Voices of Vinalhaven--A Year-End Update

All across the state of Maine, good people are battling to preserve their quality of life.  The story of Vinalhaven Island is a poignant one. 

It’s also the poster child of what’s gone wrong…. what’s gone wrong with the ‘system’, with our priorities, and with our policies.

Please take a moment to read the year end update published by Fox Islands Wind Neighbors.  And then, please consider speaking out in support of our fellow Mainers.  

Thank you, and Happy New Year.

Blind Eyes and Deaf Ears

These are thoughts and ramblings of an aging man who has outgrown the good times of his generation.  Aging eyes look upon the world, only to see the future reflections of society’s disappointments.  Ears hear the vocal cries of life’s despair, a constant din of complaints that no one hears.        

Why is this?

All are too busy to stop, to look, to listen to the passage of life’s time.  Life was once cautious, to be safe, whenever crossing railroad tracks there was a pause to stop, to look, to listen.  Now there are crossing flyovers; trains and cars can speed along without a need for us to stop, to look, to listen.  We do not need to go away to see the world, too much hassle, too much waiting, too many people.   We write quick notes to each other, rather than sharing a good conversation.  We now listen to people we do not know, who make a living telling us what we do not know.        

Why is this?

I sit here at home, living with the encroachment of society into my land of peace and tranquility, so others can feel good about themselves.  Now, I have to live with noisy neighbors, people and things; making unreasonably loud sounds; intrusions into my once life of quiet enjoyment.  I try to complain to others, yet there is no one to stop by for a friendly visit with me.   I ask for help, yet no one comes to look at what has        happened to me.  Finally, I cry out, yet no one wants to listen anymore.  I am left alone, an outcast from many. 

Why is this?

Have others' determined that my quality of life has no value.  Please tell me, can a person who has no concern for me, really make a truthful assessment of my ruined        life, my loss of well-being.  I need a sincere visit with a long stop at night, a good look at me, and careful listen to my emotional despair.  I need you to visit me on my bad days when the winds are strong.  I can have a meal brought in to share, since I can no longer cook a decent meal. Strange it is that I always find myself under stress at home. 

Where did my personal sanctuary go? 

Why is this?

I will leave my home; abandon a dream gone badly.  I need to go away, to pause for a deep breath.  Then, far away in search of needed relief, soothing relaxation, live out life’s expectation before a deep everlasting sleep.  

Why is this?

Wow, my life away feels better, yet I still miss my dream.  My mind comes back to life as if living in younger years. 

Why is this?

Should I understand what everyone is telling me?  Is it because my life has not been peer-reviewed?  This is why I need to stop, look and listen to the noisy whirlybirds. 

Why is this?

By Stephen E. Ambrose, 31Dec2011
Personal reflections after living near a wind turbine during a windy weekend.

20 Reasons to Take a Closer Look at Wind

 The Facts about Wind Energy Development in Maine

When asked if they think wind generated electricity is good, affordable, green, useful, and necessary most people will say ”Yes, of course.” But the fact is, none of the above has ever been proven. Wind generated electricity has been effectively shielded from scrutiny by marketing and lobbying, with no obligation to verify its claims. But wind generated electricity has high impact and low benefit to Maine’s economy and environment. Following are 20 reasons to take a closer look.

1. Wind generated electricity will not “get us off of oil.” Less than 2 % of the electricity in Maine and in the U.S. comes from oil-fired generators. We use oil for transportation and heating. Switching to electric vehicles and electric heat would increase electricity consumption radically, and consumers could not bear the cost of this very expensive form of electricity: wind.

2. Maine has 4300 megawatts of electricity generation capacity, though we only use 1500 megawatts on average. There is no shortage of electricity and the grid forecasts less than one percent annual growth in demand for the next decade. No urgent need exists to sacrifice unique resources using taxpayers’ money to produce a small amount of surplus electricity.

3. Even without wind turbines, Maine is already one of the cleanest states in the nation in electricity generation. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Maine ranks first in non-hydro renewable electricity gen­eration per capita, per gross state product and as a percentage of total electricity generation. We also have the highest renewable portfolio standard in the U.S.

4. By necessity, conventional sources of electricity; nuclear, biomass, natural gas, hydropower, etc. will re­main the primary suppliers of electricity to the New England grid well into the future. Wind-generated elec­tricity cannot, by its nature, replace or displace these “baseload” generators. Intermittency and low power density restrict it to a role as a marginal supplier of electricity.

