’t stop. It just keeps rolling and rumbling on and on and on, for hours and hours,” said Haas.

“There are probably 3 or 4 days out of the month where they are loud but I think it’s a small prices to pay,” said Ken Krause.

Krause stands on the other side of the wind debate. He even likes the look of the two turbines on his farmland.

“If each community in the country was doing what we are doing, we wouldn’t need foreign oil … Not as much anyway,” said Krause.

Krause points to the pain at the pump two summers ago.

“Some people are already forgetting the $4 (a gallon) gas we had a couple years back. This is helping,” said Krause.

So, are all the wind turbines worth it? That’s what people in Brown County want to know. Some have even contacted people on both sides of the issue in Fond du Lac County to hear first hand with it’s really like living inside a wind farm.

“Is there a place for wind? Maybe. But I don’t think it’s in Wisconsin,” said Jon Morehouse, the spokesman for Brown County Citizens for Responsible for Wind Energy .

The group represents more than 200 people who are opposed to large-scale wind development in Brown County. Many of those people say wind turbines blemish the landscape and pose health hazards.

“We need to slow down, we need to slow down until things get put into place to regulate these industrial monsters to a safe and healthy level,” said Morehouse. “People are going to have to put up with them for 30 years.”

100 turbines are proposed in southern Brown County, with 54 turbines going in the town of Morrison, 22 in Holland, 20 in Wrightstown and 4 in Glenmore. It would be the largest wind farm in the state.

The project is being developed by Invenergy, a private firm from Chicago . The company says the location is one of the best places to harness wind in Wisconsin.

“Wisconsin has very good places for good wind and good transmission capabilities near where the power is going to be used,” said Kevin Parzyck, the wind development manager for Invenergy.

Invenergy is still modifying its application for the project. It will ultimately go to the state Public Service Commission for a decision.

That process will likely take several more months which gives people in Brown County more time to research the issue.

“We want people to go. Go to a turbine, stand under a turbine, see what it’s like, the proof is in the pudding,” said Parzyck.

Though, there are many farmers in Fond du Lac County who say a few days in their shoes would turn most people against wind development.

Part 3: The fight over Wisconsin’s wind future, May 6, 2010

It’s free, it’s everywhere and some think it’s the answer to our ever-increasing energy needs.

“Wind is the most feasible resource for most states because of its ability to scale up,” said Michael Vickerman, the executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. The non-profit group has been advocating for nearly two decades for widespread wind development in the state.

Wind turbines also provide struggling farmers a financial lifeline of thousands of dollars each year.

“For me, it’s a good thing,” said Gary Koomen, a landowner in the town of Morrison.

But as the state Public Service Commission continues to green light large-scale wind developments throughout the state, more and more people are speaking out against the projects.

“We need to slow down until things get put into place to regulate these industrial monsters to a safe and healthy level,” said Jon Morehouse, the spokesman for Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy. The group represents more than 200 people who are against large scale wind development in southern Brown County.

Right now, 9 commercial wind farms are operating in the state, with a total of more than 300 wind turbines. Though, 18 more wind farms have been proposed, which could push the number of turbines in the state upwards of 1,000.

The largest proposal on the table is 100 turbines in southern Brown County. The project is being developed by a private company from Chicago called Invenergy.

“I’ve always been a supporter of alternate energy to start with so it kind of appealed to me a consumer,” said Gary Koomen.

Koomen signed up to have two turbines on his farmland. He stands to pocket roughly $10,000 per year for each turbine. That kind of money can make life a little easier.

“Fun money,” laughed Koomen. “I’ll probably take a vacation.”

The push for wind development in the state stems back to 1999 when Wisconsin set its first renewable energy goal. The idea is to find energy sources that are sustainable.

Currently, utility companies are required to be providing 10% of electricity from renewable sources by 2015. Experts say, right now, the utilities are only about half way there.

“Without the standards, they have no reason to add more renewable energy,” said Michael Vickerman, of RENEW Wisconsin.

Vickerman says wind is the best renewable resource Wisconsin has, which is why he predicts a flurry of development in years to come.

“Wind will be the workhorse of all the renewable energy family. That’s true elsewhere in the Midwest,” he added.

The issue of wind development has divided communities and pitted neighbors against each other. One of the biggest fights continues to be over how close the massive turbines should be to neighboring properties.

Currently, many of the wind turbines are setback about 1000 feet. There are many people, however, who think they should be significantly farther away.

