wind turbines
Ridge protections could endanger wind power
Asheville Citizen-Times - NC,USA
By Joel Burgess • July 7, 2009 12:15 AM Legislation to get consideration today would restrict wind turbines on ridge tops from being more than 35 feet tall, ...
Ocean plan curbs uses for Buzzards Bay
SouthCoastToday.com - New Bedford,MA,USA
To date, none of those communities has proposed a plan to build wind turbines offshore, he said. Smith said he plans to meet with other coastal planning ...
University should follow local lead on wind turbines
Daily Illini - Champaign,IL,USA
Invenergy, a Chicago-based company, has leased 25000 acres north of Route 74 with plans to build over 130 wind turbines next year. Local farmers have leased ...
Winds of change: Three-county wind farm project moves forward
Freeport Journal-Standard - Freeport,IL,USA
As of now, Navitas plans to build a 200 megawatt farm east of German Valley that includes approximately 100 wind turbines stretched across the three ...
More wind turbine talk at planning commission Monday night
Woodbury Bulletin - Woodbury,MN,USA
One of the items likely to get some attention is a chapter in the draft ordinance on wind turbines. The South Washington County School District has ...
Grants available for rural wind turbines
Northern Colorado Business Report - Fort Collins,CO,USA
The grants can be used to purchase and install small wind turbines or other renewable energy systems, covering up to 25 percent of the installed cost. ...
Pickens paring down wind farm project
Dallas Morning News - Dallas,TX,USA
In May 2008, Pickens announced that his company, Mesa Power LP, would order 687 wind turbines, or 1000 megawatts of capacity, from GE for about $2 billion. ...
Green Energy Technologies' First WindCube(R) Rooftop Wind Turbine ...
PR Newswire (press release) - New York,NY,USA
The installation will be the first commercial rooftop wind turbine in Ohio to provide on-site supplemental power generation using net metering. ...
Duke plans Colorado wind farm
Bizjournals.com - Charlotte,NC,USA
It will feature 34 wind turbines. Duke doesn't have any wind-power projects in Ohio, Kentucky or Indiana. In May, the company acquired the 70-megawatt North ...
See all stories on this topic
Wind Watch: Wind turbines
Sedgefield MP Phil Wilson's concerns over the “excessive development” of wind farms in his constituency (Echo, June 26) presumably reflect the broad views of constituents likely to be adversely affected? South Durham, basically rural in ...
National Wind Watch: News - http://www.wind-watch.org/news/
DARTMOUTH HITCHING POST: Wind turbine ballons fly tomorrow July 7
By Bill Trimble
I just this minute learned that Atlantic Design will be hoisting two balloons tomorrow (Tuesday, July 7) at the proposed sites for the wind turbines. The balloons will mark the tip of the blades for 100-meter towers and they should be ...
DARTMOUTH HITCHING POST - http://dartmouthhitcingpost.blogspot.com/
Power supplier to electric co-ops in 4 Western states signs wind ...
By Colleen Slevin
Tri-State to buy power from new Colo wind farmDENVER — A company that supplies power to rural electric cooperatives in four Western states announced Monday that it will buy electricity from a new wind farm on Colorado's Eastern Plains.
Breaking News - http://blog.taragana.com/n/
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Sunday, July 5, 2009
NW U.S wind power
July 5, 2009 • Opinions, Oregon, Washington
Northwest wind power a threat to raptors
[ Alternate short URL for linking • HOME ]
» Original source is provided at end of article «
The Columbia Gorge Audubon Society has monitored Northwest wind power for almost 20 years. We were not surprised by the recent eagle kill The Columbian reported May 18: “Washington wind turbines claim first known eagle victim.”
The Goodnoe Hills Wind Project that is responsible for the death of the golden eagle is sited in National Audubon Society’s designated Columbia Hills Important Bird Area in Klickitat County overlooking the Columbia River Gorge. The IBA program is Audubon’s attempt to identify and protect significant bird habitat. Gorge Audubon conducted bird counts in the Hills, and our nomination led to its IBA designation.
