Entries in wisconsin wind energy (18)

1/6/12 Giving the power back to local government: Wisconsin turbine siting issue takes a new turn 

BILL ALLOWS COMMUNITIES MORE CONTROL OVER WIND TURBINE SETBACKS

By Trent Artus,

Via www.wqow.com

January 5 2012 

Rick Stadelman, Executive Director of Wisconsin Towns Association said: “Local governments are responsible for protecting the public health and welfare of their communities. Arbitrary state standards limiting setbacks and noise levels of wind turbines take away the authority of local officials to protect their community. One size does not fit all. This bill allows local officials to exercise local control to protect the interest of their community.”

Madison, WI – State Senator Frank Lasee (R) of De Pere, WI introduced a bill allowing local communities to create their own minimum setback requirements for wind turbines. Current law doesn’t allow local communities to establish distances from property or homes that 500 feet tall wind turbines can be located.

[download copy of the bill by clicking here]

“Local communities should be able to create their own rules for public safety,” Lasee said. “We shouldn’t leave it to bureaucrats in Madison to make these decisions that affect home values and people’s lives. Madisonites aren’t the ones living next to the turbines. Having a statewide standard for the setback of these 500 feet tall wind turbines doesn’t take into account the local landscape. Local elected officials are most familiar with their area to set the correct setback distances and best represent their local constituents.”

“Over the last several months, I have spoken with numerous Wisconsin residents who have complained about wind turbines,” Lasee added. “These complaints range from constant nausea, sleep loss, headaches, dizziness and vertigo. Some have said the value of their properties has dropped on account of the turbines.”

Representative Murtha (R) of Baldwin, WI adds: “There have been many concerns raised about wind farms all over the state of Wisconsin. This bill will finally give local communities the control they have been asking for when it comes to deciding what is right for their communities and families.”

Officials and spokespersons for local communities and organizations support Senator Lasee’s bill.

Rick Stadelman, Executive Director of Wisconsin Towns Association said: “Local governments are responsible for protecting the public health and welfare of their communities. Arbitrary state standards limiting setbacks and noise levels of wind turbines take away the authority of local officials to protect their community. One size does not fit all. This bill allows local officials to exercise local control to protect the interest of their community.”

Steve Deslauriers, spokesman for Wisconsin Citizens Coalition said: “In order for wind development to be good for Wisconsin, it must be done responsibly and not in a fashion that sacrifices the health of those families forced to live within these wind generation facilities. Good environmental policy starts with safeguarding Wisconsin residents and we thank Senator Lasee for submitting this bill.”

“Wind turbine siting must be done at the local level as the population varies greatly, county by county, township to township. It is our goal to protect families within our township. This bill gives us the authority to do that.” Tom Kruse, chairman of West Kewaunee Township said.

Dave Hartke, chairman of Carlton Township added: “Carlton Township supports LRB-2700 because it places the authority for wind turbine siting at the local level where it belongs. As town chairman, I am always concerned for the health and safety of our residents.”

“We applaud Senator Lasee for introducing this bill.” Erv Selk, representative of Coalition for Wisconsin Environmental Stewardship said. “We have long thought that the Public Service Commission setbacks were not adequate to protect the people that live near the Industrial Wind Turbines.”

Senator Lasee said, “It’s about time we as legislators return local control over this important issue to the elected officials that know their area best instead of un-elected bureaucrats in Madison.”

Second Feature

BILL GIVES LOCAL CONTROL FOR DETERMINING WIND TURBINE RULES

Via Wisconsin Ag Connection, www.wisconsinagconnection.com

January 6, 2012

A Wisconsin lawmaker is introducing legislation that allows local communities to create their own minimum setback requirements for wind turbines. According to Sen. Frank Lasee, current law doesn’t allow local officials to establish distances from property or homes that 500 feet tall wind turbines can be located.

“Local communities should be able to create their own rules for public safety,” Lasee said. “We shouldn’t leave it to bureaucrats in Madison to make these decisions that affect home values and people’s lives. Madisonites aren’t the ones living next to the turbines.”

The De Pere Republican says having a statewide standard for wind turbine setbacks does not take into account the local landscape. He says local people are most familiar with their own area to set the correct distances and best represent their local constituents.