“It can have mental and physiological effects on your body. There are also the low frequency sound waves as well as the sounds waves that you can hear and those have negative effects from sleep depravation to increase blood pressure,” said Jon Morehouse, the spokesman for a group opposed to the project.

Wind developer Invenergy denies those claims.

“There’s anecdotal evidence of certain people with problems but there are no scientific studies that there are problems with wind noise,” said Kevin Parzyck, the wind development manager for Invenergy.

Though, Gary Koomen spoke with his neighbors about their concerns before signing up for the project. He said he wouldn’t have done it if they didn’t want him to.

“Probably not. I value the relationships I have in the neighborhood,” said Koomen.

The state has decided it wants to study the impact of wind turbines a little bit more. A 15 member wind siting committee was recently formed to advise the Public Service Commission on issues like noise levels and setback distances.

“These are legitimate points of disagreement and the more we can come to terms on those two issues, the better off we will all be,” said Michael Vickerman.

Vickerman is on the PSC’s wind siting committee. The committee’s goal is to come up with standards and rules for permitting large scale wind projects in the state.

Vickerman says uniform requirements are important because many communities have passed their own wind-related laws — some of which are designed to try and slow wind developmental.

The local laws may not even matter, however, because approval of large scale projects ultimately falls in the hands of the PSC.

“We have to resolve this issue before the wind industry gives up on Wisconsin,” said Vickerman.

Some admit that’s what they want.

“Whatever happened to using less and using less to the point where we save and use what we have more effectively. The wind thing does nothing but produce more,” said Jon Morehouse.

Much like the wind itself, the debate over wind development looks to be unending.

The PSC wants to have standards in place for permitting wind projects in the state by as early as this summer.

Officials at Invenergy tell FOX 11 they hope to start construction on 100 turbines in Brown County by 2011.

The question is: can these proposals withstand mounting opposition from the people who actually have to live among the wind turbines? The answer is still blowing in the wind.

SECOND FEATURE: Dig the AWEA conference by clicking on the image belo

THIRD FEATURE

SECOND FEATURE:

Columbia County Gives Wind Energy a Nod

SOURCE Capital Newspapers, www.wiscnews.com

May 21 2010

By LYN JERDE,

PORTAGE – The Columbia County Board of Supervisors offered tepid approval Wednesday to a resolution declaring electricity-generating wind turbines on five parcels of farmland are in keeping with the landowners’ farmland preservation agreements with the state.

But the non-unanimous voice vote assent didn’t come without questions about the effects of the turbines on farming, and about how the county’s approval or disapproval of the resolution might affect the future of what could soon be the state’s largest wind energy farm.

We Energies plans to build Glacier Hills Energy Park, beginning this spring, on leased farmland in the towns of Randolph and Scott. Plans call for up to 90 wind turbines, capable of generating up to 207 megawatts of electricity.

Five of the parcels leased for turbine locations – four in the town of Randolph, one in the town of Scott – are subject to farmland preservation agreements with the state.

The intent of the resolution was to declare the county’s conclusion that locating a turbine on the land is not inconsistent with the agreement that the land must continue to be used for agricultural purposes.

But why, asked Supervisor Debra Wopat of Rio, is Columbia County even addressing this issue?

The towns of Randolph and Scott are not covered under the county’s zoning ordinances. And the farmland preservation agreements, she said, are between the landowners and the state’s Department of Agriculture Trade and Consumer Protection.

Kurt Calkins, director of Columbia County’s land and water conservation department, said it was the county board that originally approved forwarding the farmland preservation agreements to the state – so the County Board has to authorize a change in the agreement to reflect the presence of the windmills. The DATCP will agree that the windmills do not impede agricultural use of the land if the county also agrees to that, he said.

“The real question is, do you deem them consistent with agricultural use? That’s the question the state has asked us to answer,” Calkins said.

Supervisor Fred Teitgen of rural Poynette questioned whether the turbines are good for rural areas.

“There are problems with large wind turbine systems, especially with noise and shadow flicker,” he said.

That was why Teitgen proposed amending the resolution to say, “Columbia County believes [that] a wind turbine structure may not (instead of will not) conflict with continued agricultural use in the area,”

He also proposed adding to the resolution a condition that the turbines should be sited properly in accordance with Wisconsin Public Service Commission standards and local requirements.

This amendment failed on a voice vote.