The main factor in securing the IBA designation was the intensive use of the area by raptors. It is well known that raptors commonly fly at an altitude that puts them at particular risk for collision with wind power blades.
Proper siting was touted as the key to green wind power. So why is wind power being sited in an Audubon Important Bird Area, and why is that Important Bird Area slated for border to border wind power development? The answer is simple. Instead of proper planning, Northwest wind power is being allowed to develop wherever infrastructure is available and politicians are agreeable.
Gorge Audubon believes wind power is already a disaster for Northwest birds. Who is responsible for this mess?
During years of reviewing wind power permits, we found that many significant omissions and deceptions were used to secure permits. For instance, The Columbian story reported that the proponent for the Big Horn Wind Energy Project in eastern Klickitat County had predicted the annual raptor mortality would be three to four birds, whereas follow-up monitoring suggests the actual raptor kill to be 31 to 49 birds per year. Drastically underestimating project bird kills is likely a common method for securing wind power permits.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tried to force the wind power industry to solve the bird kill problem on the Columbia Hills site years ago with a warning of criminal arrest. That problem was never solved.
Politics changed, and state and federal wildlife agencies have since stood by and watched the Northwest wind power disaster unfold. They protested but took no action. Now they are scrambling to “fix” the problem. If development is allowed to continue in the Columbia Hills IBA and other areas intensively used by birds, you will know that they have failed.
Lack of attention
Where are National Audubon Society and the environmental groups that authored voluntary siting standards for wind power back when the industry first arrived in the Northwest? The answer is that most of them have received Bullitt Foundation grants and hope to receive them again. The Bullitt Foundation of Seattle is a strong advocate of wind power. In fact, Denis Hayes, Bullitt Foundation Director, once wrote Audubon Washington not to “monkey wrench” wind power in the Gorge. Since then, National Audubon Society has written a few letters protesting wind power in their Important Bird Area, but they have ignored our pleas for the one thing that would save the Columbia Hills IBA: a publicity campaign exposing this siting disaster.
It’s time for a wind power reality check. Voluntary siting standards and wildlife guidelines may make the authors feel good, but they do not work. “Proper siting” has nothing to do with how wind power is actually sited. Phony mitigation measures offered by the wind power industry are unlikely to save even one bird. And the wildlife agencies need to find their spines.
The great hope of wind power is being squandered and turned into just another corporate money maker for the developers and equipment suppliers. Wind power will be joining the ranks of the other environmentally hazardous energy producers if our political leadership fails to make changes.
Governors Gregoire and Kulongoski, and President Obama, are you listening?
BY DAVE THIES
Dave Thies of White Salmon is president of the Columbia Gorge Audubon Society.
columbian.com
Northwest wind power a threat to raptors
[ Alternate short URL for linking • HOME ]
» Original source is provided at end of article «
The Columbia Gorge Audubon Society has monitored Northwest wind power for almost 20 years. We were not surprised by the recent eagle kill The Columbian reported May 18: “Washington wind turbines claim first known eagle victim.”
The Goodnoe Hills Wind Project that is responsible for the death of the golden eagle is sited in National Audubon Society’s designated Columbia Hills Important Bird Area in Klickitat County overlooking the Columbia River Gorge. The IBA program is Audubon’s attempt to identify and protect significant bird habitat. Gorge Audubon conducted bird counts in the Hills, and our nomination led to its IBA designation.
The main factor in securing the IBA designation was the intensive use of the area by raptors. It is well known that raptors commonly fly at an altitude that puts them at particular risk for collision with wind power blades.
Proper siting was touted as the key to green wind power. So why is wind power being sited in an Audubon Important Bird Area, and why is that Important Bird Area slated for border to border wind power development? The answer is simple. Instead of proper planning, Northwest wind power is being allowed to develop wherever infrastructure is available and politicians are agreeable.
Gorge Audubon believes wind power is already a disaster for Northwest birds. Who is responsible for this mess?