5. Maine’s 2700 megawatt goal for land-based wind generating capacity will necessitate the construction of 1200-1700 wind turbines, each around 400-450 feet tall on over 300 miles of rural Maine’s mountains and hills.

6. The expansive conversion of rural Maine lands to wind development could still provide no more than 5% of New England’s electricity needs under even the most optimistic of scenarios. It would have no meaningful impact on New England’s fossil fuel consumption. The intermittency of Maine’s 2700 megawatt (MW) wind power goal gives it, at most, an effective output that is around 30% of its listed capacity, or about 800 MW. On New Eng­land’s 32,000 MW grid, this is a drop in the bucket – especially, when considering the hundreds of miles of turbines needed to achieve this.

7. Wind generated electricity is high impact and low benefit. The entirety of Maine’s 2700 megawatt goal could be supplanted by the construction and operation of A SINGLE, moderately sized, conventionally fueled (e.g. natu­ral gas) generator, at 10-15% of the cost.

8. Placing wind turbines on Maine’s mountains will not enhance our energy security. Virtually all of the fuels used to produce electricity in New England are sourced from North America. ALL are readily available in North America.

9. Placing wind turbines on Maine’s mountains will not reduce coal consumption or stop mountaintop re­moval mining. Coal is used in other parts of the country as a reliable (albeit dirty) baseload fuel, with some states deriving 75% of their electricity from coal. Maine has only one small coal-fired generator, powering a Rumford paper mill, accounting for about ½ percent of all of Maine’s electricity generation. Comparatively speaking, New England is a minor user of coal.

10. Placing wind turbines on Maine’s mountains will not improve Maine’s air quality. EPA figures indicate that the burning of fossil fuels in Maine is a minor source of the state’s particulate pollution. Most fossil fuel pollutants blow into Maine from population centers many miles away.

11. If CO2 is the problem, wind power is not the solution. Placing wind turbines on Maine’s mountains will have no impact on climate change. Using the wind industry’s optimistic claims, 2700 MW of installed wind capacity in Maine could only reduce total U.S. CO2 emissions by less than five one-hundredths of one percent (0.05%.) Glob­ally, there would be no measurable impact.

12. Wind turbines require sources of NEW conventional generating capacity. The 2010 New England Wind In­tegration Study stated that “Wind’s intermittent nature would require increased reserves, ensuring that there are other generation options when the wind isn’t blowing.”

13. New wind power integration will require an unprecedented expansion of transmission capacity. The president and chief executive of ISO-New England, said in 2010 that large scale integration of wind power into the New England grid “would require spending $19 billion to $25 billion for new transmission lines.” This cost would show up on our electric bills.

14. Wind generated electricity will not guarantee lower electricity rates. Wind industry officials often state that they cannot compete with low natural gas prices, which are forecast to remain low and stable for years to come. The wind industry’s insistence on a federal Renewable Energy Standard is, by itself, proof that wind-gener­ated electricity cannot compete with other sources.

15. It is said that wind should be a “part of the mix”; but its part would be insignificant. Demand for wind generated electricity is created, not by the market, but by government policy. Without favoritism from government policies, the wind industry could not survive. No end to the wind industry’s dependence on federal taxpayers and favorable policy is in sight.

16. Wind projects are heavily subsidized by taxpayers at an exorbitant rate. Through various federal pro­grams, wind generated electricity is subsidized, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, at a rate of $23.37 per megawatt hour (MWh). Compare this to natural gas and coal, which receive 25 cents/MWh and 44 cents/MWh, respectively. (These numbers are from the 2007 report.  The 2010 U.S. EIA lists wind at an even higher rate per MWh.)

17. Wind developments create notoriously few permanent jobs. Despite boasts of creating Maine jobs, wind projects produce mostly temporary construction jobs lasting less than 6 months. Wind projects are NOT long-term investments in jobs. Construction jobs are always welcome, but publicly-funded construction jobs should pro­duce necessary and useful projects, like roads, bridges, and critical infrastructure. Also, state mandates to purchase higher priced wind-generated electricity could lead to lost jobs or fewer available jobs in Maine.

18. Most of a wind project’s expenditures occur outside of Maine – primarily, overseas. Also, property valu­ations of most new wind developments in Maine are sheltered by tax increment financing (TIF) deals. Under the terms of these deals, Mainers property tax savings are diverted to developers to help finance wind projects.

19. EVERY operating, multi-turbine, wind facility in Maine, that has been sited around people, now has sig­nificant unresolved disputes over noise and shadow flicker. Continuing to site wind turbines using the same standards that have caused conflict assures that the problems will grow in number and that more Mainers will be involved in disputes with wind developers in the future.