Supervisor Brian Landers of Wisconsin Dells said he was concerned that the revision might imply that the county can or should provide oversight for the construction of the We Energies turbines. If that’s the case, Landers asked, then which department would be responsible for the oversight, and at what cost to the county?

“I would be hesitant to add language that we somehow have a governance of this if we don’t have the legal authority to do so,” Landers said.

When Supervisor John Tramburg of Fall River asked how much farmland would be consumed by the turbines and related structures such as roads, Walter “Doc” Musekamp of We Energies said that, among the five land tracts in question, a total of 3.4 acres would be taken out of production for roads and foundations.

Construction of the roads and other ancillary structures is expected to start this spring.

THIRD FEATURE

Wind Farms vs. Doppler Radar

SOURCE: WMBD/WYZZ Chief Meteorologist Marcus Bailey

Lincoln -  Last year a weak tornado touch-downed near Holder in eastern McLean county. That's near the Twin Groves wind farm, one of the largest in the state.

Chris Miller, Warning Coordinating Meteorologist for the National Weather Service in Lincoln explains what happened next.    

"When that storm enter the wind farm area, because the rotation was weak we lost that signature as it went through the wind farm."  Says Miller.  "We had to rely strictly on storm spotter reports in the area."

Here's the concern:  The Doppler Radar beam hits the blades on a wind farm tower, causing interference.  That interference looks similar to a thunderstorm.  Current Doppler Radar uses software to filter out objects that are stationary, but rotating wind tower blades are an issue.

"We don't want to eliminate actual moving storms, but somehow the Radar would need to decide in what area the wind turbines are located and how fast they're moving and then try to remove some of that."  Says Miller.  "That's a very difficult problem to try to do software related."

This isn't an issue when the weather is fair; but when severe weather approaches or moves over a wind farm, meteorologists may not be able to pick out certain features; most specifically tornadoes.  

There are two wind farms that impact the Doppler Radar in Lincoln.  Railsplitter in southern Tazewell and northern Logan counties is the closest and most commonly seen on Radar.  A proposed wind farm may be built in western Logan county, which could also affect Radar images once completed.

So what's next?  National Weather Service officials are educating wind farm developers on their potential impact on Doppler Radar. 

"There is open dialog for the wind farm developers, but if anything we just want to educate them on what some of the concerns are."  Says Miller.  "Hopefully we have future discussions about what can be done to help mitigate the problem."


Tom Vinson, Director of Federal Regulatory Affairs with the American Wind Energy Association says wind developers are in discussions with the National Weather Service on this matter.    The Association hope that the Weather Service can develop software to take care of the problem.

"The preference on the industry side would be for a technical solution that would resolve the problem without having to necessarily give up energy production at certain times."  Says Vinson.   "It's certainly something that should be discussed but it's not something that we have definite agreement on today."  

We contacted Horizon Wind Energy, the owner of the Railsplitter wind farm.  They had no comment on our story.  Oklahoma University scientists are conducting studies on the issue.

“The notion that the wind industry is predominantly made up of small, environmentally conscious operations is one that must be quickly dispelled.

These are large, corporate-scale utility companies, not unlike coal and oil conglomerates … with a checkered environmental track record to date.

Voluntary guidelines will not change that paradigm, and will work about as well as voluntary taxes.”

George Fenwick

President, American Bird Conservancy

May 11, 2010

SOURCE: Science News UPI.com

INVENERGY TRIES TO WOO BROWN COUNTY FOR WIND FARM PROJECT

SOURCE Green Bay Press-Gazette, www.greenbaypressgazette.com

May 11, 2010

By Tony Walter,

Invenergy LLC officials say they have a track record of profitable projects and satisfied customers to support their efforts to bring a wind farm to Brown County.

“If one looks overall at this, they’ll see there’s a high level of comfort,” said Kevin Parzyck, project manager for the proposed 100-turbine Ledge Wind Energy Project in four towns in southern Brown County. “Our feeling is that it’s a benefit to the community.”

Invenergy, one of the six largest wind energy companies in the country, according to the American Wind Energy Association, wants the local project to become its 23rd wind farm in the United States.

It awaits siting guidelines from the Wisconsin Public Service Commission as it fends off opposition from a citizens group that is protesting the location in Morrison, Wrightstown, Glenmore and Holland.

The PSC is expected to announce the guidelines by July, and Invenergy plans to resubmit its proposal based on those rules.