During years of reviewing wind power permits, we found that many significant omissions and deceptions were used to secure permits. For instance, The Columbian story reported that the proponent for the Big Horn Wind Energy Project in eastern Klickitat County had predicted the annual raptor mortality would be three to four birds, whereas follow-up monitoring suggests the actual raptor kill to be 31 to 49 birds per year. Drastically underestimating project bird kills is likely a common method for securing wind power permits.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tried to force the wind power industry to solve the bird kill problem on the Columbia Hills site years ago with a warning of criminal arrest. That problem was never solved.
Politics changed, and state and federal wildlife agencies have since stood by and watched the Northwest wind power disaster unfold. They protested but took no action. Now they are scrambling to “fix” the problem. If development is allowed to continue in the Columbia Hills IBA and other areas intensively used by birds, you will know that they have failed.
Lack of attention
Where are National Audubon Society and the environmental groups that authored voluntary siting standards for wind power back when the industry first arrived in the Northwest? The answer is that most of them have received Bullitt Foundation grants and hope to receive them again. The Bullitt Foundation of Seattle is a strong advocate of wind power. In fact, Denis Hayes, Bullitt Foundation Director, once wrote Audubon Washington not to “monkey wrench” wind power in the Gorge. Since then, National Audubon Society has written a few letters protesting wind power in their Important Bird Area, but they have ignored our pleas for the one thing that would save the Columbia Hills IBA: a publicity campaign exposing this siting disaster.
It’s time for a wind power reality check. Voluntary siting standards and wildlife guidelines may make the authors feel good, but they do not work. “Proper siting” has nothing to do with how wind power is actually sited. Phony mitigation measures offered by the wind power industry are unlikely to save even one bird. And the wildlife agencies need to find their spines.
The great hope of wind power is being squandered and turned into just another corporate money maker for the developers and equipment suppliers. Wind power will be joining the ranks of the other environmentally hazardous energy producers if our political leadership fails to make changes.
Governors Gregoire and Kulongoski, and President Obama, are you listening?
BY DAVE THIES
Dave Thies of White Salmon is president of the Columbia Gorge Audubon Society.
columbian.com
Massachusetts and wind farms
July 5, 2009 • Massachusetts
Cohasset keeps wind turbine bylaw
[ Alternate short URL for linking • HOME ]
» Original source is provided at end of article «
Cohasset’s bylaw governing industrial wind turbines will remain on the books despite an effort by a citizens group to have the ordinance “sundowned’’ to review and overhaul it.
Voters who turned out for the June 27 Special Town Meeting were told the Planning Board had not voted a recommendation on the proposed petition article. Under state law, the board must hold a public hearing, which it did the night before the meeting, and vote a recommendation. Instead, planners postponed action on a recommendation until mid-July.
Petition proponents tried to keep their effort alive by asking voters to continue the Special Town Meeting to September after the Planning Board took its vote. But a majority “did not have the appetite’’ to continue it, according to Conrad Langenhagen, one of those who had petitioned to have the bylaw sundowned.
“It’s unfortunate that the Town Meeting voters weren’t given a chance to vote on the article,’’ he said.
Selectmen chairman Paul Carlson motioned to “continue action on the petition article indefinitely,’’ and that was approved.
According to Town Clerk Marion Douglas, that killed any consideration of the article beyond the Special Town Meeting.
The citizens’ petition drive had been launched in May, shortly after the Planning Board defeated a request from CCI Energy in Plymouth to build two, 400-foot industrial turbines on top of the Graham Waste landfill property.
Neighbors of the site had attended the hearings and strongly urged planners to deny the request. When the May vote was taken, one of the four Planning Board members voted against CCI’s request, which needed approval by all four members considering the proposal.
By Christine Legere
Globe Correspondent
The Boston Globe
5 July 2009
Blog it:
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
Some possibly related
Cohasset keeps wind turbine bylaw
[ Alternate short URL for linking • HOME ]
» Original source is provided at end of article «
Cohasset’s bylaw governing industrial wind turbines will remain on the books despite an effort by a citizens group to have the ordinance “sundowned’’ to review and overhaul it.
