Entries in Wind farm (250)
1/14/12 They fought the residents and... the residents won
BLISSFIELD WIND ENERGY PROJECT TO RELOCATE
By David Frownfelder and John Mulcahy,
via Daily Telegram, www.lenconnect.com
January 14, 2012
“The developer has concluded it is unable to develop its project in Riga, Palmyra and Ogden townships due to significant opposition to wind generation by the residents of Lenawee County."
RIGA, Mich. — Lenawee County is apparently not going to be home to a major wind turbine project — at least not in 2012. Officials from Blissfield Wind Energy LLC filed an amendment to its contract with Consumers Energy seeking permission to move the project from Lenawee County to Gratiot or Ionia counties.
Exelon Wind is one of the partners on the Blissfield project. Doug Duimering, project manager for Exelon Wind, said the group has not given up on Lenawee County, but because the contract with Consumers Energy states they would build wind turbines in 2012, the group is looking at other sites.
“We are disappointed with the way things turned out,” Duimering said. “We will continue to explore our options in Lenawee County.”
Larry Gould, president of Great Lakes LLC, which owns 50 percent of Blissfield Wind Energy LLC, said there are negotiations to take the project elsewhere, but the Michigan Public Service Commission must approve the transfer first. Gould said he could not say much due to a confidentiality agreement.
“There’s other communities that are inviting us to go someplace else,” Gould said.
Both Blissfield Wind and Consumers Energy are asking the MPSC to allow the contract between the two parties to be amended.
The request from Consumers reads: “The developer has concluded it is unable to develop its project in Riga, Palmyra and Ogden townships due to significant opposition to wind generation by the residents of Lenawee County. Hence, the developer has relocated its development plans to either Ionia County or Gratiot County, Michigan.”
The Interstate Informed Citizens Coalition Inc. was formed in opposition to the wind turbine project. Kevon Martis of Riga Township, a director of the IICC, commented on the development in an email.
“As much as the developers tried to paint this as a question of NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) opposition to change, the bottom line for most residents is that this particular project reeked of crony capitalism and corporate welfare of the worst kind: increased industrial profits at private citizens’ expense,” Martis wrote. “Couple that with solid scientific evidence that the noise limits and setbacks proposed by the developers are, in fact, unsafe, as the IICC maintained throughout this whole episode.”
Paul Wohlfarth of Riga Township headed the group Riga Residents for Wind. In an email, he expressed his disappointment at the announcement.
“We have a well-funded nonprofit corporation based in Lenawee County who collects money from across the country to spearhead an agenda that is against green wind generation in Lenawee County, Michigan and across the country,” Wohlfarth wrote. “I believe this whole project has been misrepresented by a well-funded vocal minority. It’s too bad the majority of the tri-township area didn’t take the time and visit a nearby wind farm. I think the outcome would have been much different.”
The potential siting of wind turbines in Riga, Ogden and Palmyra townships brought organized opposition from the IICC and recalls of Ogden Township Supervisor Jim Goetz and Clerk Phyllis Gentz and recall attempts against Riga Township Supervisor Jeff Simon and Trustee Richard Beagle.
The Blissfield Wind project was the only one that had reached the development stage. Another interested party was juwi Wind, a wind power company also considering a project for the area. A spokesman for juwi said its status remains unchanged.
“We are continuing to monitor and evaluate the situation,” said Aaron Peterson, manager of community relations and regulatory affairs.
In November, a referendum vote in Riga Township upheld the wind turbine ordinance enacted in July 2010. A similar vote on the Palmyra Township ordinance is slated for May 8. An Ogden Township citizens committee is weighing the benefits of a police power ordinance, which can take the place of zoning in special instances.
In addition, the Raisin Township Planning Commission is developing a wind turbine ordinance. Officials are taking the step despite no stated intentions of a wind turbine project for Raisin Township.
1/10/12 Health Department: Yeah, OK. There are health problems associated with wind turbines but we're not going to do anything about it
HEALTH DIVISION VALIDATES SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WIND FARM NOISE
By Tom Banse,
Via Oregon Public Broadcasting, news.opb.org
January 10, 2012
In a draft report, Oregon’s Public Health Division acknowledges that noise from wind turbine blades may cause health problems among nearby homeowners. But the agency does not intend to take action against the burgeoning wind power industry.