20. The 2006 Brookings Institute report warned Maine to avoid sprawl in order to protect its “quality of place” and its “brand.” Maine’s wind development policy actually encourages rural sprawl, threatening Maine’s distinctively unique character and future prosperity.

A Word About Maine Jobs and Industrial Wind

I've mentioned this interesting development before, but it bears repeating. 

We've heard it from the wind lobby over and over again: 

"Wind is the only game in town." 

When developers' claims that industrial wind facilities would counter the effects of global warming were debunked, they talked about national security, and used arguments that wind would "get us off foreign oil".

When they had to admit that Maine generates a minuscule amount of electricity from oil, and what we do use is imported from Canada and Mexico, they quickly changed tacks. 

When they were confronted with the damage to our mountains, they pointed their fingers at Appalachia's coal mines--hoping no one would remind them that there is only one electricity generator using coal in this state-and that's at the paper mill in Rumford, representing 1/2 of 1 percent of Maine's electric generation.

When challenged about their projects' impact on wildlife, they insulted us by comparing the massive assault to entire flocks of birds to the deaths caused by house cats and picture windows.

And when they had to face the victims--Maine citizens of every age and size--suffering the adverse effects of the low frequency noise and infrasound emissions of turbines, the wind industry talked about JOBS.


Renewable Energy Magazine published an article which should make even the staunchest Maine businesses advocating for wind development pause a moment.  Maybe even....worry.  What happens when the wind developers bring in their own construction crews to build Maine's grid-scale wind facilities?  Where are those promised jobs which will--as the only game in town--turn Maine's economy around and make all the negative impacts of industrial wind... worth it?

Will Reed & Reed and Cianbro and others still feel warm and fuzzy about Maine's wind energy plan, then?

Here's an excerpt from the article.  I urge you to read the whole thing by clicking the link above.

"Iberdrola brands itself as the US’s second largest wind operator, already possessing over 5 GW of wind capacity across the country. Now its engineering subsidiary, Iberdrola Engineering and Construction, is moving into wind farm construction in the US.

"Iberdrola Engineering, the Spanish energy giant’s engineering subsidiary, has been awarded a contract to build its first wind farm in the country through its US subsidiary, Iberdrola Energy Projects Inc. The facility is being built in Groton in the State of New Hampshire..."

Hmmmm.  New Hampshire.  Isn't that right over the Kittery Bridge?

A Word or Two About Capacity Factors--A Photo or Two of Kibby Mountain

A 'cut' on Kibby Mountain.  Developers like to down-play the damage to Maine's mountains.  This single gouge on a previously unspoiled high alpine ridge was ninety feet deep.  See the size of the humans walking on the road. Photo by Nancy O'Toole.

We all know the difference between a wind turbine's rated capacity--what it could produce if it turned properly, and at the proper speeds, 24 hours a day and 365 days a year--and what a turbine's actual production levels are.  Often, we are sold a bill of goods: "This project, when completed, can generate enough electricity to power 44,000 Maine homes!"  

Yep, it can, but it's not going to.  And that's because this world isn't perfect, the weather isn't predictable, the winds aren't steady...and these massive turbines aren't immune to the incredible stress brought upon them or to the climate challenges in mountainous regions... 

Please consider the following findings by Willem Post, and feel free to check out the links  he has shared.

KIBBY I & II

The above  132 MW wind turbine facility, capital cost $330 million, is owned by TransCanada and was built, after a lot of destruction, on one of the most beautiful ridge lines in Maine. TransCanada and Vestas the claimed that the capacity factor would be 0.32, or greater. It was placed in service on 10/31/2009.

Its FERC designation is Trans Canadian Wind Development, Inc. in case you want to look up the below data.

In 2009 and 2010, the facility had a lot of startup problems and its energy production was negligible.

In 2011, it had a capacity factor of 22.5% for the first 9 months.

For the 3rd quarter of 2011, it was 14.42%. Monthly capacity factors were as follows:

July       18.48%

Aug       12.31%

Sept      12.41%

Why are the CFs so low?

Kibby wind project under construction....