Many property owners in Brown County have signed contracts with Invenergy to permit wind turbines on their land in exchange for annual payments of approximately $8,000. Other property owners insist that the wind turbines will have negative health and safety impacts and will reduce property values.

But Invenergy officials say they have public opinion on their side.

The Wisconsin Legislature has been debating a bill that would require one-fourth of the state’s energy to come from renewable sources by 2025. And a poll commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association claims that 89 percent of American voters believe that increasing reliance on wind energy is a good idea.

Parzyck said the proposed wind farm in Brown County is not a reckless plan and has the potential of being a $300 million project when completed.

“There has to be a rock solid plan in place if you’re going to have a huge upfront investment,” he said.

The opposition group, Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy, is misinforming the public, he said.

“The one thing I would say is this group is extremely well-funded and well connected statewide,” he said.

“They have said they do not believe renewable energy makes sense in Wisconsin, but that flies in the face of what the Legislature and electorate has asked for. And they haven’t offered any alternatives.”

The citizens group has said it doesn’t oppose wind turbines but objects to their locations. The decisions on where to locate the turbines were based on the towns’ zoning ordinances at the time, Parzyck said.

Bill Hafs, the county’s land and water conservation director, said he has been in contact with Invenergy officials to discuss the possible impact of wind turbine construction on groundwater. But he said the county has no say on the wind farm issue.

Invenergy’s financial worth isn’t disclosed because it is a privately owned company. It has wind farms in 14 states and one in Canada.

SECOND FEATURE:

FEDERAL WIND FARM RULES MAY NOT SAVE BIRDS

United Press International, www.upi.com

 May 10, 2010

The American Bird Conservancy says it fears proposed voluntary guidelines for wind farms will not prevent the deaths of birds by the turbines.

ABC President George Fenwick said Monday he sent letters to Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Bureau of Land Management Director Bob Abbey identifying key shortcomings in recent federal plans to address the affects of wind farms on birds.

“I find it ironic that the Interior Department is asking us to believe that the wind industry will follow voluntary guidelines when their own land management agency is not even doing so,” Fenwick said.

Fenwick said the Fish and Wildlife Wind Advisory Committee has made excellent recommendations for the generation of wind power that the conservancy wants adopted throughout the federal government. But Fenwick said the major shortcoming in the recommendations is that they are proposed as voluntary, rather than mandatory, and as such will do little to curb unacceptable levels of bird mortality and habitat loss at wind farms.

“The notion that the wind industry is predominantly made up of small, environmentally conscious operations is one that must be quickly dispelled,” Fenwick said. “These are large, corporate-scale utility companies, not unlike coal and oil conglomerates … with a checkered environmental track record to date. Voluntary guidelines will not change that paradigm, and will work about as well as voluntary taxes.”

THIRD FEATURE: A letter from a bat and a Wisconsin conservationist

The Bat in the Wind Turbine Facility… Today’s Canary in the Coal Mine

By Kevin Kawula

May 11, 2010 

Things are going badly for our wildlife populations in and around the operating industrial scale wind projects in Wisconsin.

Anecdotal reports from people living in Wisconsin wind projects report an absence of normal wildlife, i.e. no turkey, no deer, fewer or no songbirds, and no bats. Relatives and friends outside the wind facility report greater numbers of deer and turkey.
 
 The birds and deer are leaving the area, but the bats are as likely to be dieing, as leaving.

A recent post-construction bird and bat mortality report, conducted by We Energies (WEPCO) CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD  as part of receiving approval for it’s Blue Sky Green Field project, shows that the bird deaths were 11 to 12 bird deaths/per turbine/per year. This is four times higher than the national average of 3 bird kills/per turbine/per year.

Even more alarming are the bat kill rates of 40.54 to 41/per turbine/per year This is more than ten times the reported national average of less than 4 per turbine per year.

Wisconsin's turbine related bat deaths are among the highest in North America, and equal to the bat mortality numbers from Pennsylvania/Appalachia area which stunned conservationists across the nation.

The total number of bats killed by the 88 turbine Blue Sky Green Field project is estimated to be between 3,500 to 3,600 per year.

Two additional post construction reports show the same bat kill rates at the Cedar Ridge project, and slightly higher kill rates at Invenergy Forward Energy project near the Horicon Marsh.

These three projects alone have resulted in an estimated 8,000 bat deaths per year.