In a draft report, Oregon’s Public Health Division acknowledges that noise from wind turbine blades may cause health problems among nearby homeowners. But the agency does not intend to take action against the burgeoning wind power industry.
Complaints from sleep-deprived neighbors and uncertainty among government officials prompted the re-examination of wind energy. A team of investigators from the Oregon Public Health Division reviewed case studies and held field hearings near some major wind farms. Principal investigator Jae Douglas says while the evidence isn’t exactly “rock solid,” the team found reason to take complaints about health impacts from turbine noise seriously.
“There could be a problem. At certain levels, certain equipment could be producing levels (of noise) that are troubling and difficult for people,” says Douglas.
Douglas says the investigators also assessed whether “shadow flicker” from spinning blades is a problem. They conclude that’s unlikely to have an adverse impact. The Oregon wind energy assessment has been published in draft form for public comment through the end of March. Before the draft came out, a pro-wind industry group issued a statement portraying wind turbines as “benign” to human health.
Oregon Division of Public Health draft study:
1/2/12 An 'inconvenient truth' about the wind industry AND Mount Pleasant to get waxed by SC Johnson wind turbines AND What's happening with Goodue Wind in 2012
Vermont's Energy Options >> Utility Scale vs. Community Solutions from Energize Vermont on Vimeo.
Vermont’s Energy Options is a documentary work-in-progress being produced by non-profit Energize Vermont. The purpose of the documentary is to examine the different paths Vermont has to a renewable energy future and create a dialogue around their respective impacts and benefits. The final product is intended to be full length 40-60 minute film, and may be adapted as the state’s energy landscape changes. Before the final product is released, we plan to update this space with extended interviews and additional information. The documentary is completely funded by Energize Vermont, which is funded by its members.
Video below from Scotland: Do you call this green? Forest gone, clearcut logs piled to the side, mud roads: what to expect when you are expecting turbines.
Want to watch more? What people living near turbines have to say about it.
Another video:
Click here to view video interviews of Australian wind project residents
Next feature
LEADING BIRD CONSERVATION GROUP FORMALLY PETITIONS FEDS TO REGULATE WIND INDUSTRY
ABC is filing this petition because it’s clear that the voluntary guidelines the government has drafted will neither protect birds nor give the wind industry the regulatory certainty it has been asking for.
(Washington, D.C., December 14, 2011) American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the nation’s leading bird conservation organization, today formally petitioned the U.S. Department of the Interior to protect millions of birds from the negative impacts of wind energy by developing regulations that will safeguard wildlife and reward responsible wind energy development.
The nearly 100-page petition for rulemaking, prepared by ABC and the Washington, D.C.-based public interest law firm of Meyer, Glitzenstein & Crystal (MGC), urges the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to issue regulations establishing a mandatory permitting system for the operation of wind energy projects and mitigation of their impacts on migratory birds. The proposal would provide industry with legal certainty that wind developers in compliance with a permit would not be subject to criminal or civil penalties for violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).
The government estimates that a minimum of 440,000 birds are currently killed each year by collisions with wind turbines. In the absence of clear, legally enforceable regulations, the massive expansion of wind power in the United States will likely result in the deaths of more than one million birds each year by 2020. Further, wind energy projects are also expected to adversely impact almost 20,000 square miles of terrestrial habitat, and another 4,000 square miles of marine habitat.
The petition highlights the particular threat from unregulated wind power to species of conservation concern and demonstrates the legal authority that FWS possesses to enforce MBTA regulations and grant take permits under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The petition also provides specific regulatory language that would accomplish the petition’s objectives, identifying the factors that would be considered in evaluating a permit for approval, including the extent to which a given project will result in adverse impacts to birds of conservation concern and species that are under consideration for listing under the Endangered Species Act.
ABC is filing this petition because it’s clear that the voluntary guidelines the government has drafted will neither protect birds nor give the wind industry the regulatory certainty it has been asking for. We’ve had voluntary guidelines since 2003, and yet preventable bird deaths at wind farms keep occurring. This includes thousands of Golden Eagles that have died at Altamont Pass in California and multiple mass mortality events that have occurred recently in West Virginia,” said Kelly Fuller, Wind Campaign Coordinator for ABC.
