Home in Invenergy windfarm, Fond du Lac County. PSC approved setbacks: 1000 feet from homes
HAVE YOU REACHED OUT AND TOUCHED YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS TODAY?
Just a phone call is all it takes to do your part to help give rural Wisconsin an 1800' setback between industrial scale wind turbines and landowner's property lines.
Better Plan encourages you to take a moment right now to contact Governor Walker's office to thank him for his wind siting bill, (CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE BILL) which provides for a setback of 1800 feet between wind turbines and property lines. Let him know you support this bill.
AND! CALL THE LEGISLATORS ON THE COMMITTEES BELOW
AND! Then call your own legislators.
And then, please accept our thanks and the thanks of many in rural Wisconsin for your help.
Jan. 29--SHABBONA -- A real estate agent says many of her customers don't want to live near wind farms, which has caused home values to drop in those areas.
Beth Einsele of Beth Einsele Real Estate in Shabbona said she has shown her share of properties near Lee County wind farms. She said the houses there can't sell for as much as similar homes in other areas of the county.
Earlier this week, County Assessor Wendy Ryerson presented numbers to the county's ad hoc committee on wind turbines, arguing that the Mendota Hills wind farm, started in 2004, hasn't affected nearby home values.
Einsele, a Realtor, took exception to Ryerson's analysis.
"She doesn't look at comparable sales of similar properties. That's not her job. Her job is to see to it that there are fair prices for the assessments," Einsele said. "She does a good job. But she is being used by the County Board to promote their agenda."
Einsele said she has seen firsthand the effects of turbines on home sales.
For instance, a property on Bingham Road in eastern Lee County is surrounded by turbines. It was put on the market in November 2005, and didn't sell until March 2008 for $265,000, she said. Five similar properties -- a few miles away but not near wind farms -- sold much quicker and for well more than $300,000, according to the Realtors' Multiple Listing Service.
Einsele also said she got a bad reaction when she had an open house for a property near a wind farm.
"Out of nine families that came that day, seven asked, 'What are those things? What do they do? How come they're so noisy?'" she said. "That parcel remains on the market today."
In response to Einsele, Ryerson said she tries to walk a "fine line" in providing information to decision makers.
"I try to make sure the information I give out is based on fact, not emotion," she said. "I personally have nothing to gain whether or not we put in another wind project."
Her analysis focused on the area near the Mendota Hills project, looking at home sales in the townships of Brooklyn, Willow Creek, Viola and Wyoming. According to Ryerson's office, the four townships recorded 45 home sales in 2002, with a median home price of $102,400.
The median price increased over the years to $150,000 by 2007, with annual homes sales ranging from 43 to 72.
But in 2008, the median sales price dropped to $107,500, with only 30 sales. In 2009, the office recorded the same number of sales, with the median price further falling to $101,000.
Ryerson contended that the drop in prices had more to do with the declining home market in the area than wind turbines.
She said she understood the argument that fewer buyers interested in a property likely would impact a home's value. But she said nothing in her data demonstrates any effect from the Mendota Hills project on nearby properties.
John Thompson, president and CEO of the Lee County Industrial Development Association, wouldn't take a position on wind farms' effect on home values.
But he said the turbines have helped Lee County's economy. They bring more property tax revenue to government coffers, employ many people during the construction phase, and give farms that allow turbines extra income, he said.
The county's ad hoc committee is supposed to provide recommendations to the Planning and Zoning Board of Appeals on new wind regulations. In September, the County Board enacted a moratorium on new wind energy development while the zoning board drafted new rules.
The moratorium is set to expire Feb. 15. County Board Chairman Jim Seeberg has said he is opposed to extending it.
Wind farm opponents say the turbines are noisy, bothersome and unsightly.
SECOND FEATURE
FACTS ABOUT GREEN JOBS CREATION ELUSIVE AS THE WIND
Source: MacIver News Service
Although they are touted and promoted by policy makers and opinion leaders across the state, accurately defining and keeping track of ‘green jobs’ has proven nearly impossible in Wisconsin.
Take, for example, ‘green jobs’ associated with the wind industry.
“Clean energy technology and high-end manufacturing are Wisconsin’s future,” Governor Jim Doyle said in his final State of the State address. “We have more than 300 companies and thousands of jobs in the wind industry.”