Winds on ridge lines have highly-irregular velocities AND directions. This does not show up when one does wind velocity testing for feasibility, but when rotors are 373 feet in diameter, one part of a rotor will likely see a different wind velocity AND direction from another part. This leads to highly inefficient energy production and CFs. Wind vendors are very familiar with this, but do not mention it. However, all is explained in this article. I recommend the VT-DPS and House Environment and Energy Committee, and all others, finally read this article, before "leading" Vermont into an expensive energy la-la-land.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/61309/lowell-mountain-wind-turbine-facility-vermont

The Bolton Valley Ski Resort wind turbine CF also does not live up to claims.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/53258/examples-wind-power-learn

The New York State wind turbine CFs also do not live to claims. The Vendor promises were for capacity factors of 30% to 35%, before installation.

http://www.dailyenergyreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/NY_CF2008-2010_final.jpg

The reality, after installation:

Installed capacity, MW: 1035.5 in 2008; 1,274 in 2009: 1,274 in 2009; 1,348 in 2010

Production, MWh: 1,282,325 in 2008; 2,108,500 in 2009, 2,532,800 in 2010

Capacity factors: 14.1% in 2008; 18.9% in 2009; 22.7% in 2010

The data for the table was obtained from the 2011 New York ISO Gold Book

http://www.nyiso.com/public/webdocs/services/planning/planning_data_reference_documents/2011_GoldBook_Public_Final.pdf

Because no wind turbines were added during 2010, the 22.7% capacity factor of 2010 is the best proof of the lack of performance of the New York State wind turbine facilities.

This reality is not unique to Maine, Bolton Valley and NY State. It has replicated itself in The Netherlands, Denmark, England, Germany, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, etc. The production is invariably less than promised. Add this to the fact that the CO2 emissions reduction is much less than claimed, as shown in below articles, makes further investments in wind energy an extremely dubious and expensive

proposition.

http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/64492/wind-energy-reduces-co2-emissions-few-percent

http://www.clepair.net/IerlandUdo.html

http://docs.wind-watch.org/BENTEK-How-Less-Became-More.pdf

http://www.clepair.net/windSchiphol.html

http://www.clepair.net/Udo-okt-e.html

Kibby Mountain...before wind.

Maine Lawmakers Slated to Consider BEP Decision

Department of Environmental Protection Rule Ch. 375, Sec. 10 Amendment

Subsection I: Sound Level Standards for Wind Energy Developments

Since the dawn of grid-scale industrial wind energy production, there have been problems; not just here at home, but nationwide and abroad.  To date, every improperly sited wind project in Maine is a party to litigation or ongoing and serious complaints.

In the autumn of 2010, the Citizens’ Task Force on Wind Power (CTFWP), in accordance with Maine Law, submitted almost twice the sufficient number of verified petitions to the Board of Environmental Protection to require Agency Rulemaking on the subject of noise from Wind Energy Developments.  DEP Noise Rules, last amended more than 20 years ago, were inadequate to protect Maine citizens from industrial wind turbines’ unique noises and vibrations.   In an attempt to protect Maine citizens’ health, property values and quality of life, CTFWP–in conjunction with Friends of Maine’s Mountains (FMM) –launched a determined effort calling for revised noise rules for grid scale wind facilities.

FMM submitted comprehensive draft amendments to the BEP, citing an urgent need to change existing Noise Rules to improve predictive modeling and protect against health risks associated with noise from industrial wind turbines.  In response to the citizens’ initiative, BEP held technical and public hearings in Augusta on July 7, 2011.

The claims made by CTFWP and FMM were supported by the testimony of several respected and experienced acoustics experts, including Rick James, Rob Rand and Stephen Ambrose.  These gentlemen have not relied on computer modeling to arrive at their findings.  They have done--and continue to do--extensive testing at wind turbine sites in Maine and across the country.  They have spent nights in affected homes, as well.  Added to their findings was the testimony of Dr. Michael Nissenbaum—another respected professional who has had first-hand experience with the impacts of wind turbine noises as he has treated sufferers right here in the state of Maine.  Following the testimony of these experts, scores of Maine citizens gave oral and/or written testimony about wind turbine noises and their impacts to health, property values and quality of life.  BEP found it incumbent upon them to support an amendment to the State’s current noise rules and had staff prepare a draft rule change.

 

On September 15^th, in spite of late-in-the-game and undue pressure from attorneys representing the corporate wind lobby, the Board of Environmental Protection voted to approve more restrictive sound standards for wind energy developments. The Board recognized the fact that Maine citizens are already suffering from the impacts of wind turbine noises and they voted to implement new parameters for Ch. 375, Section 10 rules which are more stringent than those previously in effect.