That's 16,000 dead bats for the two years these projects have been in operation.

According to page 66 and 67 of the Public Service Commission's Environmental Impact Statement, the bat kill numbers for the pending Glacier Hills wind project are expected to be equally as high, adding at least another 3500 turbine related bat deaths per year.

Can Wisconsin bat populations sustain this kind of impact?

Bats are not being struck by the blades (135 feet long with tip speeds of 180mph), but are suffering catastrophic damage to their lungs as they fly into the low-pressure zone that is created behind the rotating blades.

This drop in pressure causes their lungs to expand rapidly, burst, fill with fluid and blood, and they drown. It is called barotrauma – deep-sea divers get a version of it called the bends, when raised too quickly from the depths.

Birds have different lung structures, so they are not as readily affected, but bats are mammals and have lungs much more similar to ours, so take a deep breath, and imagine you can’t stop inhaling until your lungs burst. 
 
Bats live up to thirty years, reproduce slowly, maybe one pup a year, and and because they maintain tight family groups, the loss of a single bat can have a significant impact.

Bats are a vital link in the natural balance of Wisconsin’s wild and not so wild areas.

I cannot think of a time in human history that bats have not been flying over Wisconsin, but the loss of our bat population could happen in our lifetimes.
 
White nose syndrome, a nasal/respiratory fungus, is threatening cave roosting/hibernating species of bats, in the eastern United States into extinction, but has not yet reached Wisconsin.

Industrial wind turbines kill all species of bats, even the tree roosting/migrating species we hoped might be spared from the white nose blight.

If the state continues to follow its plan to add 200 to 300 new industrial turbines each year until 2025, turbine related bat deaths could be as high as 131,200 to 192,700 bats per year.
 
This total annual mortality number is unlikely, because the remaining bat populations would likely crash from mounting annual losses before then.
 
I am asking that  we, as conservationists, help stop this needless slaughter.

Contact the Department of Natural Resources and the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin with your concerns.
 
Shari Koslowsky, Conservation Biologist with the DNR, has been very helpful in explaining the post construction mortality numbers. She can be reached at shari.koslowsky@wisconsin.gov , (608) 261- 4382.
  
My main concern is that there is no representative of any organization with expertise in wildlife and natural habitat protection on the Wind Siting Council. The Wind Siting Council is a 15 member organization currently working on creating guidelines for siting wind turbines in our state.
 
I am asking that the DNR require the PSC to stop the operation of industrial scale wind turbine facilities at night (curtailment) when electrical demand is low and easily met by existing base load generation which cannot be shut off. 

The period from dusk until dawn must be reserved for migrating and feeding wildlife as an equitable distribution of a state (“free wind”) natural resource, for the greater good of the whole rural community, human and animal. Night time curtailment would ensure safe passage for bats and night migrating birds, and provide a reliable period of quiet for the undisturbed sleep that is vital to any being's health. 
  
CLICK HERE to leave a comment on the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin’s Wind Siting Council’s docket.
  
Thank you all for your time and consideration on this issue. Energy independence will eventually mean grid independence, but until then the decision makers need to face the facts and take responsibility for the harm caused by their decisions, and remedy the problem.
 
 Thanks again,

 Kevin Kawula

Board member of the Rock County Conservationists, TPE Member, Spring Valley Planning and Zoning board member, Owner and operator of Lone Rock Prairie Nursery, and Rock County Parks Volunteer.
lonerockprairienursery@gmail.com

WHAT WIND TURBINES MEAN CAN MEAN FOR BIRDS:

Click on the images below to watch wind turbine shadow flicker in the 36 turbine Butler Ridge project in Dodge County, Wisconsin. Each turbine in this video is 400 feet tall. Filmed on the morning of May 4th, 2010 en route to a Wind Siting Council meeting hosted at the home of council member Larry Wusch who lives in the Invenergy Forward Energy project located about twenty miles north of Butler Ridge.

This turbine in this video emitted a high pitched whistle as well as low pulsing jet sounds.

This video shows how long the turbine shadows are, and what shadow flicker looks like when it covers a field, a house and a barn

THE NEXT WIND SITING COUNCIL MEETING IS CANCELLED FOR 9AM WEDNESDAY MAY 12 2010 AT THE PSC

Public Service Commission Building

610 North Whitney Way

Madison, Wisconsin

 [Click here for map]

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: For some, watching a Wind Siting Council Meeting is like watching paint dry. For others it's like watching people toss your future around in their hands. For the BPWI Research Nerd (who is working on a book about the experiences of wind farm residents in our state) it's a front row seat on the creation of siting standards that will either protect the people and avian species of our state, or protect the interests of wind developers, utilities and wind lobbyists.