That statistic is impossible to verify.
The State of Wisconsin does not track those companies nor the jobs within the industry. When contacted, the Office of Energy Independence (an agency created by Governor Doyle in 2007) directed MacIver News to Wisconsin Wind Works, a self-described “consortium of manufacturers representing the wind manufacturing supply chain within Wisconsin.”
The advocacy group maintains an online wind energy-related supply chain database, although a routine examination of the data proved just how unreliable the figures are.
When the online, searchable database was utilized earlier this summer, it listed 340 companies in Wisconsin connected to the wind industry, a fact which, without additional investigation would appear to be in line with the Governor’s statement. However, further examination showed many of those companies were not currently serving the wind industry and were only listed because they someday could serve the wind industry.
For example, the database listed 38 manufacturers, but only 24 of them have anything to actually do with the wind energy sector presently.
Of those 24 Wisconsin manufacturers, only eight were categorized as primary suppliers. Another four companies were listed as both primary and secondary suppliers. A MacIver NewsService reporter contacted all eight primary suppliers and the four companies listed as primary/secondary suppliers in our initial query and what we found further eroded the credibility of Governor Doyle’s claims.
When contacted, the companies listed as both primary and secondary suppliers all described themselves merely as secondary suppliers. That means they produce products that are not exclusive to the wind energy. For example, Bushman Equipment manufactures lifts that move heavy pieces of equipment, which, among many other uses, can be used to handle wind turbines.
Wisconsin Wind Works’ database is not only generous with the number of companies within their supply chain it associates as being primary suppliers, there are issues with the actual job numbers listed for each company as well. Many of the figures are either inflated, the jobs are not located in Wisconsin, or they cannot be tied to wind energy.
For example, Rexnord Industries was one of the eight Wisconsin manufacturers listed in our query as directly serving the wind energy industry. The database shows the company has 6,000 employees. Yet a Rexnord official told the MacIver News Service that the company only has 1,500 employees in Wisconsin, and only five of those have jobs which are directly tied to the wind industry.
Wisconsin Wind Works’ database says Orchid International has 600 employees, but a company spokesperson told MacIver it only has 150. Amsoil Inc. in Superior has 236 employees listed in the Wisconsin Wind Works database, but a company representative told the MacIver NewsService that only 6 of them work on wind energy-related products.
In all, at the time of our search, the database claimed 7,632 jobs among the eight manufacturers that were current primary suppliers to the wind industry. Yet, the MacIver News Service was only able to identify 31 jobs at those companies which were specifically tied to wind energy related products.
Manufacturers told MacIver News that other employees might work on wind-related products occasionally, but it does not represent the bulk of their workload.
Another 1,077 workers are listed among the secondary suppliers and we did not investigate that claim.
VAL-FAB, one of the companies listed as both a primary and secondary supplier, explained to MacIver News that it initially had high hopes for the wind energy industry that never materialized. The company specializes in fabrication for the energy sector.
William Capelle, Director of Business Development at VAL-FAB, said “At first we thought we might be able to manufacture the actual towers, but it turns out 90 percent of those are imported from Spain.”
Since the MacIver News Service first examined the Wisconsin Wind Works database, the number of companies listed has increased to 360. A reporter attempted to contact the organization for comment about the veracity of their data, but Wisconsin wind Works, which solicits members by selling itself as the “preferred partner of wind energy professionals,” did not respond.
Meanwhile the Office of Energy Independence continues to pursue the Doyle Administration’s green energy policies. As Doyle said during his final State of the State address, “anyone who says there aren’t jobs in the clean energy economy had better open their eyes.”
There is no doubt that some jobs in the wind industry exist in Wisconsin. The accurate number of these ‘green jobs’ is proving to be, at best, elusive
Representatives of Doyle’s office did not respond to repeated request for comments regarding the information contained within this article.
NOTE: THIS ARTICLE ORIGINALLY RAN IN SEPTEMBER OF 2010
By Bill Osmulski MacIver News Service Investigative Reporter
SUPPORT SENATE BILL 9: WALKER'S WIND SITING REFORM
Better Plan encourages you to take a moment right now to contact Governor Walker's office to thank him for the provisions in Senate Bill 9, (CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE BILL) which provides for a setback of 1800 feet between wind turbines and property lines. Let him know you support this bill.