From the start, the Wind Lobby took no notice of the BEP’s directive to refrain from arguing the pros and cons of ‘wind’ during testimony.  They touted the jobs they have brought to Maine—ignoring the fact that those temporary jobs exist because of mandated federal, state and local tax-payer subsidies.  In addition, by wind developers’ own accounts we know that wind energy facilities will not create more than a handful of full-time, permanent technicians’ jobs, statewide.  Studies done in Europe show that each ‘renewable’ job created cost more than $1,000,000.00 in government subsidies, and resulted in the loss of 2.2 conventional jobs.  Denmark, with its high percentage of wind facilities, pays some of Europe’s highest energy tariffs—more than twice those in Britain–partially due to wind subsidies.  It is expected that the wind industry will cite those who are employed in the construction of wind facilities when they lobby the Legislature to vote against the BEP’s recommendations, but it ludicrous for the wind industry to use ‘jobs’ to justify the negative impacts brought about by their product.

The wind lobby also warned the BEP that if it ‘changed the rules’ mid-stream the ‘investors’ would go elsewhere.  Rather than discuss how to reduce the negative impacts of their product, the wind industry proceeded to lecture BEP about Maine’s economy.

BEP recognized that it was not the Board’s responsibility to worry about Maine’s financial circumstances or the wind lobby’s impact thereon—whether positive or negative.  Rather than being drawn into that debate, BEP considered the expert and public testimony and then voted to amend the noise rule standards.

During the last 3 years, many Maine communities have passed comprehensive and protective moratoria and wind energy ordinances.  Towns such as Jackson, Dixmont, Thorndike, Montville, Phillips, New Vineyard, Buckfield, Wilton, Stockton Springs, Sedgwick, Penobscot, Avon, Eddington, Unity, Eastbrook, Rumford, Prospect, Brooksville, Deer Isle, Temple, Frankfort and Caratunk have all recognized that grid-scale wind energy facilities are not benign and must be carefully considered during the zoning and siting process in order to protect the health, property values, and quality of life of Maine residents.

Citizens request that the 125^th Legislature show their confidence in the People of Maine and in the members of the Board of Environmental Protection and vote to uphold the BEP’s noise rule amendments.

Merry Christmas, from Your Friendly Neighborhood Wind Developer

From snowmobile clubs to fire departments to historical societies, and from fuel assistance funds to youth programs to libraries; the wind industry in Maine has a long history of spreading its money around the communities wherein it hopes to build grid-scale industrial wind facilities.

The latest example of a wind corporation’s ‘largesse’ here in Maine can be found in the River Valley.  Patriot Renewables (PR) is the owner of controversial wind projects at Beaver Ridge in Freedom and Spruce Mountain in Woodstock.  This same developer is hoping to build additional wind turbine developments in area communities, including Dixfield and Carthage.  So it came as no surprise to read in the 12/21/2011 edition of the Sun Journal that Tom Carroll, PR’s project coordinator, was handing out hefty checks to local organizations. 

http://www.sunjournal.com/news/business/2011/12/21/eleven-circles-receives-10000-patriot-renewables-l/1130779

Still, I was stunned by the blatant nature of the largest contribution made last week.  Eleven Circles, a youth action group, is no doubt a worthy recipient for a $10,000.00 donation.  But the impartiality of Maine’s town governments and town officials is crucial as we watch communities struggle to remain cohesive through the process of writing ordinances and considering the development applications submitted by large and wealthy corporations.  Should we not have serious questions when Patriot Renewables ‘supports’ a business owned by the daughter-in-law of a Dixfield town selectman? 

Other area recipients of Patriot Renewables’ bounty were Ludden Library, the Webb River Snowmobile club, the Poodunk Snowmobile Club and the Carthage fuel assistance fund.

Corporations like to call this ‘being a good neighbor’.  Patriot Renewables said they were looking to ‘help to fill a void in the area’.

Let’s not kid ourselves.  First Wind, Patriot Renewables, Trans-Canada, Iberdrola and other wind developers looking to build facilities aren’t passing around tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars because they care about our youth, or our poor, or our winter recreation enthusiasts.  They target communities which will be deciding whether or not to approve their development permits.  The people of Dixfield and Carthage are being ‘romanced’, just as the citizens of Mars Hill, Danforth, Stratton, Woodstock and Lincoln were.  If Dixfield and Carthage had already passed ordinances restricting the placement of industrial wind developments, the odds are that deserving non-profits in the area would not have been the beneficiaries of those much-needed donations.

A bribe is a bribe.  Towns such as Dixfield and Carthage should design and institute ordinances that take into account the health, property values and quality of life of their citizens.  Then they will see how quickly a wind developer decides that there are other towns which need a ‘good neighbor’ or have ‘voids’ to be filled.   

The Holiday Voice of Vestas

I have a good sense of humor.  Some people say I have a GREAT one.

But this video didn't make me smile.