Will residents of Wisconsin wind projects be heard?

SPOILER ALERT: Because of the composition of the WSC , the Research Nerd predicts the interests of the wind developers, utilities, and wind lobbyists will win out over the protection of the people and bats and birds of rural Wisconsin who will be living with the fallout of wind development.

Unless--- by some miracle---the PSC Horton Hears a Rural Wisconsin Who.

If you'd like to make your voice heard, CLICK HERE to leave a public comment on the Wind Siting Council Docket. What you post will become public record. There is no limit to the number of posts you can make. You are free to post opinion, articles, documents, and video links. Anything that you would like the wind siting council to consider.

It's Better Plan's understanding that though some of the council members do pay attention to the docket, there is no requirement that the council read any of the posts.

WHAT'S ON THE WSC DOCKET TODAY?

This "energy sprawl" of giant turbines and pylons will require far greater amounts of concrete and steel than conventional power plants—figure on anywhere from 870 to 956 cubic feet of concrete per megawatt of electricity and 460 tons of steel (32 times more concrete and 139 times as much steel as a gas-fired plant).

From a review of "Power Hungry" by Robert Bryce  SOURCE: The Wall Street Journal

ON THE WSC DOCKET: Better Plan thanks Curt Hilgenberg and Julie Bixby-Wendt for taking the time to post to the docket.

This Post from Curt Hilgenberg, Town of Holland, Brown County includes an article about wind power By Robert Bryce in the Wall Street Journal. The quote above is from Bruce's book, "Power Hungry", released in April.

March 1, 2010 by Robert Bryce in Wall Street Journal

People living near turbines increasingly report sleep deprivation, headaches and vertigo. The wind lobby says there's no proof

Imagine this scenario: The oil and gas industry launches an aggressive global drilling program with a new type of well. Thousands of these new wells, once operational, emit a noxious odor so offensive that many of the people living within a mile of them are kept awake at night. Some are even forced to move out of their homes. It's easy to predict the reaction: denunciations of the industry, countless lawsuits, and congressional investigations.

Now substitute wind for oil and gas and consider the noise complaints being lodged against wind projects around the world.

The Obama administration has made the increased use of wind power to generate electricity a top priority. In 2009 alone, U.S. wind generation capacity increased by 39%. But more wind power means more giant turbines closer to more people. And if current trends continue, that spells trouble.

In 2007, a phalanx of wind turbines were built around Charlie Porter's property in rural northern Missouri. Soon, Mr. Porter began to have trouble sleeping. So did his wife and daughter. The noise, he told me, made sleeping almost impossible. "We tried everything-earplugs, leaving the TV station on all night." Nothing worked. Late last year he moved his family off their 20-acre farm.

Mr. Porter's story is no isolated event. Rural residents in Texas, Maine, Pennsylvania, Oregon, New York, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, France and England have been complaining about the noise from wind turbines, particularly about sleep deprivation.

Dozens of news stories-most of them published in rural newspapers-have documented the problem.

I've spoken to nine other people in New York, Wisconsin, Ontario, New Zealand, Nova Scotia and England who live, or lived, near wind turbines. All complained of the noise, with sleep deprivation being the most common complaint. For example, Janet Warren, who raises sheep near Makara, New Zealand, told me via email that the turbines near her home emit "continuous noise and vibration," which disturb her sleep and are causing "loss of concentration, irritability, and short-term memory effects."

Complaints about sleep disruption-as well as the deleterious health effects caused by the pulsing, low-frequency noise emitted by the giant turbines-are a central element of an emerging citizen backlash against the booming global wind industry.

Lawsuits that focus on noise pollution are now pending in Maine, Pennsylvania and New Zealand. In New Zealand, more than 750 complaints have been lodged against a large wind project near Makara since it began operating last April. The European Platform Against Windfarms lists 388 groups in 20 European countries. Canada has more than two dozen antiwind groups. In the U.S. there are about 100 such groups, and state legislators in Vermont recently introduced a bill that will require wind turbines be located no closer than 1.25 miles from any residence.

