Science of Industrial Wind in MA and the Eastern US

http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/science-of-industrial-wind-in-ma-and-the-eastern-us/

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

CT Siting Council’s working draft of wind regulations, plus public comments and the transcript for the public hearing the CSC held on Oct. 13, 2011 prior to developing the draft regulations.

Link to Document (220 pages)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Wind energy panel recommends against Lenox Mountain turbine

By Clarence Fanto, Berkshire Eagle Staffberkshireeagle.com

Posted: 02/16/2012 03:01:11 PM EST

February 17, 2012 12:4 PM GMT Updated: 02/17/2012 07:04:04 AM EST

Friday February 17, 2012

LENOX — A study group’s report says the town should abandon a wind energy proposal.

After four months of study, the majority of the Wind Energy Research Panel is recommending the proposal be scuttled because it won’t be a financial benefit to Lenox, but would raise health concerns and yield a negative environmental impact. The panel was assigned by the Select Board to evaluate a single or double municipal wind-turbine installation atop Lenox Mountain. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Vermont February Update

With the goal of building 200 miles of ridgeline wind in Vermont (David Blittersdorf’s number) or 126 3MW turbines (VPIRG’s number) or any new renewable energy project anywhere even if it’s poorly sited (Rep. Tony Klein’s approach) or building new renewables as fast as possible (Gov. Shumlin’s approach), big wind projects are not going away. Derby is coming up for its first pre-hearing conference tomorrow, the Grandpa’s Knob spokesman made a presentation at the Killington Selectboard last week and says they expect to have their power purchase agreement finalized within the next few weeks, the Brighton/Ferdinand developers have been active with state agencies, GMP has now cleared the Crane Path road all the way to the southern end of the Lowell Mountains and blasting continues, and the Sheffield turbines are making noise. Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Appeal of windfarms’ approval proceeds in New Britain court

COLEBROOK — A citizens’ group appeal of two mini-wind farms in town is moving ahead in court.

A New Britain Superior Court judge upheld the legality of FairwindCT’s appeal this week, accord­ing to the group’s lawyer, Nicholas Harding of Hartford. Judge Henry S. Cohn opened a hearing on the case Monday.

The hearing is an opportunity for the judge to ask questions and clarify information he has from the parties involved, Harding said. FairwindCT is opposed to the development of six wind turbines — three on Flagg Hill Road and three others on Rock Hall Road — proposed by BNE Energy of West Hartford. Four Colebrook residents are list­ed as separate plaintiffs.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

CT Citing Council to hold Public Hearing TOMORROW – 12/13/2011

All,

The Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) is holding a public hearing on Tuesday, Dec. 13th in New Britain at 1:00 PM on changes they have proposed to their review structure — one of which is to restrict Conservation Commissions and environmental groups from commenting on any given application unless they have filed for party or intervenor status. Go to their website for info at http://www.ct.gov/csc/ click on Proposed Amended Regulations. Scroll down to comments by Attorney Keith Ainsworth for the most cogent objections. You can also access the salient areas through his citations and go to the Proposed Amended Regulations for cross reference.
It is important that as many people as possible from environmental groups, planning agencies, and town conservation groups show up at this hearing to object to any such restrictions. Or at least file written comments ASAP as their supposed deadline is Dec. 6th. (Ask for an extention.)
In Litchfield County, both the Housatonic Valley Association (HVA) and the Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council (BLEC) have given their input during the public comment session of CSC hearings, not as intervenors/parties, depending on the circumstance. For instance, it was appropriate for BLEC to officially intervene when a tower was proposed within 1000′ of our office. In other instances, we have been asked to comment by various entities — citizens groups, conservation commissions, etc. — as authorities but without intervenor or party status. HVA does the same. Both groups often provide information completely left out by applicants and therefore unavailable to the CSC during any particular application. Local environmental groups and town conservation commissions are far more knowledgeable about local resources and sensitive areas than distant state entities or corporate behemoths which hire out-of-state firms to compile information.
This proposed CSC change would eliminate that avenue of participation and require a degree of legal participation typically beyond most groups and town committees. Also, in so doing, it would remove a significant opportunity to enter expert information into the public record that can be used in the advent of court challenges later on. The change requires that any expert information be subject to their strict evidentiary control and cross examination. But to participate at THAT level requires legal expertise beyond most towns and/or environmental groups.
It is BLEC’s position that participation in the CSC process is already daunting enough and that the process should be made easier, not more difficult.
Another ill-conceived change would codify what applicants now use regarding the presence of sensitive wildlife, flora or fauna at proposed sites… There is a proforma DEEP letter typically used in cell tower applications that should not be used as a final determination, or in lieu of a wildlife inventory survey when indicated. The DEEP letter even contains a disclosure statement to that affect at the bottom but it is usually ignored by the CSC. This change would allow that letter to be the final word and it is wholly inadequate. The DEEP’s letter is based on a data search of DEEP records but the DEEP database is nowhere near complete, nor does DEEP  conduct wildlife inventory reviews. It is up to local entities to do that themselves and then file with the DEEP. But few are equipped for such inventory review and this has been a way of shifting essential regulatory process onto local entities.
These changes serve to stack the deck even more in CSC’s favor — something that municipalities already find too onerous. But without pushback, it will go through. Please comment during this one narrow window allotted to the citizens of CT. There are also issues pertaining to industrial wind turbine siting in these proposed changes, too.