Ice throw from turbines is a very serious issue.  At least--it is to those who live or work or recreate in the vicinity of wind turbines.

I suppose I should lighten up, hmmm?

Merry Christmas.
Kaz
*************************
Painting by Alice Barnett

Expert Voices from Maine Confirm Adverse Health Affects from Industrial Wind Turbines

Two leading accoustics experts from Maine believe they have confirmed the link to adverse health affects from improperly sited wind turbines. 

Stephen E. Ambrose, INCE (Brd. Cert.) and Robert W. Rand, INCE Member have just released a detailed and comprehensive report to the public.  I encourage you to read it. 

I know these gentlemen personally and have found them to be very professional and independent.  They are not affiliated with any pro- or anti-wind groups.  From "Day One" I have been impressed with their knowledge, commitment, integrity and compassion.

My esteem grows daily.

Please don't miss this amazing opportunity to learn the science behind what victims of wind turbines' unique noises have been saying, feeling and living with for years.  Check out the above link and read "The Bruce McPherson Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise Study--Adverse Health Effects Produced By Large Industrial Wind Turbines Confirmed" You can download the whole report from the website, or email me at roomtomove@tds.net and I'll send it straight away.

The wondering and the waiting are over.  This may be the 'proof positive' that we've been looking for--that industrial wind turbines can--and have been--adversely impacting our fellow citizens.  

Spread the news.  What a Christmas gift these gentlemen and their benefactor have given to mankind.  The authors welcome and encourage you to share their study far and wide.  Knowledge is power.  Let's use our power to make things right for the victims who've lived with the effects of industrial wind turbine noises, and to prevent others from suffering the same fate.

Merry Christmas.

Kaz 

Iberdrola's Many Costly Voices

Iberdrola Renewables–a subsidiary of Iberdrola Group and the owner of CMPC–is poised to become a major player in the industrial wind energy plan for Maine.  But before Maine embraces this foreign company and the product it’s selling, there are some crucial questions which must be answered.

Wind energy is expensive in many ways—both to tax-payers and to rate-payers.  Our neighbors in North Carolina are discovering the same thing.

This excerpt is from the December 15^th edition of the Charlotte Observer:

“The developer of the largest wind farm ever proposed in North Carolina says the project has stalled because no utility wants to buy the power the project would produce.

“Iberdrola Renewables, having put more than three years into a 31-square-mile wind farm near the coast, this week began notifying property owners and public officials…that the project is on hold indefinitely. If built, the Desert Wind Energy Project… would have ranked among the largest wind farms in the country.

“… the Spanish company has been unable to find a buyer for the power output of Desert Wind.”

No purchaser for wind power?  Is this due to the price wind will cost?  Or are there other disadvantages to wind power which makes it undesirable?

In trying to protect its investments and promote its agenda, the wind lobby has been vociferous about the jobs “wind” is bringing to our state.  Thus far, experienced local construction companies like Reed & Reed and Cianbro have been contracted to build the developers’ wind facilities.  However, the November 28^th issue of Renewable Energy Magazine reported that another Iberdrola subsidiary, Iberdrola Engineering and Construction, is moving into the wind facility construction business in the United States.  Iberdrola has been awarded two construction contracts for wind developments in the region—in Groton, NH and Hoosac, MA.  That begs the question: If Iberdrola is successful in getting permits for wind facilities in Maine will they import their own crews to build them?

Another lamentable detail:  When CMP customers write checks for our monthly electric bills, we’re sending them to a processing center in New Jersey.  We’re not mailing them to Augusta as we did for decades–back when CMPC was a Maine company, instead of a Spanish one.  Why is it that Iberdrola out-sources this traditional source of employment for Mainers?

Add to that; the fact that CMP intends to lay off dozens of employees once it has completed installing smart meters across the state, and one has to ask:

Is this foreign company looking out for the best interests of Maine’s citizens?

   

Voices that Snap, Crackle and Pop

Maine is the most forested state of the contiguous forty-eight.  And Maine has an aggressive wind energy plan.  But what is the plan to protect our forests, homes, livelihoods and lives from turbine-originated fires?  These mountaintop industrial facilities will present many serious problems for firefighters and the Maine Forest Service.  I would like to see the strategy our state has in place for protecting Maine from this new hazard.

Add caption

North American Clean Energy

Taming Turbine Fires Before They Start: It’s when, not if…

By Scott Starr

According to reports, the cost of a fire that damages or destroys a wind turbine can be as much as $2 million. Property damage to the turbine, and nearby areas, from fires reported in the past decade ranged between $750,000 and $6 million.

Aside from the imminent hazards of a burning turbine, there is also the risk of sparks, embers, or debris falling to the ground and setting off a wildfire due to the remote location of many wind farms. Even if a turbine is not fully burned or damaged, or a potential fire doesn’t spread to the surrounding countryside, costs can be considerable. This was shown during a recent fire at a wind farm in California, which resulted in the loss of just one converter cabinet. Cost for replacement: $243,000, including parts and downtime.

Although the financial loss and costs of a fire might be the primary concern of any wind farm operator, pressures are building up from environmental groups and the concerned public in general. Turbine fires—and, particularly those that spread—should be a significant concern, affecting the planning stages of any project. To this avail, permitting might be more drawn-out, costly, and time-consuming process. Turbine manufacturers and wind farm operators are now, more than ever, becoming acutely aware of the costs, safety, and the environmental arguments in favor of effective fire detection and suppression. But what are the fire risks associated with wind turbines?

Technical equipment and combustible material are concentrated in the nacelle and, once a fire starts in a turbine, it can be fuelled by up to 200 gallons of hydraulic fluid and lubricants. The nacelle itself is constructed from highly flammable resin and glass fiber, and internal insulation can become contaminated by oil deposits, adding to the overall fuel load.

The most common cause of a turbine fire is a lightning strike—a risk that is heightened by the installation of taller and taller wind turbines. Turbines are now being built that are up to 320 feet high. They’re frequently sited in exposed and high-altitude locations. Globally, there are around 16 million lightning storms and approximately 1.4 billion lightning flashes every year. However, only 25% of these are cloud-to-ground (the remainder are either cloud-to-cloud or intra-cloud); yet, this still equates to the US being hit by between 15 million and 20 million ground strikes a year, according to the Colorado-based National Lightning Safety Institute.

The consequences can be judged from the following example. Recently, a wind turbine caught fire as a result of a lightning strike. Burning parts of the rotor blade, which had been struck, fell and caused a secondary fire in the nacelle—all at a cost of $200,000 and 150 days lost operation.

Mechanical failure or electrical malfunction can also trigger a fire as capacitors, transformers, generators, electrical controls, transmission equipment, and SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) systems all have the potential to catch fire. This risk is amplified when there are loose or broken electrical connections, or there is an overloading of electrical circuits. Braking systems pose a particularly high risk of fire. Overheating can cause hot fragments of the disc brake material to break off, rupturing hydraulic hoses, and resulting in the highly combustible hydraulic fluid being expelled under pressure and coming into contact with the hot disk brake fragments. Hydraulic pumps and connections can also fail, allowing the fluid to erupt into flames when it comes into contact with a hot surface.

A case in point was a fire where a slip-ring fan of a double-fed induction generator broke. Sparks were generated by the rotating fan impeller, which set the filter cabinet’s filter pad alight. The fire then spread to the hood installation, causing $800,000 worth of damage.

With the fire risk becoming greater as more turbines come into operation, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has added wind turbine and outbuilding fire protection standards to NFPA 850 (“Recommended Practice for Fire Protection for Electric Generating Plants and High Voltage Direct Current Converter Stations;” 2010 Edition). This provides fire protection recommendations for the safety of construction and operating personnel, physical integrity of plant components, and the continuity of plant operations. The revised 2010 edition includes detailed recommendations relating to wind turbine generating facilities.

Wind farms are usually built in isolated locations with restricted access, placing them beyond the prospect of immediate attention by the fire service. Even when emergency services are able to respond quickly, few have the equipment capable of firefighting at the height of modern wind turbines. The solution is an effective fire detection and suppression system. Such a system should be intrinsically safe, not require any external power that can fail or put the system out of operation, and it needs to be able to stop a fire precisely where it breaks out before it can do irreparable damage to the turbine or spread elsewhere. It also needs to be purpose-designed to contend with the vibration, dust, debris, airflow through the nacelle, and the extreme temperature variations. An effective system also has to be capable of providing 24/7 unsupervised wind farm protection.

Wind farm fires do happen, and many in the industry suspect that they occur far more frequently than statistics suggest. This is because a significant number of turbine fires go unreported due to their remote location. Emergency services are not always involved and there are no regulatory requirements to report related fire incidents. Hardly surprising, many insurers are becoming increasingly concerned, and the opinion of many can been summed-up by the following statement: “Fire. It’s not a matter of if, it’s a matter of when.” Better safe than sorry.

Scott Starr is the director of marketing at Scottsdale, Arizona-based Firetrace International.

A Voice Mesmerized by Carnage

The other day I was recounting an experience I’d had to my friend Alan, who is a pilot.  I told him how I’d been blessed with the opportunity to watch a gaggle of immature Canada geese as they received their “flight training”.

For several minutes I was able to watch the flock as they occupied airspace over Williams’ Oakhurst Dairy Farm in North Anson.  The adult geese flew low over the corn fields and the adjacent Kennebec River, where the flock had spent their summer.  Those in the lead positions would form up the classic “V”, and the juveniles would flap and honk and generally appear disorganized until—suddenly—they seemed to “get it” and they’d fall into line.  After a few moments of flight in "formation"; those in the lead would veer off and break ranks—circling back around over familiar ground. 

Immediately the geese in the lead would reform the “V”—now going in the opposite direction—and the goslings would disperse and complain and again appear muddled and confused.  But what soon became apparent was that this flock was a family.  The grown-ups were teaching the young 'uns exactly how they were going to participate in the autumn migration to southern climes… and how they were going to do it safely.

Watching this ‘rite of passage’ was enthralling, humbling and uplifting.

And perhaps that’s why this story (found on the Wind Turbine Syndrome website) was so disturbing.

Please read it.

And then—please forward it to every wildlife biologist and ornithologist and bird enthusiast you know. 

Please.

And thank you.  

You Are Not Welcome Here

My family doesn’t post our property.  We never have, for as far back as I can remember.  My grandparents owned many acres, as did my parents, and there was never a “No Trespassing” sign posted on trees. 

My husband and I are lucky enough to own 70 acres of forest.  We feel fortunate to be able to step off our front porch and take a walk in the woods and we want everyone to have that same freedom and ability.  When I was a child, almost all of Maine was ‘open’.  It was rare to see a “No Trespassing” sign and Mainers were able to roam the forests and fields and mountains to experience that ‘quality of place’ and quality of life that is so integral to our contentment. 

A shiny silver Ford pick-up drove out of the driveway to our orchard.  That was not a big deal.  It happens all the time in November, since this is the height of deer hunting season.  The truck then proceeded up the road and stopped beside our house.  Since my husband has just gotten into his Blazer to take our son to work, he got out and walked over to the Ford.

He noticed the GPS antenna mounted on the front of the hood.  He asked the driver what was up.

The driver informed my husband that he and his partner were ‘fixing the positions’ of residences in the area for a survey they were conducting.

Mr. Pease asked them who they were working for.

The driver informed him that his client wished for its identity to remain confidential.

Mr. Pease said, “Oh.  Iberdrola, huh?”

The men became deer in the headlights.  Kids caught with their hands in the cookie jar.  They shut their mouths.  Stick a fork in them—they were done!

It’s easy to have the last word when the other party won’t speak—but the words my husband uttered could not have come easy, nonetheless.  He’s the kindest, gentlest, most generous man I know.  But he meant what he said when he told those wind industry surveyors that they were not welcome on our land--that he knew he couldn’t prevent them from using the county right-of-way to invade our privacy or help a foreign company threaten our way of life, but he could forbid them from stepping foot—or driving tire—onto our property.

This is a tough battle we’re fighting.  We don’t have anything against those men—not personally.  Those contractors are Mainers who are “just doing their job”.  But as a friend from Vinalhaven said of the construction workers who built the Fox Island Wind turbines near his island home: “YOUR job has ruined MY life.”  Those six words sum it up quite succinctly.

That shiny, decked out Ford (and yes, I went outside and got their license plate number) which was driven so nonchalantly onto the property we generously share with all may very well have been purchased with money earned by work that was done for an industry which is negatively impacting the lives of hundreds of Mainers.

So, no.  We don’t post our property, and unless something drastic occurs--we won’t.  But let this be public notice that anyone working for an industrial wind developer--whether directly, or indirectly as a subcontractor--is not welcome at The F.A.R.M.  If you’re going to try to plot and plan how to sidestep the wishes of more than 77% of the residents of Lexington Township, you’re going to have to do it without our help.  If you don’t care that we have stood together and said “NO!” you will not be the beneficiary of our largesse.  We will not harbor you, we will not welcome you—and we will not hesitate to firmly escort you off and arrange for your transport to the county jail if you come onto our property without having express and written permission from my husband or me.

I can't make this any clearer.  You are not welcome at The F.A.R.M. and you are not welcome in Lexington Township.  Or in Concord, or in Highland.  Accept defeat, please.  You are not welcome here and I am just one voice of many asking you to respect us and abandon your plans for wind developments in these three communities.