In theory, big wind projects should only be built in desolate areas. But the reality is that many turbines are being installed close to homes. Wind developers put a turbine within 550 meters of Mr. Porter's house. Hal Graham, a retired office manager in Cohocton, N.Y., complains about the noise pollution caused by a turbine 300 meters from his home. Tony Moyer, a plumbing superintendent in Eden, Wis., grumbles about the noise generated by three turbines built within 425 meters of his house.

Doctors and acoustics experts from the U.S. to Australia report a raft of symptoms that they blame on wind turbine noise, including sleep disturbance, headaches and vertigo. Dr. Nina Pierpont, a pediatrician in Malone, N.Y., has studied 36 people affected by wind turbine noise since 2004 at her own expense.

The people she interviewed were widely dispersed; they lived in the U.S., Canada, England, Ireland and Italy. She found that the collection of symptoms she calls "wind turbine syndrome" disappeared as soon as people moved out of their noise-affected homes and into new locations at least five miles from any turbines.

Across the border, Ontario-based orthopedic surgeon Dr. Robert McMurtry has been researching wind turbine noise for the past 18 months. Dr. McMurtry, a fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, counts more than 100 people in Ontario he believes are experiencing adverse effects from turbine noise. "It has compromised their health," he says.

The wind lobby has publicly rejected these claims. In December, the American Wind Energy Association in conjunction with the Canadian Wind Energy Association, issued a report titled "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects: An Expert Review Panel."

It declared: "There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects." It also suggested that some of the symptoms being attributed to wind turbine noise were likely psychosomatic and asserted that the vibrations from the turbines are "too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans."

Yet the report also noted that in "the area of wind turbine health effects, no case-control or cohort studies have been conducted as of this date." True enough-but it means there are no studies to prove or disprove the case. It also says that "a small number of sensitive people" may be "stressed" by wind turbine noise and suffer sleep deprivation. But who gets to define "sensitive" and "small number"? And if turbine noise and sleep disturbance aren't problems, then why are people in so many different locations complaining in almost identical ways? Such questions are only going to be pressed with more urgency in the future.

By 2030, environmental and lobby groups are pushing for the U.S. to produce 20% of its electricity from wind. According to the Department of Energy, meeting that goal will require the U.S. to have about 300,000 megawatts of wind capacity, an eightfold increase over current levels. Installing tens of thousands of new turbines inevitably means they'll be located closer to populated areas.

The health effects of low-frequency noise on humans are not well understood. The noise in question often occurs at, or below, decibel levels that are commonly considered a public nuisance. And detecting low-frequency noise requires sophisticated acoustic gear. For all of these reasons, this issue should be investigated. If policy makers are serious about considering all of the impacts of "green" energy, then an impartial, international study of the effects of wind turbine noise should be undertaken without delay.

Mr. Bryce is the managing editor of Energy Tribune. His fourth book, "Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future," will be published in April by PublicAffairs.

Web link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487042... 

POST TO THE WSC DOCKET FROM

Julie Bixby-Wendt

Greenleaf, Wisconsin

Submitted May 8, 2010

 Below are my comments that I emailed to Fox 11 and other news stations, newspapers and State representatives:

I watched your story about the "Wind Wars" going on in the Town of Morrison. I am a resident of the town and wondered if you are aware that property owners who have vacant land next to a property owner who has signed an easement for a wind turbine are receiving absolutely no compensation, even though they are basically taking away 500 feet of our land at every side where a turbine will be placed, because the 1,000-foot setback is from a dwelling rather than the property line.

My husband and I own 40 acres of vacant land. There are proposed wind turbines on property next to at least two sides of our land, and they only have to be 500 feet away from our property.

We have kept this property with the intention that our children might someday build their homes on this land. Because any dwelling will have to be placed 1,000 feet away from a turbine, they are effectively taking away at least 500 feet of our land without any compensation to us.

If they make the setbacks from a dwelling larger, that will mean more of our property will be stolen from us. What happened to our encroachment rights?

Every time I hear someone say how much money this wind farm could bring to property owners, it makes me very upset!

I would like to hear someone reporting on how our state and the power companies are stealing from property owners and shoving these wind turbines down our throats! They should have to get a vote from a town as to whether or not they would like to host a wind farm before they can even come into a town and sneak around getting easements from anyone who will sign up.

Also, even though the people in our town have to live with the wind turbines, the town will receive less money than the county for having them here (town gets 1/3, county gets 2/3).