“Over the last several months, I have spoken with numerous Wisconsin residents who have complained about wind turbines,” Lasee points out. “These complaints range from constant nausea, sleep loss, headaches, dizziness and vertigo. Some have said the value of their properties has dropped on account of the turbines.”

Meanwhile, Wisconsin Towns Association Director Rick Stadelman support the effort. He says local governments are responsible for protecting the public health and welfare of their communities, and says arbitrary state standards limiting setbacks and noise levels of wind turbines take away the authority of local officials to protect their community.

The bill comes nearly a year after a joint legislative panel voted to suspend the wind siting rule promulgated by the Public Service Commission in December 2010. Those policies would have put into place standard rules that all areas of the state would need to follow when determining regulations for wind turbines.

1/4/12 Scenes from a Wisconsin wind sighting council meeting... AND Plant trees not wind turbines!

IS SAFETY A RELATIVE TERM?

Some members of the Wind-Siting council seemed to think so.

With the fate of the Wisconsin wind-siting rules (PSC 128) is still up in the air, Better Plan takes a look back at some of the wind siting council meetings that lead to PSC 128. This was filmed on July 15, 2010

The video below was shot on the 8th of December, 2011, just a few weeks ago.

How much louder is the wind turbine noise limit proposed by the wind siting council?  How were the noise levels determined by Wind Siting Council? You'll have to see it to believe it: one of the discussions that lead to the decision about turbine noise limits.

Next Feature: A BETTER PLAN! Plant trees not wind turbines

From the UK

THE CONTRIBUTION OF TREES TO OUR LIVES: IT'S TIME TO TAKE STOCK

The Jardin des Plantes in Paris viewed from above. A tree planted in the entrance to the gardens by the French naturalist Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, in 1785 still stands today. Photograph: Yann Arthus-Bertrand/Corbis

VIA The Guardian

January 3, 2012

Humans, with a mere 2 square metres of skin, underestimate the surface area of a tree. To calculate that you need to measure both sides of each leaf, add the surface of the trunk, the branches and boughs, the perennial and feeder roots and the absorbent root hairs, not forgetting the bark pockets. A 15-metre tree in leaf would cover a total area of 200 hectares, which is the size of Monaco. A tree doubles its weight when wet, and its entire surface breathes and allows us to breathe.

Give me a tree and I'll save the world – that is the message that comes across from a book just published by the French botanist Francis Hallé, Du bon usage des arbres (Making good use of trees). The book is a defence of trees addressed to decision-makers and town planners. It is hard to know which specific tree to start with, but let's take as our prime example the plane tree planted by the Comte de Buffon in 1785 at the entrance to the Jardin des Plantes in Paris. Visitors can see how well it has fared 226 years on, even though it has never been pruned.

Plane trees, like many others, have a long lifespan. They are even "potentially immortal", claims Hallé. "Man is senescent, that is to say is programmed to die, but a plane tree is not," he said. After its leaves have fallen, life begins again in the spring and the tree recovers its youthful genomes. If it is not subjected to accidents, diseases or humans, the plane tree could live for centuries. "When you talk about a 100-year-old tree, it's just a kid in shorts," said the botanist, who knows of a 2,000-year-old olive tree in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin on the Côte d'Azur.

And trees create colonies. To reproduce they distribute seeds all around, but they also spread roots from which offshoots can grow. That is why 100-year-old plane trees are often surrounded by their younger brothers, and why poplars have grown for the past 10,000 years in Utah, and there are 13,000-year-old creosote bush clones in the Mojave desert of southern California, and 43,000-year-old stands of King's holly spread over an area of one kilometre in Tasmania. Hallé says: "The history of our zoological species can be found in the life of a tree. That should make us feel humble." Perhaps that is the first good turn trees do for us.

Another marvellous thing about trees is that they solve their own problems without moving. They are model citizens, decorative, quiet, economical, calm and courageous. They are content with so little, just light, water and trace elements, and silently elude their enemies by developing an arsenal of chemicals. Trees produce molecules to keep mice and insects at bay and in doing so provide man with taxol, an efficient anti-cancer drug. As we all know, lime, birch, willow, hazel and lemon trees are all used for medicinal purposes.