“The status quo is legally as well as environmentally unsustainable. The federal government is seeking to promote "a smart from the start” energy sector in a manner that is in violation of one of the premier federal wildlife protection statutes. ABC’s petition seeks to bring wind power into harmony with the law as well as with the needs of the migratory bird species that the law is designed to safeguard,” said Shruti Suresh, an attorney at MGC, the law firm that prepared the petition with ABC and that has brought many legal actions enforcing federal wildlife protection laws.
The petition is available online here.
ABC supports wind power when it is “bird-smart”. A coalition of more than 60 groups has called for mandatory standards and bird-smart principles in the siting and operation of wind farms. The coalition represents a broad cross-section of respected national and local groups. In addition, 20,000 scientists, ornithologists, conservationists, and other concerned citizens have shown their support for mandatory standards for the wind industry.
"ABC’s petition would safeguard more than just birds covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. It proposes a model rule that would allow the government to consider impacts of wind farms on all bird species, as well as bats and other wildlife,” said Fuller.
THIRD FEATURE:
Mount Pleasant approves SC Johnson wind turbines
By Kimber Solana
December 12, 2011
MOUNT PLEASANT - Amid some opposition from neighbors, SC Johnson is set to build two of the largest wind turbines in Racine County at its Waxdale manufacturing facility, a project expected to supply about 15 percent of the facility's electricity usage.
In a 6-1 vote, the Village Board approved the conditional use petition on Monday to erect the turbines at the facility, 8311 16th St. Trustee Harry Manning dissented, expressing concerns over the size - about 415 feet tall - of the energy facilities.
"The noise is going to be there. There is going to be flickering. You read anywhere, they've had nothing but problems," said Mount Pleasant resident Gail Johnson, 62. Johnson said her home is located on Willow Road, right across from where the turbines are expected to be built.
However, village officials said SCJ has gone "above and beyond" to address concerns by neighbors. Conditions set by the village include ensuring the wind turbines minimize noise decibel levels and shadow flickering.
Any noise would be no louder than traffic heard on Highway 20 or Highway 11, said Christopher Beard, reputation management director at SCJ.
The company has also offered to put in additional landscaping, if needed, such as trees that may block views of the turbines from residences, he added.
In addition, after meetings between the company and some residents, including those who opposed the project, SCJ has reduced the number of turbines from five to two.
Racine-based SCJ has said the wind turbines are the latest in a series of investments at Waxdale that will enable the site to produce 100 percent of its electrical energy on-site, with about 60 percent from renewable sources.
According to Beard, a groundbreaking date for the project remains unknown. SCJ is awaiting approval for the project from the Federal Aviation Administration due to the turbines' height, and proximity to Sylvania and Batten International airports.
The cost of the project was not available Monday, but returns in electrical savings would take years to recoup.
"But we wouldn't propose this project unless we believed it was a good long-term investment," he said, adding customers concerned over environmentally-friendly products now research how products are made.
Waxdale, the size of 36 football fields, is SCJ's largest manufacturing plant globally and where it makes products such as Glad, Pledge, Raid and Windex.
NEXT FEATURE
MANY DELAYS DRAG WIND CASE INTO 2012
By Regan Carstensen
January 1, 2011
From Minnesota
When the battle over wind development in Goodhue County was the Republican Eagle’s top story at the end of 2010, it was expected that some aspects would stretch into 2011. But it wasn’t quite as expected that the fight would be continuing when 2012 came around.
Just about every bit of controversy possible has been swirling around a 78-megawatt large wind energy conversion system that is planned for Goodhue County by wind developer AWA Goodhue Wind.
Ranging all the way from citizens and the developer disagreeing about eagle activity in the project footprint to lawsuits being filed by project participants, disputes have been abundant.
The AWA Goodhue project has taken several months longer than most wind farms to get to its current stage, which still hasn’t included any construction. A variety of factors contributed to extending the project’s original timeline.
Getting approval
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission had been taking its time ever since the end of 2010 to decide whether to approve the project that would be laid out near Goodhue and Zumbrota.
Ultimately, the PUC holds the authority to permit or deny wind farms in the state, but the commission decided to take into consideration a zoning ordinance created by Goodhue County officials in October 2010.
In order to determine the validity of the ordinance, the PUC asked an administrative law judge to review it, which caused the application to drag into April 2011.
It wasn’t until June 30 at a daylong hearing in St. Paul that the PUC approved the project. However, a state government shutdown stalled progress yet again and kept AWA Goodhue Wind from getting its permit.
Putting up a fight
Citizens developed two different groups — Goodhue Wind Truth and the Coalition for Sensible Siting — to fight the planned project, and a couple of government entities joined in.
With the Coalition for Sensible Siting, Goodhue Wind Truth, Belle Creek Township and Goodhue County all interested in filing for reconsiderations with the PUC, the case slowly inched forward as a second hearing was scheduled for November 2011 in St. Paul.
In what was probably the quickest decision made so far regarding the AWA Goodhue wind farm: It only took commissioners a matter of minutes to decide that the project should move forward as originally approved.
Still, reconsideration wasn’t the end of the road. Each group, except for Goodhue County, decided to appeal.
The Goodhue County Board was primarily opposed to the idea since it was likely to cost at least $10,000 to follow through with an appeal. A 3-2 majority made it official: The county’s fight was over.
“Wind turbines are coming to Goodhue County,” Commissioner Jim Bryant said after voting against an appeal. “I don’t think anything we do today is going to stop that.”
Looking out for eagles
Over the past year, citizens have shown a variety of concerns with wind turbines, including stray voltage, shadow flicker and noise pollution.
Perhaps the most talked about, however, has been the concern over the safety of the avian population — whether local or migratory birds — and their chances of getting struck by the blades of a turbine.
On several occasions, area residents invited representatives from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to view the environment within AWA Goodhue’s project footprint.
“It’s nice to try to use alternative energy, but we are right on the Mississippi Flyway,” Jaime Edwards of the DNR said. “You really have to look hard at whether something like this should be placed on a flyway.”
Moving forward
Belle Creek Township made its official decision Nov. 28 to appeal the PUC’s initial decision to approve a site permit. Not long after, however, AWA Goodhue began a lawsuit claiming that a moratorium put in place by the township is interfering with the developer’s rights.
As the new year begins, having lawsuits and appeals up in the air continues to delay progress of the project. Though AWA Goodhue officials would like to start construction in 2012, only time will tell what gets accomplished during the next year.
A timeline
December 2010
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission debates whether to approve the 78-megawatt project proposed by AWA Goodhue Wind for Goodhue County.
The PUC decides to ask administrative law Judge Kathleen Sheehy whether parts of Goodhue County’s zoning ordinance should be applied to the project.
April 2011
Administrative law Judge Kathleen Sheehy submits facts and findings that recommend the Public Utilities Commission not apply the Goodhue County’s ordinance to the AWA Goodhue Wind project.
May 2011
Goodhue County Attorney Stephen Betcher files a response that provides an exception to nearly half of the administrative law judge’s findings.
June 30, 2011
At a hearing in St. Paul, the Public Utilities Commission votes 4-1 to approve an amended site permit and a certificate of need for the AWA Goodhue Wind project.
August 2011
After several weeks of a government shutdown — preventing AWA Goodhue Wind from moving forward with its wind project — the developer receives its official site permit.
Sept. 6, 2011
Goodhue County commissioners vote 4-1 to allow Goodhue County Attorney Stephen Betcher to file for reconsideration with the Public Utilities Commission, asking it to take a second look at its permit approval.
Belle Creek Township and citizen groups Goodhue Wind Truth and Coalition for Sensible Siting also decide to file reconsiderations.
Sept. 20, 2011
Without getting a response from the Public Utilities Commission regarding reconsideration, the Goodhue County Board reluctantly votes 3-2 to submit an appeal to the PUC’s decision.
The county is told the appeal period expires Sept. 22. If it opts not to appeal, Goodhue County’s battle against the wind project would end if the PUC decides not to reconsider its original approval of a site permit.
November 2011
Goodhue County, Belle Creek Township, Coalition for Sensible Siting and Goodhue Wind Truth are told there was a misunderstanding with filing deadlines for appeals, and their appeals are dismissed.
They are allowed to wait for the Public Utilities Commission’s ruling on reconsideration and can then re-submit their original appeal without additional fees.
Nov. 10, 2011
The Public Utilities Commission votes 4-1 not to reconsider its approval of a permit for AWA Goodhue Wind.
Nov. 15, 2011
With misunderstandings and deadlines cleared up, Goodhue County Attorney Stephen Betcher asks the commissioners once more whether he should appeal the Public Utilities Commission’s decision not to reconsider approval of a permit for the wind project.
The County Board votes 2-2 to file with appeal, but without a majority the motion fails and Betcher is not directed to appeal.