CONTACT Governor Scott Walker govgeneral@wisconsin.gov 115 East Capitol Madison WI 53702 (608) 266-1212
It's also very important that you contact these key Senate committee legislators and urge them to support this bill and vote to move it forward. Every phone call and email to these committee members matters.
Members of the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Utilities, Commerce, and Government Operations.
An important official document regarding a landmark wind lawsuit about to take place in Canada has now been made public. (Click here to download) This 'factum- ( statement of facts in a controversy or legal case) includes conclusions from three medical doctors who have studied the issue of industrial scale wind turbine's effect on human health.
Based on the available science Dr. Robert McMurtry has concluded:
a. persons living within close proximity (1.5 to 2 km) of IWTs are experiencing adverse health effects. In many cases these effects are significant or severe;
b. these adverse health effects have a common element, medically referenced as annoyance, which manifests itself in various ways including difficulties with sleep initiation and sleep disturbance, stress and physiological distress.
Stress and sleep deprivation are well known risk factors for increased morbidity including significant chronic disease such as cardiovascular problems including hypertension and ischemic heart disease;
c. none of the existing regulations or guidelines have been developed based on evidence related to these types of adverse health effects, as this type of evidence has yet to be produced; and
d. there is a need to complete additional research, including at minimum one or more longitudinal epidemiological studies in regard to the foregoing types of adverse health effects in the environments of IWTs.
28. Based on his broad experience in health policy, based on his research, based on his knowledge as a physician addressing many of the same types of adverse health effects, as well as having clinically examined many individuals exposed to IWTs, he has concluded:
a. scientific uncertainty exists regarding impacts to humans from IWTs;
b. no studies conducted to date have been sufficiently rigorous so as to resolve this uncertainty; and
c. in light of this uncertainty, the precautionary principle directs that it be resolved prior to setting regulatory standards and/or proceeding with further development of IWT projects in close proximity to human populations.
From page 9
Dr. Christopher Hanning has also extensively researched the literature on sleep disturbance secondary to noise from industrial wind turbines. His conclusions are as follows:
a. Generally, it is recognized by all responsible health bodies including the World Health Organization (“WHO”) that adequate refreshing sleep is necessary for human health.
Sleep deprivation causes fatigue, sleepiness, impaired cognitive function and increases the risk of obesity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cardiovascular disease and cancer. Disturbed sleep is, in itself, an adverse health effect.
b. The effect of noise in causing sleep disruption through arousals has been recognized for many years and is acknowledged in the WHO documents.
c. There are sufficient cases and commonality of symptoms to conclude IWTs can and do adversely affect health and sleep. This conclusion is shared by many others.
d. In addition, there are several studies which confirm that sleep disruption occurs at distances considerably greater than 550 meters and at external noise levels considerably less than those permitted by the GEA and Regulation. As well, no reduction in permitted night time noise levels is required contrary to established practice.
e. There is good evidence that the impulsive noise emitted by wind turbines is considerably more annoying than traffic and aircraft noise at equivalent sound levels.
There is some evidence that the impulsive noise characteristic of wind turbines is more likely to disturb sleep than a more constant noise.
The precautionary principle would require that more stringent restriction of wind turbine noise be implemented until safe limits have been established
There is evidence that low frequency noise may have a particularly disturbing effect on sleep. IWTs are known to generate low frequency sound. Safe limits have not been established and the precautionary principle would require that more stringent restriction of wind turbine noise be implemented until safe limits have been established.
31. The Ministry has acknowledged that much of the information relied upon by Dr. Hanning to inform his conclusions regarding IWTs was known to the Ministry at the time the Regulation was being considered.
FROM PAGE 10
D. THE EVIDENCE OF DR.MICHAEL NISSENBAUM
i. Qualifications
32. Dr. Michael Nissenbaum is a graduate of the University of Toronto Medical School with post-graduate training at McGill University and the University of California. He is licensed to practice medicine in Ontario, Quebec and the State of Maine.
33. He is a specialist in diagnostic imaging, whose work involves developing and utilizing an understanding of the effects of energy deposition, including sound, on human tissues. He is the former Associate Director of Magnetic Resonance Imaging at a major Harvard hospital, a former faculty member (junior) at Harvard University, a Director of the Society of Wind Vigilance and published author.