Even their sneaking around is underhanded.

We were approached to host a wind turbine and were told all of our neighbors were signing up so we might as well get in on the action. They even mentioned names of our neighboring property owners who had signed up, so we were somewhat interested...until I took the contract to an attorney who told me it was a terrible contract.

So now, because we are not hosting a turbine we are not receiving any money, and they are taking some of our land anyway because the setbacks are not the same from the property line as from a dwelling. This just isn't right!

Besides the actions our town is taking (apparently the state has made it impossible for a town to do much against wind turbines), we just don`t know who to contact who can help us, and others like us, who are being robbed.

I don`t know when alternative energy became more important than people, but our government is definitely not standing up for the people. If you have any suggestions as to where we can get help with this, it would be deeply appreciated!

 I affirm that these comments are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
 

Julie Bixby-Wendt

Want to keep up with what's going on with the wind siting council? For some it's like watching paint dry, for others it's watching people toss your future around in their hands

Remember to check the docket

Click here to visit the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin website

Type in Docket number 1-AC-231

WHAT'S THE LATEST ON THE DOCKET?

EXTRA CREDIT: Click on the image above to hear another wind turbine that whistles because of a faulty blade.

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Better Plan has been following the Wirtz family story since our first interview with them in June of 2009 on the day they decided to abandon their home because of noise and vibration from the turbine in the photo below.

You can read our first interview with the family by CLICKING HERE

The Wirtz family had been living in and renovating the 100 year old home pictured below for 12 years before Invenergy began erecting 86 industrial scale wind turbines. The 400 foot structures are sited as close as 1000 feet from non-participating homes.The turbine in this photo is located 1250 feet from the Wirtz home.

They were unable to find anyone willing to purchase the property and say they were unable to stay because of the deterioration of the family's health due to loss of sustained sleep because of tubine noise and vibration.

We spoke with Ann Wirtz, who attended the May 4th Wind Siting Council meeting at the home of council member Larry Wunsh. Wunsch, a fire fighter, lives in the same Invenergy project and spoke to the council about the turbine noise which keeps he and his wife awake at night.

At the same time Wunsch was speaking, Ann told us her home was being auctioned at a sheriff's sale. Though the home had appraised for $320,000 in 2007, the opening bid on the house was $107,000.

Even at that price it found no local buyers. The Bank of New York Mellon took ownership at a price of $106,740.

Better Plan was glad to hear from Ann that the Wirtz family's health has greatly improved since they moved to the village of Oakfield.

Both Ann and Jason Wirtz grew up in rural Wisconsin and intended to raise their children in their 100 year old farmhouse.

Both decided it was not worth the cost of their family's health to remain in the Invenergy Forward Energy wind project, even if it meant losing all they had.

They do have their health, but what a price they have had to pay.

Most members of Wisconsin's wind siting council continue to claim there is no effect on property value when wind turbines are built so near a home.

They continue to claim there are no negative health effects from living too close to wind turbines.

The Wirtz family begs to differ.

Council member Larry Wunsch's home is now for sale.

The closest turbine to his door is 1100 feet away.

The Wind Siting Council will be creating siting guidelines for wind turbines for the entire state of Wisconsin.

More than two thirds of the council members have direct or indirect financial interest in the outcome of these rules.

CLICK HERE TO SEE WHO IS ON THE WIND SITING COUNCIL

WIND FARM PROPERTY SOLD AT SHERIFF'S SALE

 SOURCE: The Daily Reporter, dailyreporter.com

May 6, 2010

By Paul Snyder

The attorney representing two Oakfield residents in a case against Chicago-based Invenergy LLC wants the results of a sheriff’s sale this week to convince the state to review the case.

Madison-based attorney Ed Marion on Thursday sent a letter to the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, requesting it consider new facts in Ann and Jason Wirtz’s case against Invenergy.

The Wirtzes abandoned their home in Brownsville last year after Invenergy’s Forward Energy Wind Center became operational in 2008. The property, appraised at $320,000 in 2007, sold to the Bank of New York Mellon at a sheriff’s sale Tuesday for $106,740.

“I hope it will influence the commission to look favorably, at least, at giving us our day in court,” Marion said.

The Wirtzes want the PSC to force Invenergy to compensate the family for their losses, although no specific amount is named.

Marion said the PSC has not yet made a decision as to whether it will review the case.