Nov. 28, 2011
The Belle Creek Town Board votes 2-0 to file for appeal in the wind case.
Angry citizens in Goodhue County District 2 — potential home to much of the wind farm — announce a petition to recall Commissioner Richard Samuelson. Since they want to file for appeal in the wind case and Samuelson is opposed to an appeal, they feel he is not representing them.
Samuelson was absent from the Goodhue County Board meeting Nov. 15, but told those at the Belle Creek Town Board meeting he would have voted not to appeal had he been present.
Dec. 1, 2011
Commissioner Richard Samuelson requests an opportunity for the Nov. 15 appeal vote to be re-taken so his opinion can be officially reflected as part of the vote.
Just as he said he would at the Belle Creek Town Board meeting, Samuelson votes no to an appeal, contributing to the 3-2 failure of the motion to appeal.
Dec. 15, 2011
Belle Creek Town Board Chair Chad Ryan is served papers informing him that AWA Goodhue Wind is suing Belle Creek Township because a moratorium put in place by the township is interfering with the wind developer’s rights under the site permit it received from the Public Utilities Commission.
1/1/12 Life in a wind project: In Illinois and North Dakota the story is the same
FROM ILLINOIS
NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: According to this December 20th news article , wind company NextEra (formerly Florida Power and Light) has quietly settled with DeKalb County residents who brought a lawsuit against them.
Details of the settlement are unknown, however, a website that chronicled the Hulthen family's daily experience of living with turbine noise and shadow flicker in the NextEra wind project is suddenly gone from the web.
Wind companies often refuse to settle unless a gag-order is part of the deal. Was this one of the terms of the settlement? Is this why the website is gone?
Residents of a wind project in DeKalb Illinois talk about their experiences.
uploaded to YouTube by preservelenoxmtn on Dec 31, 2011
Dave and Stephanie Hulthen | "Life with Dekalb Turbines" | February 5, 2011 | Blissfield Middle School
The Interstate Informed Citizens Coalition, a group opposing the location of wind turbines in Riga, Ogden and Fairfield townships, hosted a seminar at the Blissfield Middle School.
Dave and Stephanie Hulthen spoke on "Life with Dekalb Turbines". They are from DeKalb County, IL. They live in the middle of an industrial wind farm. There are thirteen industrial wind turbines located within one mile of their home, two within 1400 feet
Next features:
A letter from North Dakota:
Subject: Life with turbines
From: Paul L Meisel Photography
Date: Sat, May 07, 2011 5:55 pm
To: windtruth@goodhuewindtruth.com
Hello,
I happened to hear you on KTLK a couple of weeks ago. I live south of
Minot, ND. A year and a half ago a wind farm of approximately 80
turbines was installed south of Minot. There are 42 in my township, the
nearest one is a little over one mile from me.
I have a 50% hearing loss, yet even on relatively calm days I can hear
the sound of the turbines. And on windy days I can feel them. It is as
if a diesel truck was idling nearby. I can hear that sound while in my
house, but not when I go outside. Therefore I conclude that it is caused
by low frequency sound or perhaps earth vibrations which cause my house
to vibrate. I now experience occasional vertigo and nausea often while
the low sound is occurring.
Driving near the turbines in winter can be dangerous. Ice dislodges from
the turbine blades, and if the wind is in the right speed and direction
the ice pieces land on the road. I have had several hit my car at night.
It was quite disconcerting.
Opposing wind development is not a very popular activity in this area.
When a neighbor and I tried to speak in opposition to the turbines at
our annual township meeting, we were quickly told that our opinions did
n
ot matter.
Prior to the turbines this was on a prime Bald Eagle migration path. I
have only seen one Baldy since the turbines went up. Also, this area was
an overnight stopping point for Sandhill Cranes. Accompanying the
Sandhills I would occasionally see Whooping Cranes. Now the cranes avoid
the region. Speaking out publicly is strongly discouraged and I am not
aware of any local action groups.
There is nothing which can be done up here, it is all too late. However
I am devoted to helping others avoid what has happened here. If I can
help in any way, please let me know. Also, I am attaching a photo of a
local turbine which experienced a blade failure several days ago. The
wind was less than 50 knots when the incident occurred (I maintain my
own weather station). Feel free to use and disseminate the image.