34. He developed an interest in the health effects of wind turbine projects after becoming aware of complaints related to an industrial wind turbine installation in Mars Hill, Maine. Dr. Nissenbaum performed a simple public health study cataloguing the types and incidences of symptoms among twenty two (22) people living within 1,100 meters of a linear arrangement of 1.5 MW industrial wind turbines. They were compared to a control group of twenty seven (27) people living beyond the area impacted by turbine noise.
35. The design of the study can be termed a ‘controlled cross sectional cohort study’. Its goal was to compare the health changes following the start of turbine operations. The study is important because it is believed to represent the first controlled study of adverse health effects attributed to industrial wind turbines.
36. This pilot study was undertaken as a public health service in order to report findings to the Public Health Subcommittee of the Maine Medical Association. Preliminary results were presented to the Maine Medical Association in March of 2009 and completed in May of 2009.
ii. Conclusions
37. Dr. Nissenbaum has concluded that there is a high probability of significant adverse health effects and consequent high level of concern for those within 1100 meters of a 1.5 MW turbine installation based upon the experience of the subject group of individuals living in Mars Hill Maine. These health concerns include:
a. Sleep disturbances/sleep deprivation and the multiple illnesses that cascade from chronic sleep disturbance. These include cardiovascular diseases mediated by chronically increased levels of stress hormones, weight changes, and metabolic disturbances including the continuum of impaired glucose tolerance up to diabetes.
b. Psychological stresses which can result in additional effects including cardiovascular disease, chronic depression, anger and other psychiatric symptomatologies.
c. Increased headaches.
d. Auditory and vestibular system disturbances.
e. Increased requirement for and use of prescription medication
RICHARD BLACKWELL A panel of Ontario Divisional Court judges will begin hearing a challenge today that, if successful, could throw a wrench into the province’s burgeoning wind power industry.
The case, brought by Ian Hanna, a resident of Prince Edward County, 200 kilometres east of Toronto, argues that regulations in Ontario’s Green Energy Act, governing how far turbines must be from houses, are illegal. If the court agrees, new wind development could come to a standstill.
The case will also be an opportunity to air the views of those who feel wind turbines are unhealthy. Mr. Hanna’s argument is based on the premise that the minimum setback in Ontario – 550 metres – does not take into account the possible negative impacts to human health that turbines may cause.
Essentially, he argues, there is no medical evidence that the setback is safe, and that by publishing its regulations without sufficient proof, the province has breached the “precautionary principle” in its own environmental bill of rights. That principle says the government has to show an activity is safe before it is approved.
Indeed, Mr. Hanna’s court filings say, the government knew there was literature that raises concerns about turbines, and spells out that not enough was known to settle the setback issue.
A court victory, said Mr. Hanna’s lawyer Eric Gillespie, would essentially put a moratorium on building any new wind farms in Ontario. That would be a huge victory for wind farm opponents, who say there need to be far more studies done on health impacts. “If the court determines that [Ontario] has insufficient science to support its decision, then governments, the wind industry and communities will have to look very closely to determine in a more scientific way where industrial wind turbines should be located,” Mr. Gillespie said.
Increasingly, opponents have been protesting the spread of wind turbines, insisting that they cause health problems and calling for more detailed studies before the devices become even more ubiquitous. Both sides have cranked up the rhetoric recently; last week, one anti-wind group complained that a wind farm developer had called it a “group of terrorists.”
To support his client’s case in court, Mr. Gillespie will present evidence from three physicians who say turbine noise and vibration can cause high stress, sleep deprivation and headaches among people who live near them.
The government argues, in a document filed with the court, that the doctors’ conclusions are suspect, and that it reviewed all the literature available on the issue, and held public consultations before creating the guidelines.
It also says that complaints about possible health effects from turbines come from a small number of people, while the government’s role is to try to clean the air for all residents of Ontario by shifting to renewable power.
There is “no conclusive evidence that wind turbine noise has any impact on human health,” the government filing states. Available information suggests a 550-metre setback is adequate, it adds, and that that distance is “clearly conservative,” given the existing studies. It dismisses the data about health problems as “anecdotal hearsay.”