Humans, with a mere 2 square metres of skin, underestimate the surface area of a tree. To calculate that you need to measure both sides of each leaf, add the surface of the trunk, the branches and boughs, the perennial and feeder roots and the absorbent root hairs, not forgetting the bark pockets. A 15-metre tree in leaf would cover a total area of 200 hectares, which is the size of Monaco. A tree doubles its weight when wet, and its entire surface breathes and allows us to breathe.

Hallé believes that arboreal photosynthesis is our best ally in the fight against global warming. Buffon's plane tree, like all trees, absorbs quantities of carbon dioxide, responsible for greenhouse gases, and between 20% and 50% of matter produced by the tree, including wood, roots, leaves and fruit, is composed of CO2. When trees breathe they clean the atmosphere and retain CO2 and urban pollutants such as heavy metals, lead, manganese, industrial soot and nitrous oxide. These are stored in the wood. That is why we should refrain as much as possible from cutting down old trees. The older they are, the better they control pollutants.

At the same time, trees release oxygen that allows us to live. An adult human consumes about 700g of O2 per day, or 255kg per year. In that time, an average tree produces 15kg to 30kg, so about 10 trees are required to provide oxygen for one person. Trees also humidify and cool the atmosphere by evaporation and transpiration. A wooded area of 50 square metres brings the temperature down by 3.5C and increases the humidity by 50%. Leaf movement, especially in conifers, releases negative ions that are supposed to have beneficial effects on health and mood. And the tree is home to many useful species.

Pascal Cribier, a professional gardener, lives in a flat overlooking the Luxembourg Gardens in Paris. He points to the tree tops there. "We only ever see half the tree and can't imagine all the underground activity, the size and strength of the roots, and the many species that live in symbiosis with it. We forget that without trees the earth would deteriorate rapidly and lastingly." It is the secret underground life of trees that led Cribier to his vocation when he was 18. He wanted to understand, to plant and put his hands to the earth.

Now he is also a "garden artist", and exhibits blocks of knotted roots in galleries. In the undergrowth, those roots and the subsoil give life to mushrooms, lichen, ferns, epiphytic plants, insects, worms and mammals. Beneath the ground, the roots circulate tonnes of water for the leaves, and they are often longer than the branches. The Libyan jujube tree is two metres high but has branches 60 metres long. "Man can't live without trees, and yet they are under threat everywhere," warns Hallé. The UN declared 2011 to be the International Year of Forests. Trees are home to 50% of the world's biodiversity, and provide subsistence to 1.6 billion humans.

Surveys by the United Nations collaborative programme on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries show that half the planet's forests were destroyed in the 20th century. From 2000 to 2005, 7.3m hectares of tropical forest disappeared every year, or 20,000 hectares a day. As a result, tropical deforestation and forest degradation account for between 15% and 20% of CO2 emissions, because trees release carbon when they are burned or felled. The UN believes that tree planting could offset 15% of carbon emissions in the first half of the 21st century.

Take a (French) city dweller dining on a cafe terrace. He or she orders a salad with olive oil, lemon and pine nuts, followed by a truffle omelette and a glass of Chablis, and a poire belle-hélène for dessert (poached pears with melted chocolate). The meal ends with a cup of coffee sprinkled with cinnamon and a gin-based liqueur. Then our diner takes an aspirin and jots down a few lines in a notebook with a disposable ballpoint. That person has just used the output of 15 trees: ash for the chair, elm for the table, olive for the oil, umbrella pine for the nuts, a lemon tree, oak for the truffles, false acacia for the white wine barrel, a pear tree, a cocoa tree, a coffee tree, a cinnamon tree, juniper tree to flavour the gin, willow for the aspirin, castor tree for the plastic and Scots pine for the paper. We could not live without trees.

Nor could cities. The urgent need to protect trees in cities led the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) to dedicate October 2011 to urban and periurban forestry. By 2030, 70% of Earth's population will be urban and will need to be fed, since the countryside will not be enough. Urban and periurban agriculture exist already in wastelands and slums. City dwellers plant trees and vegetables to feed themselves and the FAO has been providing assistance and credit for years.

In Europe, Brussels has protected the Forêt de Soignes in the middle of the city, and Zurich is doing the same. Barcelona has made its nearby forest a protected area, and Nantes intends to plant 1,400 hectares of trees just outside the city. Julien Custot, FAO adviser, says: "Urban trees are vital in preserving the soil, containing floods, providing energy and producing healthy foodstuffs. They make cities cooler and more pleasant."

The Indian economist Pavan Sukhdev, co-director of Deutsche Bank in Mumbai, is also study leader for the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) project. In October 2010, he made a financial assessment of the services rendered by ecosystems for the Nagoya Convention of Biological Diversity, whose protocol France has just signed. He calculated the economic value of nature and its deterioration, after a three-year survey led by 100 experts. According to Sukhdev, if we halved the deforestation rate by 2030, the reduced CO2 emissions would cut the cost of global warming by €2.6 trillion ($3.5tn). The erosion of forests, soil and coastal areas leads to losses of between €1.3tn and €3.1tn a year. "It is the economic invisibility of ecosystems that has led to this ecological crisis," says Sukhdev.

As a gardener, Cribier is concerned about those figures. "A tree is invaluable," he said. "What we get from trees is priceless."

11/2/11 Studies indicate bats and birds plus big wind turbines equal big trouble. What about the same kind of study for the people in wind projects who are having health issues? 

THE MYSTERIOUS LINK BETWEEN BATS AND WIND TURBINES

Source: Minneapolis Star Tribune

November 2, 2011

By Josephine Marcotty

For years researchers have been puzzled by the number of bats killed by wind turbines. Birds, yes. But bats, in theory, should be able to avoid the towers because of their innate sonar systems that orient them in space. Nonetheless, they die in the thousands, in far greater numbers than birds. Some research found that they died because the enormous changes in pressure as the blades sweep through the air ruptured their delicate ear drums, causing a hemorrhage known as barotrauma. Now, a new study based on bat autopsies from the University of  Wisconsin found that the problem is far more complicated.

X-ray of a bat killed by a wind turbine at a southeastern Wisconsin wind energy facility during fall 2009.  Note the compound fracture of the right arm and the dislocation of the right shoulder joint

The scientists found 41 dead bats over three months beneath 29 turbines in Wisconsin. They conducted autopsies, including X-rays, on the animals to determine precisely why they died.

"Half the bats had trauma to the inner ear -- their ear drums blew out," said David Drake, one of the researchers on the study published this week in the journal of Mammology. And three fourths had broken bones, primarily wings, he said.

Why does it matter? Because knowing why they die might help in designing towers and blades that are not quite so lethal, he said. For example, changing the  shape of a blade could reduce the pressure gradient enough to prevent trauma to their ear canals, he said. Maybe changing the height of the tower would help avoid fatal collisions.

But the science is in its infancy, Drake said. in addition, not much is known about bats, much less about how they behave around wind towers or why they get close to them at all.

In the Midwest, migrating tree roosting bats are the ones that are killed most often. Drake said one theory is that they look for the tallest thing on the landscape -- often a wind turbine -- in which to roost and mate.  There are also studies that correlate bat deaths with low wind, perhaps because that's the best time for bats to feed. "They are so focused on feeding that they don’t pay attention to the blades until it's too late, Drake said. Even so, the bats need 20 meters to sense to a moving object. But the blades of a turbine move so fast they have only a quarter second to move out of the way. 

Drake said no one has a good estimate of how many bats are killed by wind turbines. But now it matters more than ever because bats are being decimated by a disease called white nose syndrome that destroys whole colonies. The disease is common in east, and is steadily moving west. So the total impact on bats is worrisome.

"With white nose syndrome  coming, all bets are off," he said. "When they are suffering 100 percent mortality from white nose, then added mortality from wind farms, it's hard to tell."

NEXT STORY :

GROUP REPORTS BIRD KILLS AT WEST VIRGINA WIND FARMS

Source: augustafreepress.com

October 31, 2011

With the deaths of nearly 500 birds at the Laurel Mountain wind facility earlier this month, three of the four wind farms operating in West Virginia have now experienced large bird fatality events, according to American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the nation’s leading bird conservation organization.

“Wind energy has the potential to be a green energy source, but the industry still needs to embrace simple, bird-smart principles that would dramatically reduce incidents across the country, such as those that have occurred in West Virginia,” said Kelly Fuller, ABC’s wind campaign coordinator.

There were three critical circumstances that tragically aligned in each of the three West Virginia events to kill these birds. Each occurred during bird migration season, during low visibility weather conditions, and with the addition of a deadly triggering element – an artificial light source. Steady-burning lights have been shown to attract and disorient birds, particularly night-migrating songbirds that navigate by starlight, and especially during nights where visibility is low such as in fog or inclement weather. Circling birds collide with structures or each other, or drop to the ground from exhaustion.

At the Laurel Mountain facility in the Allegheny Mountains, almost 500 birds were reportedly killed after lights were left on at an electrical substation associated with the wind project. The deaths are said to have occurred not from collisions with the wind turbines themselves, but from a combination of collisions with the substation and apparent exhaustion as birds caught in the light’s glare circled in mass confusion.

On the evening of Sept. 24 this year at the Mount Storm facility in the Allegheny Mountains, 59 birds and two bats were killed. Thirty of the dead birds were found near a single wind turbine that was reported to have had internal lighting left on overnight. This incident stands in stark contrast to industry assertions that just two birds per year are killed on average by each turbine. Data from Altamont Pass, California wind farms – the most studied in the nation – suggest that over 2,000 Golden Eagles alone have been killed there.

On May 23, 2003 at the Mountaineer wind farm in the Allegheny Mountains, at least 33 birds were killed. Some of the deaths were attributed to collisions with wind turbines and some to collisions with a substation.

“The good news is that it shouldn’t be hard to make changes that will keep these sorts of unnecessary deaths from happening again, but it’s disturbing that they happened at all. It has long been known that many birds navigate by the stars at night, that they normally fly lower during bad weather conditions, and that artificial light can draw them off course and lead to fatal collision events. That’s why minimizing outdoor lighting at wind facilities is a well-known operating standard. And yet lights were left on at these sites resulting in these unfortunate deaths. This reinforces the need to have mandatory federal operational standards as opposed to the optional, voluntary guidelines that are currently under discussion,” Fuller said.

A fourth wind farm in West Virginia, the Beech Ridge Wind Energy Project in Greenbrier County, has not experienced large mortality events, likely because it is currently prohibited by a court order from operating during nighttime between April 1 and Nov. 15.

“Some West Virginia conservation groups have suggested that other wind farms in the state should shut down their wind turbines at certain times and seasons to protect birds. Given the recurring bird-kill problems, that idea needs to be seriously considered, at least during migration season on nights where low visibility is predicted. A wind farm in Texas is doing just that, so it is possible.” said Fuller.

10/27/11 Wind developers Eco-Energy/ Acciona caught red-handed AND turbines shut down at night to protect bats.That's a good start, but what about protecting people?

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: Folks in Rock County are quite familiar with the wind developers mentioned in the article below. They had big plans for a major wind project in the Towns of Magnolia, Spring Valley and Union. They began by signing up landowners to long term contracts and working the community to pit neighbor against neighbor.

The project that was the subject of this audit is located just a few miles south of the Wisconsin-Illinois border.

CLEAN-ENERGY DEVELOPERS REAPED EXCESS U.S. AID, AUDITORS SAY

SOURCE: Bloomberg.com

The Obama administration overpaid renewable power developers in a federal grant program, including $2.08 million distributed to a unit of Acciona SA (ANA), a Spanish maker of wind turbines, according to government investigators.

The excess payment to EcoGrove Wind LLC, a unit of Acciona, was uncovered in an audit by the U.S. Treasury Department’s inspector general. EcoGrove received a $67.9 million grant in October 2009 for a wind farm in Illinois through a program to promote clean power created in the economic stimulus bill that year.

President Barack Obama’s administration already faces congressional inquiries over the Energy Department’s $535 million loan guarantee to Solyndra LLC, a maker of solar panels that filed for bankruptcy on Sept. 6. The audits raise questions about the Treasury’s management of a separate grant program that has awarded $9.2 billion to wind, solar and geothermal projects as of Sept. 11.

“A significant number of them no doubt have inflated costs,” William Short, an industry consultant and former investment banker with Kidder Peabody & Co., said in an interview. “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. This one’s a superhighway.”

The grants, covering 30 percent of a project’s cost, are based on what companies claim as the expense of developing a power source. Inspectors found overpayments in four of the five grants they have audited so far. Aside from Acciona, the discrepancies totaled $43,137. The excessive payments may climb as the inspector general investigates more of the 19,875 grants awarded.

‘Abusive Action’

The Treasury grants offer a benefit that leads some project developers to “engage in abusive action,” according to George Schutzer, a partner specializing in tax law with Patton Boggs LLP in Washington. Schutzer said he has advised clients seeking grants against being overly aggressive in their claims.

“It’s on the list of the things the Treasury Department is clearly looking at,” Schutzer said in an interview.

The audits by Eric Thorson, the Treasury’s inspector general, have focused on whether projects were eligible for the grants they received and whether the amounts awarded were appropriate, Richard Delmar, counsel to Thorson, said in an e- mail. The office plans to issue reports on nine additional grants next year, Delmar said.

The audits, which began in February 2010, involve visits to the headquarters of companies that received the so-called 1603 grants, and to project sites, Delmar said.

Planned Report

“We do plan to assess common and/or pervasive issues identified through these individual audits in the aggregate as part of a planned report on Treasury’s administration of the 1603 Program and make recommendations as necessary,” Delmar said.

There isn’t a deadline for completion of the “overall program assessment,” he said.

In Acciona’s EcoGrove project, investigators questioned five items including $5.3 million for interest on a late payment related to a turbine supply agreement with another unit of the company. Ineligible costs totaling $6.93 million led to the government overpayment of $2.08 million, Marla Freedman, assistant inspector general, said in a Sept. 19 report.

“People want to make sure they don’t leave money on the table, but you’ve got to strike that balance between what is permissible and what goes too far,” Jeffrey Davis, a tax partner with Mayer Brown LLP in Washington, said in an interview.

Furniture, Spare Parts

The Treasury Department agreed with the inspector general that Madrid-based Acciona should return $35,479 for costs associated with transmission lines, office furniture and expendable spare parts, according to the report. The Treasury hasn’t determined whether the interest penalty is eligible for the grant.

The company said including the interest payment in the cost of the project is “common industry practice” in construction of wind farms, according to the report.

“I don’t think there’s any padding” of costs, Amy Berry, a spokeswoman for Acciona, said in an interview. “You’re talking about companies that have a lot more on the line than a couple million back from U.S. Treasury. Obviously the consequences are huge if we don’t do it right.”

Small Staff

Six months after Obama signed the stimulus measure, the inspector general said managers at the Treasury Department had failed to explain what staffing would be needed to evaluate “the potentially thousands of applications of varying complexity for awards under this program,” according to an Aug. 5, 2009, report.

The Treasury Department responded that “the current team of four is adequate.”

“Just for just practical matters, we have a program to administer,” Ellen Neubauer, grants program manager for the Treasury, said in a Sept. 21 interview. “We have a large number of applications, a relatively small staff. We sort of have to set some parameters on what we’re going to examine more closely and what we’re not.”

The program has led to $31.1 billion in public and private investment in clean-energy projects that have the capacity to generate 13.6 gigawatts of electricity, about the same amount as 13 nuclear reactors, according to the Treasury.

Treasury Comment

“Treasury’s team works closely with a larger team of reviewers to carefully evaluate each application to ensure that the amount of money awarded is correct,” Sandra Salstrom, a department spokeswoman, said today in an e-mail. “In all instances where funds are found to be paid improperly, Treasury will work aggressively to recoup them.”

In the first five audits, investigators questioned $2.12 million of $306.4 million awarded in grants, or 0.69 percent. In the case of two wind farms developed by EON AG, inspectors reversed initial decisions questioning $1 million in grant awards related to spare parts after Treasury Department officials said the costs were eligible under tax law.

“The auditors that come out aren’t always the subject- matter experts when it comes to tax policy,” Matt Tulis, a spokesman for EON, said in an interview.

Credits Turned Grants

The incentives began under President George W. Bush as a tax credit companies could use to offset profit by investing in renewable energy projects. The 2008 financial crisis dried up company profits and opportunities to use the tax credit, resulting in the move to convert the benefit to grants.

“Our experience shows that it’s difficult getting financing for the projects,” Schutzer, the tax lawyer, said. “That makes the grant or the credit upfront so valuable. I would bet that the rate of mis-claimed charitable deductions is a good bit higher than the rate of abuse you’d find with the grants.”

The grant program, which was set to expire last year, received a one-year extension in December. A second continuation is unlikely, Bill Wicker, a spokesman for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said in a Sept. 12 e-mail.

“Given the considerable fiscal challenges confronting Congress, renewing this program seems to be a steep hill to climb,” he said.

NEXT STORY:

BAT FATALITIES AT WIND FARMS: CURTAILMENT A MORE COMMON PRACTICE

by Bill Opalka,

Source www.renewablesbiz.com

October 26, 2011

The recent discovery of a dead endangered bat at a Pennsylvania wind site led to the immediate shutdown of night-time operations of a wind facility. The practice has become more widespread I recent years.

Unlike a few years ago, the wind industry has been armed with studies and procedures that lead to immediate actions to prevent further fatalities, which have been deployed in sensitive areas populate by migrating birds and bats.

On September 27, Duke Energy Corporation notified the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that a dead Indiana bat, a state and federally protected species, had been found at its 35-turbine, North Allegheny Wind facility.

The facility, located in Cambria and Blair Counties in Pennsylvania, has been in operation since September 2009, and the bat carcass was located during voluntary post-construction mortality monitoring, FWS said.

Duke Energy stopped operating the wind farm at night “to prevent additional mortalities of Indiana bats,” spokesman Greg Efthimiou said.

Efthimiou said the company will continue to switch off the farm a half hour before sunset and a half hour after sunrise until mid-November, when the migration season of the endangered Indiana bat generally ends.

The ridge is in the section of the Appalachian Mountains that extends into West Virginia, where the issue of bat mortality first gained prominence a few years ago.

The bat carcass was discovered by a contracted technician and brought to the office at the end of the day per Duke standard procedures.

Duke immediately curtailed night-time operations of the turbines at the North Allegheny facility, and reported the incident to the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the Service. The FWS said it is currently reviewing the incident.

A project in West Virginia was itself endangered when the Beech Ridge project avoided denial of its permit when wind developer Invenergy and the Animal Welfare Institute reached a proposed settlement in federal court. The developers sought an “incidental take permit” from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, recognition that some fatalities will occur from an otherwise lawful activity.

The actual settlement that was agreed upon allows the turbines to be in 24 hour operation between mid-November and April 1 when the bats are hibernating. For the remaining months the turbines may only operate in the daylight hours.

In other locations, bat and bird monitoring has led to wind curtailment. Not the most lucrative solution, as curtailment cuts into wind plant revenue, but it helps avoid a PR disaster-in-the making.

10/22/11 Wisconsin Wind Siting Issues Continue

NOTE FROM THE BPWI RESEARCH NERD: The newest wind turbines in our state are 500 feet tall. The reporter was in error when he gave the height as 'up to 300 feet'.

WIND POWER AMENDMENT SHOT DOWN

SOURCE: Cap Times

By Mike Ivey

October 21, 2011

An effort to push forward with new rules for siting wind towers in Wisconsin has failed.

On a largely party-line 60-30 vote, the Republican-controlled Assembly on Thursday voted down an amendment  that would have cleared the way for an expansion of wind generated electricity here.

The rules for siting of wind turbines were approved by the state Public Service Commission under former Gov. Jim Doyle. But implementation of those rules has been suspended under a directive from Gov. Scott Walker.

Walker and others, including Rep. Frank Lasee, R-Ledgeview, have said the rules should be reviewed again, with more consideration given to those living near wind farms. Some residents have complained of noise and visual impacts from wind turbines, which can be up to 300 feet tall.

Rep. Gary Hebl, D-Sun Prairie, had co-sponsored the wind amendment that was attached to a bill that allowed for larger trucks on Wisconsin highways, including trucks that carry equipment for electric transmission lines.

In a statement, Hebl said it was ironic that the wind amendment was shot down just as new figures showed Wisconsin lost more jobs in September.

"On a day when we learned Wisconsin lost 12,400 jobs last month, it is unacceptable that Republicans would reject a Democratic amendment that would have helped create hundreds or possibly thousands of jobs in wind energy," he said.

The bill and proposed amendent are available here.

Posted on Saturday, October 22, 2011 at 07:24AM by Registered CommenterThe BPRC Research Nerd in , , | Comments Off
Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next 5 Entries