Regards,
Paul L Meisel
12/28/11 Rejected by local government, wind company goes to the Public Service Commission AND 2013 predictions for Big Wind
WIND FARM PROPOSAL IS FIRST IN TWO YEARS
Doug Schneider/Press-Gazette, Clay Barbour, Wisconsin State Journal,
via www.greenbaypressgazette.com
December 27, 2011
MADISON — Developers have applied to the Public Service Commission for a permit to build a large new wind farm in western Wisconsin, the first application of its kind in more than two years.
Emerging Energies applied this month to build Highland Wind Farm, a 41-turbine, 102.5-megawatt project in the St. Croix County towns of Forest and Cylon, about 25 miles east of the Minnesota border.
The application comes as new wind siting rules remain in limbo in the PSC, with officials trying to broker a deal between the wind industry and its critics.
William Rakocy, a founding member of Hubertus-based Emerging Energies, said his company understands there still is some uncertainty surrounding Wisconsin’s wind energy regulations, but he feels confident about the project.
“I guess we would like to believe that more reasonable minds will prevail,” he said.
Wind farms have been a contentious issue in Northeastern Wisconsin.
A proposed 100-turbine wind farm polarized Morrison and other southern Brown County communities before Invenergy LLC in March withdrew its plans to seek permits to develop the project. The company cited the state’s lack of siting guidelines in pulling the proposal, which would have put 54 turbines in Morrison and others in Glenmore, Holland and Wrightstown.
Residents around the hamlet of Shirley have complained that a smaller wind development there has reduced their property values, and has caused health problems for some people. The development’s owner insists that the wind farm complies with all laws.
Those concerns have prompted elected officials to be involved. State Sen. Frank Lasee, R-Ledgeview, this fall proposed a statewide ban on turbine construction until the state is in possession of a report that assures that they are safe.
Brown County Supervisor Patrick Evans last week called for the County Board to support the Wisconsin Citizens Safe Wind Siting Guidelines, a proposal that would establish limits for audible and low-frequency sound emissions, and set penalties for certain violations. A county committee will consider that request in January.
The new wind siting rules, more than a year in the making, were suspended just before going into effect in March. Those rules required wind turbines have a setback from the nearest property line of 1.1 times the height of the turbine, or roughly 450 feet. The rules also required turbines be no closer than 1,250 feet from the nearest residence.
Gov. Scott Walker proposed changes to those rules, pushing the setback from the property line — not just a dwelling — to 1,800 feet, or about a third of a mile. That legislation did not pass but did lead Republicans to ask the PSC to negotiate a new deal.
Those rules are for projects under 100 megawatts. The Highland project is larger and does not specifically fall under the rules under debate. But state law requires PSC officials to consider the yet-to-be approved rules when considering projects of greater than 100 megawatts.
This is only the beginning of the process, and the PSC has 30 days to determine if the application is complete. The agency has up to 360 days to make a decision.
Dan Rustowicz of Minnesota’s Redwind Consulting, a wind farm builder, said he is glad to hear about the application.
“That is a really good sign,” he said. “But we still need to get these rules resolved. Clarity is powerful.”
NEXT FEATURE
WIND POWER MARKET FACES TOUGH 2013
December 28 2011
The wind turbine market faces a difficult 2013 even if a U.S. incentive scheme known as the Production Tax Credit (PTC) is extended beyond its end-2012 expiry date, Denmark-based MAKE Consulting said in a research note.
Uncertainty about whether the tax credit will be extended or replaced with something else has led to a rushed 2011 and 2012 wind farm building cycle, while new development plans for 2013 have plummeted, MAKE said.
“The wind industry will see precipitous drops in 2013 installations without a PTC,” MAKE said in an abstract of a note for paying customers entitled, “U.S. market eyes policy cliff”.
“But even if a PTC is extended, the market impact is likely to be muted due to more challenging macro-economic conditions – basic demand conditions remain weak and natural gas futures remain low,” it said. “Even with a PTC, 2013 will not be the boom market of PTC years past.”
MAKE Consulting said that an analysis of publically announced orders for projects to be completed in 2012 showed the top-tier turbine manufacturers solidifying their market shares.
MAKE’s annual ranking list published in March this year showed Danish wind turbine maker Vestas clinging to its world market leadership with a 12 percent share, ahead of China’s Sinovel in second place and U.S. industrial giant GE in third.
Turbine prices have eroded steadily since 2008, but aggressive sales tactics may not be sustainable, MAKE said.