Best Regards,
B. Blake Levitt
Communications Director, The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

News & Events around Wind in Vermont This Week and Next Week (Oct. 24, 2011)

This email contains many of the news articles from the last few days (not even all of the last week, there are so many).  In putting together this compilation, I found a Fox 44 TV news piece I hadn’t seen before, and a blog from Canada that is an excellent summary of recent events.

1.  Continuation of Court Hearing, GMP vs. the Nelsons, Tuesday, Oct. 25, 10 a.m., Orleans Superior Court, Newport

2.  Protest at Sheffield wind site (article below), begin convening at 10 a.m., official ceremony requires RSVP, goes from 11 to 1 and includes lunch.  http://www.marketwatch.com/story/vermont-governor-shumlin-to-join-first-wind-at-ribbon-cutting-ceremony-to-commemorate-completion-of-sheffield-wind-project-2011-10-19

3.  Call the Governor.  (802) 828-3333.  When people complain about the Sheffield project, tell them to call the governor.  When people ask what they can do about Lowell, tell them to call the governor.  We have heard that so many people are calling the governor, they have had to dedicate one person to handle all the calls.  Keep it coming.

4.  The protest taking place on the Lowell Mountains in Vermont is getting noticed by people who have previously not paid any attention to wind issues, and it is spreading outside of Vermont, partly thanks to this blog post (full text below) by Seven Days http://7d.blogs.com/blurt/2011/10/occupy-lowell-mountain-now-blogging-from-the-blasting-zone.html about the blog of the Mountain people http://lowellmountainsnews.wordpress.com/.  The people writing the Mountain Talk blog are producing a work of art.  If you haven’t taken a look yet, you’ll probably find you’ll be checking it for updates every day.

5.  Carol Irons began a hunger strike recently protesting the Lowell wind project, and she has received her first news coverage, below.

6.  Got a letter to the editor bursting to come out?  Here’s a listing of where and how to submit your letter:  http://energizevermont.org/write-letters/

7.  Photos of construction of “Granite Reliable” http://www.brookfieldpower.com/granitewind 3 MW x 33 turbine wind project in Coos County, NH:  http://www.vce.org/Sentinel 10.12.11 pg1and20.pdf.  Here’s an interesting piece about the project and its connection to Occupy Wall Street:  http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/13/greens-occupy-wall-street-indeed/

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Not-So-Green Mountains

Craftsbury, Vt.BULLDOZERS arrived a couple of weeks ago at the base of the nearby Lowell Mountains and began clawing their way through the forest to the ridgeline, where Green Mountain Power plans to erect 21 wind turbines, each rising to 459 feet from the ground to the tip of the blades.

Joseph Hart

 

Related

Readers’ Comments

This desecration, in the name of “green” energy, is taking place in Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom on one of the largest tracts of private wild land in the state. Here and in other places — in Maine and off Cape Cod, for instance — the allure of wind power threatens to destroy environmentally sensitive landscapes.

Erecting those turbines along more than three miles of ridgeline requires building roads — with segments of the ridgeline road itself nearly half as wide as one of Vermont’s interstate highways — in places where the travel lanes are now made by bear, moose, bobcat and deer.

It requires changing the profile of the ridgeline to provide access to cranes and service vehicles. This is being accomplished with approximately 700,000 pounds of explosives that will reduce parts of the mountaintops to rubble that will be used to build the access roads.

It also requires the clear-cutting on steep slopes of 134 acres of healthy forest, now ablaze in autumn colors. Studies have shown that clear-cutting can lead to an increase in erosion to high-quality headwater streams, robbing them of life and fouling the water for downstream residents, wild and human.

The electricity generated by this project will not appreciably reduce Vermont’s greenhouse gas emissions. Only 4 percent of those emissions now result from electricity generation. (Nearly half come from cars and trucks, and another third from the burning of heating oil.)

Wind doesn’t blow all the time, or at an optimum speed, so the actual output of the turbines — the “capacity factor” — is closer to about one-third of the rated capacity of 63 megawatts. At best, this project will produce enough electricity to power about 24,000 homes per year, according to the utility.

Still, wind does blow across Vermont’s ridgelines. The Vermont Public Interest Research Group, for instance, has suggested that wind power could provide as much as 25 percent of the state’s electricity needs, which would require turbines on 29 miles of ridgeline. Other wind advocates, notably David Blittersdorf, the chief executive of a wind and solar power company in Williston, Vt., has urged that wind turbines be placed along 200 miles of ridgeline in the state.

But it is those same Green Mountain ridgelines that attracted nearly 14 million visitors to Vermont in 2009, generating $1.4 billion in tourism spending. The mountains are integral to our identity as the Green Mountain State, and provide us with clean air and water and healthy wildlife populations.