Voters who turned out for the June 27 Special Town Meeting were told the Planning Board had not voted a recommendation on the proposed petition article. Under state law, the board must hold a public hearing, which it did the night before the meeting, and vote a recommendation. Instead, planners postponed action on a recommendation until mid-July.
Petition proponents tried to keep their effort alive by asking voters to continue the Special Town Meeting to September after the Planning Board took its vote. But a majority “did not have the appetite’’ to continue it, according to Conrad Langenhagen, one of those who had petitioned to have the bylaw sundowned.
“It’s unfortunate that the Town Meeting voters weren’t given a chance to vote on the article,’’ he said.
Selectmen chairman Paul Carlson motioned to “continue action on the petition article indefinitely,’’ and that was approved.
According to Town Clerk Marion Douglas, that killed any consideration of the article beyond the Special Town Meeting.
The citizens’ petition drive had been launched in May, shortly after the Planning Board defeated a request from CCI Energy in Plymouth to build two, 400-foot industrial turbines on top of the Graham Waste landfill property.
Neighbors of the site had attended the hearings and strongly urged planners to deny the request. When the May vote was taken, one of the four Planning Board members voted against CCI’s request, which needed approval by all four members considering the proposal.
By Christine Legere
Globe Correspondent
The Boston Globe
5 July 2009
Blog it:
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
Some possibly related
Ontario and wind farms
July 5, 2009 • Ontario, Press releases
Group fed up with Gerretsen’s lack of concern over wind-turbine health issues – Calls for resignation
[ Alternate short URL for linking • HOME ]
» Original source is provided at end of article «
The Coalition for the Protection of Amherst Island is so fed up with John Gerretsen’s lack of concern over the serious health problems being suffered by Ontarians living too close to wind turbines, that they have decided take out the advertisement set out below in the Whig Standard charging that Mr. Gerretsen, as Minister of the Environment, is ignoring the right of Ontarians to a ‘healthful environment’ as provided for under the Environmental Bill of Rights.
The advertisement also accuses the Ministry of the Environment of ruining people’s lives by allowing his Ministry to approve siting wind turbines too close to homes. Further, the ad. states that his Ministry has shown a chilling indifference to the harm caused by the 86 turbines now turning on Wolfe Island knowing that 266 dwellings would be located at or within 1 km of these turbines. The Coalition is calling for a moratorium on further construction of wind turbine farms while full independent medical and noise studies are conducted, and is asking Mr. Gerretsen how many more Ontarians may be put in harm’s way. The media are urged to seek answers to these questions.
The advertisement appeared in the Whig Standard on Saturday, July 4th.
About the Coalition to Protect Amherst Island. The Coalition to Protect Amherst Island was formed in 2006 in response to a proposal to build a 100-turbine wind power plant on Amherst Island. Amherst Island is one of the Thousand Islands in Lake Ontario
- 30 -
Contact: Coalition for the Protection of Amherst Island, General Delivery, Stella, Ont. KOH 2S0 — ProtectAi@kos.net.
Media Contact: Janet Grace – 613 389 8166
Further information and documents can be provided upon request
JOHN GERRETSEN
M.P.P., MINISTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT
HAS QUESTIONS TO ANSWER
Group fed up with Gerretsen’s lack of concern over wind-turbine health issues – Calls for resignation
[ Alternate short URL for linking • HOME ]
» Original source is provided at end of article «
The Coalition for the Protection of Amherst Island is so fed up with John Gerretsen’s lack of concern over the serious health problems being suffered by Ontarians living too close to wind turbines, that they have decided take out the advertisement set out below in the Whig Standard charging that Mr. Gerretsen, as Minister of the Environment, is ignoring the right of Ontarians to a ‘healthful environment’ as provided for under the Environmental Bill of Rights.
The advertisement also accuses the Ministry of the Environment of ruining people’s lives by allowing his Ministry to approve siting wind turbines too close to homes. Further, the ad. states that his Ministry has shown a chilling indifference to the harm caused by the 86 turbines now turning on Wolfe Island knowing that 266 dwellings would be located at or within 1 km of these turbines. The Coalition is calling for a moratorium on further construction of wind turbine farms while full independent medical and noise studies are conducted, and is asking Mr. Gerretsen how many more Ontarians may be put in harm’s way. The media are urged to seek answers to these questions.
The advertisement appeared in the Whig Standard on Saturday, July 4th.
About the Coalition to Protect Amherst Island. The Coalition to Protect Amherst Island was formed in 2006 in response to a proposal to build a 100-turbine wind power plant on Amherst Island. Amherst Island is one of the Thousand Islands in Lake Ontario
- 30 -
Contact: Coalition for the Protection of Amherst Island, General Delivery, Stella, Ont. KOH 2S0 — ProtectAi@kos.net.
Media Contact: Janet Grace – 613 389 8166
Further information and documents can be provided upon request
JOHN GERRETSEN
M.P.P., MINISTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT
HAS QUESTIONS TO ANSWER
Danny's Letter to the Editor
Dear Editor:
The experts in the field of medicine recommend a minimum set-back distance of one and one half miles (2400 m) of a Wind Turbine from a human habitation.That can be understood as a truth of medicine.
The proponents of a Wind Project on Digby Neck are proposing a 600 m.distance from homes in some instances. People, of which I am one, are upset about that. Well-meaning leaders tell us there must be compromise.I agree with that.However, it is at best unethical to compromise the truth.
Case in point: one partner in a committed relationship has been found to be unfaithful by the other.When the former is confronted by the other,the offer of a compromise is made. The paramour of the former wants the compromise,i.e.let him/her "be with me three nights a week and all day Sunday!" Dr.Phil would ask:"How's that gonna work for ya?" The truth about committed relationship is that is inclusive of two exclusively and permanent. There is no middle road. Compromise for less than that is a lie.
To compromise the truth of medical science is equally ludicrous and odious.
For this reason alone, aside from the detriment to tourism and small business in Gullivers Cove, the best compromise is that there be no turbines there. Place them a minimum of 2400 m from residences along highway 217 and strategically out of sight so as not to diminish the enjoyment of those who come here from the world over to enjoy the peace,beauty, and serenity for which this place is recognized.There aren't many left like it!
Daniel Mills
The experts in the field of medicine recommend a minimum set-back distance of one and one half miles (2400 m) of a Wind Turbine from a human habitation.That can be understood as a truth of medicine.
The proponents of a Wind Project on Digby Neck are proposing a 600 m.distance from homes in some instances. People, of which I am one, are upset about that. Well-meaning leaders tell us there must be compromise.I agree with that.However, it is at best unethical to compromise the truth.
Case in point: one partner in a committed relationship has been found to be unfaithful by the other.When the former is confronted by the other,the offer of a compromise is made. The paramour of the former wants the compromise,i.e.let him/her "be with me three nights a week and all day Sunday!" Dr.Phil would ask:"How's that gonna work for ya?" The truth about committed relationship is that is inclusive of two exclusively and permanent. There is no middle road. Compromise for less than that is a lie.
To compromise the truth of medical science is equally ludicrous and odious.
For this reason alone, aside from the detriment to tourism and small business in Gullivers Cove, the best compromise is that there be no turbines there. Place them a minimum of 2400 m from residences along highway 217 and strategically out of sight so as not to diminish the enjoyment of those who come here from the world over to enjoy the peace,beauty, and serenity for which this place is recognized.There aren't many left like it!
Daniel Mills
Labels:
Digby Neck wind park
Truth and Turbines
To: voice of the people halifaxherald
Cc: dan mills
Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 11:02 AM
Subject: Compromise
Dear Editor:
The experts in the field of medicine recommend a minimum set-back distance of one and one half miles (2400 m) of a Wind Turbine from a human habitation.That can be understood as a truth of medicine.
The proponents of a Wind Project on Digby Neck are proposing a 600 m.distance from homes in some instances. People, of which I am one, are upset about that. Well-meaning leaders tell us there must be compromise.I agree with that.However, it is at best unethical to compromise the truth.
To compromise the truth of medical science is equally ludicrous and odious.
For this reason alone, aside from ther detriment to tourism and small business in Gullivers Cove, the best compromise is that there be no turbines there. Place them a minimum of 2400 m from a residences along highway 217 and strategically out of sight so as not to diminish the enjoyment of those who come here from the world over to enjoy the peace,beauty, and serenity for which this place is recognized.There aren't many left like it!
Daniel Mills
Cc: dan mills
Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 11:02 AM
Subject: Compromise
Dear Editor:
The experts in the field of medicine recommend a minimum set-back distance of one and one half miles (2400 m) of a Wind Turbine from a human habitation.That can be understood as a truth of medicine.
The proponents of a Wind Project on Digby Neck are proposing a 600 m.distance from homes in some instances. People, of which I am one, are upset about that. Well-meaning leaders tell us there must be compromise.I agree with that.However, it is at best unethical to compromise the truth.
To compromise the truth of medical science is equally ludicrous and odious.
For this reason alone, aside from ther detriment to tourism and small business in Gullivers Cove, the best compromise is that there be no turbines there. Place them a minimum of 2400 m from a residences along highway 217 and strategically out of sight so as not to diminish the enjoyment of those who come here from the world over to enjoy the peace,beauty, and serenity for which this place is recognized.There aren't many left like it!
Daniel Mills
Labels:
wind turbines Digby Neck
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Latest News from National Wind Watch
Latest News
Massachusetts:
State wind power plans stir up local concerns
Ontario:
Wind farm neighbours say they had to move
Ontario:
Huron agricultural group seeks moratorium on wind power projects
Letters, Scotland:
Wind farm exhibition didn’t tell full story
Nova Scotia:
Towers on horizon for windfarm
Wyoming:
State requires marking towers
Ontario:
Backyard wind turbine rejected by Ontario Municipal Board
British Columbia:
Helicopter lift of blades to Grouse Mountain windmill delayed
Letters, Minnesota:
Evidence blows away wind farms
England:
Debate on wind farms in Northamptonshire
Scotland:
Wind farm group to go public
France:
Le développement de l'éolien en péril, selon Compagnie du Vent
Scotland:
Wind farm plans are gust not on
California:
TANC opponents decry meeting cancellation
Massachusetts:
Melrose wind turbine, expanded recreation explored at Mt. Hood
England:
Wind farm is a 'threat to tranquility'
Illinois:
Internet loss halts Farmersville wind generator
England, Press releases:
Silton Windfarm Unanimously Rejected
Massachusetts, Opinions:
An ill wind is blowing turbine issue in our state
British Columbia:
Installation of wind turbine delayed
Massachusetts:
State wind power plans stir up local concerns
Ontario:
Wind farm neighbours say they had to move
Ontario:
Huron agricultural group seeks moratorium on wind power projects
Letters, Scotland:
Wind farm exhibition didn’t tell full story
Nova Scotia:
Towers on horizon for windfarm
Wyoming:
State requires marking towers
Ontario:
Backyard wind turbine rejected by Ontario Municipal Board
British Columbia:
Helicopter lift of blades to Grouse Mountain windmill delayed
Letters, Minnesota:
Evidence blows away wind farms
England:
Debate on wind farms in Northamptonshire
Scotland:
Wind farm group to go public
France:
Le développement de l'éolien en péril, selon Compagnie du Vent
Scotland:
Wind farm plans are gust not on
California:
TANC opponents decry meeting cancellation
Massachusetts:
Melrose wind turbine, expanded recreation explored at Mt. Hood
England:
Wind farm is a 'threat to tranquility'
Illinois:
Internet loss halts Farmersville wind generator
England, Press releases:
Silton Windfarm Unanimously Rejected
Massachusetts, Opinions:
An ill wind is blowing turbine issue in our state
British Columbia:
Installation of wind turbine delayed
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