The government also argues that a new environmental review tribunal set up under its Green Energy Act is the right place to air health issues, not the provincial court.
Dianne Saxe, a Toronto lawyer who specializes in environmental issues, said she would be very surprised if Mr. Hanna wins his case. She said he is stretching the precautionary principle beyond what it actually covers. And the government “should have no trouble at all proving that it considered the health concerns of the anti-wind activists, because they were very vocal,” even appearing at legislative committee meetings, she said.
Ms. Saxe thinks it is likely the court will deal only with the narrow legal aspects of the case and not make any substantial ruling on the health effects of wind turbine placement.
"During the construction phases, dozens of jobs can be created by these towering turbines that have popped up in Fairfield and Norway and are being considered in Litchfield.
But after the project is completed, most of the jobs disappear.
Municipalities considering wind farms are left to decide: Are short-term construction jobs and a few permanent jobs worth it for the other effects of the developments?
“Wind projects can be a significant contributor to economic activity,” said Eric Lantz, a research analyst for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab. “But if you live in a moderate-sized town, it’s probably not going to revolutionize your area.” CLICK HERE TO KEEP READING
“I’m lined up with two turbines that give me a double flicker. You can’t watch TV, you can’t read a book, a newspaper, you can’t work on a computer because your eyes are constantly adjusting to light and dark,” he said. “Green energy is a great thing, but when it interferes with life, health — no, something has to be done.”
- Emmett Curley, wind project resident, January 21, 2011
One of the many things Governor Walker's proposed 1800' setback from property lines will do is help protect rural Wisconsin families from having wind turbine shadow flicker forced upon them.
Shadow flicker is downplayed by the wind industry and often mischaracterized by the media as a minor nuisance. Those who live with shadow flicker tell a different story.
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT SENATE BILL 9: WALKER'S WIND SITING REFORM
Better Plan encourages you to take a moment right now to contact Governor Walker's office to thank him for the provisions in Senate Bill 9, (CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE BILL) which provides for a setback of 1800 feet between wind turbines and property lines.
This setback protects health and safety, protects property values, preserves property rights, gives residents a choice about participating in wind projects planned for their community. Any land owner who wishes to have turbines closer to their property lines may do so by entering into an agreement with the wind company.
CONTACT Governor Scott Walker govgeneral@wisconsin.gov 115 East Capitol Madison WI 53702 (608) 266-1212
It's also very important that you contact your legislators and encourage them to support the bill.
“I’m lined up with two turbines that give me a double flicker. You can’t watch TV, you can’t read a book, a newspaper, you can’t work on a computer because your eyes are constantly adjusting to light and dark,” he said. “Green energy is a great thing, but when it interferes with life, health — no, something has to be done.”
People living in the shadow of a group of wind turbines in Summerside, P.E.I., are complaining about the flickering light caused by the energy producers.
Emmett Curley has enjoyed living in the area for 15 years, but says things have become unbearable since the wind turbines arrived a year ago.
“Last summer when it started, I left my house. I just couldn’t stand it. I’ve had friends over that left during the situation, saying, ‘I’m starting to get a headache,’” Curley said Friday.
The problem comes when the sun sets and its light passes through the turbines, creating a flickering effect of shadow and light. It lasts for about an hour.
“I’m lined up with two turbines that give me a double flicker. You can’t watch TV, you can’t read a book, a newspaper, you can’t work on a computer because your eyes are constantly adjusting to light and dark,” he said. “Green energy is a great thing, but when it interferes with life, health — no, something has to be done.”
Other neighbours also said they were annoyed by the flickering. One told CBC News that her daughter feels sick to her stomach when it happens and the family has to spend part of their summer evenings in the basement.
Most want the city to shut the turbines off for the hour at sunset when the flicker happens, but the city said that is unlikely.
Greg Gaudet of Summerside Municipal Services said the city could provide options such as shutters or awnings for area residents.
He said shutting down the turbines for an hour each day would cost about $100,000 in lost energy over the course of a year.
“Obviously the city doesn’t want to invest a large amount of money to create renewable energy, which is good for the environment, and then have to reduce those energies,” he said.
“Obviously that’s one of the last solutions the city would look at.”
NOTE FROM THE NERD: EXTRA CREDIT MATH TURBINE RELATED PROBLEM: If $100,000 a year in energy would be lost by shutting down the wind turbine for one hour a day, what would that turbine make in a year? How did you figure it out?
A health official who suspects a link between wind turbines and ill health accused a green advocacy group of twisting her words Friday to claim precisely the opposite.
Dr. Hazel Lynn, chief medical officer of health in Huron and Bruce counties, was outraged when the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment sent out a media release that suggested she had disavowed the link.
“It’s ridiculous,” said Lynn, who estimates between 10% and 15% of people living near turbines in her area say their health has been affected.
It’s not clear if turbines cause physical harm or stress that brings on poor health, but concerns are real and need to be examined, she said.
“Many people, in many different parts of Grey Bruce and Southwestern Ontario have been dramatically impacted by the noise and proximity of wind farms. To dismiss all these people as eccentric, unusual, or as hyper-sensitive social outliers does a disservice to constructive public discourse and short-circuits our opportunities to learn and benefit from their experiences as we continue to develop new wind farms,” she wrote in a report to her health board.
“It is apparent that a minority of those people living or situated near Industrial Wind Turbines may experience dramatic, negative impacts. We cannot pretend this affected minority doesn’t exist. A determination has to be made as to what level or extent of negative impacts is tolerable.”
Those findings weren’t mentioned by the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment when it issued a release that highlighted two lines from Lynn’s seven-page report — that most people don’t complain of ill effects from wind turbines.
“Forty years of science suggests wind turbines do not harm human health,” wrote Gideon Foreman, the group’s executive director. He linked Lynn’s report to a review done last year by Ontario’s chief medical officer of health, a review Lynn publicly objected to because it excluded a section on community harm.
“The study found the scientific literature ‘does not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health’ effects,’ ” Foreman wrote.
The image above is a detail map of We Energies Glacier Hills project currently under construction in Columbia county. The red squares in yellow circles are the non participating homes in the project. The red dots represent the wind turbines. Below is a small map of the entire project.
The PSC approved the project with setbacks of 1250 feet. The yellow circles below indicate a 1000 foot setback from non-participating homes in the project.
“I believe our results are quite robust,” says Meneveau. “They indicate that large wind farm operators are going to have to space their turbines farther apart.”
Big turbines are at the moment generally installed about seven rotor diameters apart, but Meneveau and Meyers say that the optimum spacing is actually 15 diameters, slightly more than twice as far apart.
If this plan were followed, a wind farm covering a given area would only be able to install a quarter of the number of turbines it could have under today's planning assumptions."
A top American fluid-dynamics boffin says that new, larger wind turbines now going into service are going to have to be placed much further apart - which will have serious implications for the amount of energy produced by wind farms of the future.
The latest wind farms now going into service use huge turbines with rotor diameters in the 100m range, expected to offer large outputs. But according to engineering professor and fluid dynamics expert Charles Meneveau of Johns Hopkins University, there's a problem.
“The early experience is that they are producing less power than expected,” says Meneveau. “Some of these projects are underperforming.”
The prof, who has investigated air flow in wind farms for years, looked into the matter of the underperforming monster turbines along with Johan Meyers of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium.
“I believe our results are quite robust,” says Meneveau. “They indicate that large wind farm operators are going to have to space their turbines farther apart.”
Big turbines are at the moment generally installed about seven rotor diameters apart, but Meneveau and Meyers say that the optimum spacing is actually 15 diameters, slightly more than twice as far apart.
If this plan were followed, a wind farm covering a given area would only be able to install a quarter of the number of turbines it could have under today's planning assumptions. Though the amount of energy generated per turbine would be the best possible, it seems unlikely that such efficiency gains could possibly compensate for the cut in numbers.
On the other hand, if windfarms continue to be constructed with turbines crowded more closely together, they will continue to produce less electricity than their builders had expected.
Overall the professor's research would appear to mean that projected output figures for large new windfarms - for instance the UK's planned, enormous offshore Round 3 facilities, expected to be built in the North Sea from 2015 - will have to be revised downwards one way or another.
Professor Meneveau presented the research, based on wind tunnel studies carried out at Johns Hopkins, at a physics conference recently. The outlines of it are reported in The John Hopkins University Gazette. ®
EXTRA CREDIT READING:
TELL THEM NO:
WHAT DID THE JUDGE SAY TO THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSIONERS ABOUT PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY APPLYING TO BUYING A HUGE WIND FARM FROM IBERDROLA?
THE JUDGE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS A GOOD IDEA. HERE IS WHY:
“We reject the application because we find that the Manzana Wind Project is not cost-competitive and poses unacceptable risks to ratepayers.
We find that the proposed cost of the Manzana Wind Project is significantly higher than other resources PG&E can procure to meet its RPS program goal.
Moreover, it will subject the ratepayers to unacceptable risks due to potential cost increases resulting from project under-performance, less than forecasted project life, and any delays which might occur concerning transmission upgrades and commercial online date.
As a proposed utility-owned generation project, ratepayers would pay a lump sum cost rather than a performance based cost for the Manzana Wind Project.
Therefore, ratepayers would be at risk if the project underperforms.
In particular, if the Manzana Wind Project fails to achieve production as expected for any reason such as construction delays or curtailments as a result of a collision with a California condor, shareholders face no risks while customers could incur increased costs"
SUPPORT SENATE BILL 9: WALKER'S WIND SITING REFORM
Better Plan encourages you to take a moment right now to contact Governor Walker's office to thank him for the provisions in Senate Bill 9, (CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE BILL) which provides for a setback of 1800 feet between wind turbines and property lines.
CONTACT Governor Scott Walker govgeneral@wisconsin.gov 115 East Capitol Madison WI 53702 (608) 266-1212
It's also very important that you contact your legislators and encourage them to support the bill.
CLICK ON THE IMAGE BELOW TO SEE SOMEONE JUMPING FROM WIND TURBINE FOR THE FUN OF IT. Yes he had a parachute.
CLICK ON THE IMAGE BELOW if you have have $2.18 million dollars laying around and you'd like to find out more about buying an industrial scale Gamesa wind turbine that is priced to sell.
Here's what the ad says:
One Time Opportunity’ for the serious wind farm developer - No unacceptable lead times - Immediatley available - On behalf of one of our clients, we offer 94 brand new and unused units of Gamesa G87 2.0mW T78 Wind Turbines. With warranty, Ready to ship anywhere in the world. Priced to sell quick. Only $2.18m
The wind setback issue is no longer part of Governor Walkers bill.
Following a five to three party-line vote to remove this provision from the bill, the Assembly Rules Committee approved the calendar for Thursday's floor session, which includes special session bills on tort reform, a tax credit for health savings accounts, increased economic development tax credits and a tax credit for businesses relocating to Wisconsin.
The wind setback issue may be taken up as a separate issue later in the session.
LAWMAKERS TO TAKE UP REGULATORY REFORMS SEPARATELY
Madison — Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) said Friday he wants to deal with all the issues Gov. Scott Walker has included in a regulatory reform bill, but not as one package.
That means the three issues in the package will be dealt with as separate legislation.
Walker's bill would change rules on siting wind turbines, make it easier to build on wetlands in Brown County and give the governor more power in writing administrative rules.
Fitzgerald said he supported all those ideas but thought they should be dealt with separately.
The wetlands language in Walker's bill would allow a retail development near Lambeau Field to proceed. Fitzgerald called the development a project "that clearly should be built in Green Bay."
"My concern about it is the Department of Natural Resources has absolutely messed this up from the beginning," Fitzgerald said.
The Legislature had the Public Service Commission develop rules on wind turbines, but lawmakers need to revisit the issue, Fitzgerald said. "I think that it is something that the Legislature should go back and look at again," he said.
He said he was sensitive to concerns raised both by property rights groups as well as the wind industry. They say the rules Walker is proposing would kill jobs.
The Legislature is controlled by Walker's fellow Republicans, and they have been broadly supportive of his efforts to boost the economy through tax cuts and regulatory reform. But lawmakers from both parties have raised concerns about ceding too much power to the executive branch on administrative rules.
Rules are written to implement new legislation, and lawmakers must sign off on any rules. Walker wants the rules to go through the governor's office as well.
Fitzgerald spoke to reporters after a committee of Senate leaders voted to take up a tort reform bill Tuesday on the Senate floor. Republicans say the measure will help business, while Democrats say it will make it harder for victims to find justice.
SECOND FEATURE:
TOWN OF MORRISON LOOKS AT CHANGING RULES FOR WIND TURBINES
Amid ongoing debate at the state Capitol, the Town of Morrison in Brown County continues discussion on expanding or creating another ordinance for wind turbines.
A group of residents opposes a proposed wind farm project in southern Brown County that would build 100 turbines.
Currently that project is on hold since its application to the state Public Service Commission is incomplete.
It’s a debate that has united and divided communities across southern Brown County.
Tuesday night, more than 60 town residents united in hopes of creating another ordinance restricting what wind companies can do — restricted themselves by the state Legislature.
“If you have an ordinance that doesn’t comply with state law, you’re illegal,” Town of Morrison consultant Glen Schwalbach said.
Soon-to-be enacted rules by the Public Service Commission change setback rules for neighboring properties and how much nearby residents can be paid.
But already Governor Walker has introduced legislation as part of the special session that would impose even tighter guidelines for wind companies.
“I think they are going to extend the setbacks, and they well should be. They should be much greater than originally planned,” Morrison resident Gerald Cornelissen said.
Yet others, like the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, say the proposal would lose the state nearly $2 billion in new wind power investments.
If no further legislative action is taken, the Public Service Commission says the new changes are expected to take effect March 1st.
For now the debate continues — from town halls to the state Capitol.
THIRD FEATURE
Pilot might not have seen met tower before fatal Delta crash
OAKLEY -- A crop duster pilot killed last week may not have seen the weather tower that his plane clipped, causing him to crash on a remote island in the Delta, according to a preliminary report by the National Transportation Safety Board.
Stephen Allen, 58, died in the crash reported about 11 a.m. Jan. 10 on Webb Tract Island, located about two miles north of Bethel Island. Allen was a resident of Courtland, a town about 20 miles south of Sacramento.
Allen was the only person on board the Rockwell International S-2R Thrush Commander crop duster, which according to Federal Aviation Administration records was built in 1975 and registered to Walnut Grove-based Alexander Ag Flying Service.
According to the NTSB, Allen was applying seed when he crashed. He appears to have struck a 200-foot meteorological tower -- constructed of galvanized tubing and designed to collect wind information -- that was installed on the island in 2009.
The NTSB wrote in its report that "the fact that these towers are narrow, unmarked and gray in color makes for a structure that is nearly invisible under some atmospheric conditions."
A final report about the crash is not expected to be completed for several months.
BETTER PLAN'S EXTRA CREDIT READING ASSIGNMENT:
What happens when wind developers come to town?
---KEEP WIND TURBINE DEBATE RESPECTFUL (WI)
"Obviously, the community has been torn apart because of this project," [Morrison Town Chairman] Christensen said.
"You have brothers not talking to brothers, fathers and sons not talking. It's sad. … Everybody has all the right to debate (an) opinion with fact, but do it with respect. That hasn't been happening."
HE'S BAA-ACK: PRO-WIND PLALE LANDS JOB IN WALKER ADMINISTRATION
Former Democratic Sen. Jeff Plale has joined the administration of Republican Gov. Scott Walker.
Plale sponsored and fought for the bill which stripped local governments of their power to regulate the siting of wind turbines in our state and gave this power to the appointed members of the Public Service Commission.
Plale wil earn $90,000 a year as the administrator of the Division of State Facilities, Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch said.
In Wisconsin wind turbine noise limits are 50 dbA during the day and 45 dbA during the night. How does this compare with other states?
RESIDENTS RAISE NOISE ON WINDMILLS (NY)
" A 29-turbine commercial wind farm has been proposed for the town by New York City-based EverPower Renewables. EverPower officials have requested that the noise level emitted by the wind turbines be raised to 40 decibels. The current town law allows for the noise level to be raised 3 decibels above the ambient level of 25 decibels."
COUNTY TO DISCUSS HOW CLOSE WIND TURBINES SHOULD BE TO HOMES (MI)
Developers of wind farms say 1,000 foot setbacks are enough. They say problems with windmills are greatly exaggerated by people who want to ban them altogether.
Tonight planning commissioners in Mason County will review a proposal to require setbacks of 1.25 miles. Under the proposed rule windmills could be closer to a home if the homeowner was part of the project, meaning he or she makes a deal with the energy company.
The BPRC Research Nerd