Vermont’s proud history of leadership in developing innovative, effective environmental protection is being tossed aside. This project will set an ominous precedent by ripping apart a healthy, intact ecosystem in the guise of doing something about climate change. In return, Green Mountain Power will receive $44 million in federal production tax credits over 10 years.

Ironically, most of the state’s environmental groups have not taken a stand on this ecologically disastrous project. Apparently, they are unwilling to stand in the way of “green” energy development, no matter how much destruction it wreaks upon Vermont’s core asset: the landscape that has made us who we are.

The pursuit of large-scale, ridgeline wind power in Vermont represents a terrible error of vision and planning and a misunderstanding of what a responsible society must do to slow the warming of our planet. It also represents a profound failure to understand the value of our landscape to our souls and our economic future in Vermont.

Steve E. Wright, an aquatic biologist, is a former commissioner of the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Opponents of wind power project begin occupation on Vermont’s Lowell Mountain

MONTPELIER, Vt. — Some opponents of a wind power project planned for the ridge line of northern Vermont’s Lowell Mountain began camping out on nearby property Wednesday, hoping their presence will halt blasting for the project.

Don and Shirley Nelson, who own 600 acres in Albany that abut the project, said they had invited campers to pitch tents 100 feet from their property line and well within the safety zone surrounding where some of the blasting will occur.

“Friends and neighbors have decided that it’s time that somebody just said something,” Shirley Nelson said in a phone interview. “We couldn’t think of any other way to do it. We’ve been ignored through this whole process.”

She said four tents had been pitched as of Wednesday afternoon.

The Nelsons wrote to Mary Powell, CEO of project developer Green Mountain Power, to say campers and hunters would be in the area and urging the company to ensure their safety.

“Our guests will be camping, recreating and hunting in that area for the foreseeable future. We trust you will be respectful of their presence and particularly their safety,” the Nelsons wrote.

GMP spokeswoman Dorothy Schnure said blasting had begun on the other side of the mountain and was not expected to near the Nelsons’ property until late fall or early winter.

She said the area would need to be cleared when blasting occurs, and that signs would be posted warning hunters and others of the danger. She could not say what would happen if the campers refused to leave.

“If they’re still there later this winter when we need to do the work, we’ll address it then,” Schnure said. “But there’s certainly time between now and then to work it out.”

Other occupation-style protests in Vermont frequently have ended in arrests and trespassing charges for participants. But since the campers are invited guests of the Nelsons, the trespassing law wouldn’t apply, said Attorney General William Sorrell.

If people are simply camping or hunting with a property owner’s permission, “there’s no criminal violation that comes readily to mind,” Sorrell said.

GMP’s $156 million, 21-turbine wind power project is due to be completed by the end of next year and is expected to provide enough power for 24,000 homes, Schnure said. It has drawn stiff opposition from neighbors and some environmentalists, whose concerns include its effects on wildlife, noise from the turbines and marring unspoiled mountain vistas.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Public Forum Scheduled for adoption of wind regulations in Connecticut

VERY IMPORTANT !!!

A PUBLIC FORUM HAS BEEN SCHEDULED ON THE ADOPTION OF WIND REGULATIONS IN CONNECTICUT
Thursday, October 13 from 1:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and from 6:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Hearing Room One, Ten Franklin Square
New Britain, CT

The Connecticut Siting Council will hold a public forum on the adoption of regulations for the siting of wind projects on Thursday, October 13 from 1:30-5:00 p.m. and 6:30-9:00 p.m.

This is an informal proceeding and you can make oral statements (time limit is about 3 minutes) or submit written statements concerning the adoption of regulations for the siting of wind projects. There will be a sign-up sheet at the entrance for those wishing to make oral statements.

Written statements may be submitted at the public forum,
and you may also MAIL them to the Connecticut Siting Council at 10 Franklin Square, New Britain, CT 06051,
or EMAIL them to the Council at siting.council@ct.gov

A verbatim transcript of the public forum will be available later at the Council office.

PLEASE MAKE A STATEMENT ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR CONNECTICUT —  PLAN TO ATTEND THE PUBLIC FORUM ON OCTOBER 13 IF POSSIBLE.

FairWindCT does not think industrial wind turbines, standing up to 492 feet tall, should be sited in residential neighborhoods in any town. Connecticut currently HAS NO REGULATIONS for industrial wind turbines — and the Council has been charged by the State Legislature (Public Act 11-245) to create regulations by July 1, 2012 that will cover setbacks, including considerations of tower height and distance from neighboring properties; flicker; a requirement for the developer to decommission the facility at the end of its useful life; different requirements for projects of different sizes; ice throw; blade shear; noise; and impact on natural resources; and a requirement for a public hearing for wind turbine projects.

If you have any questions, please contact me at info@fairwindct.com or leave me a message at 860-379-6425. The FairWindCT web site has lots of informative material, and a copy of our appeal to CT Superior Court of the two approved industrial wind projects in Colebrook.

Thank you,
Joyce Hemingson, President
FairWindCT

www.fairwindct.com
info@fairwindct.com

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment