Vinalhaven Island Neighbors Win Round in Superior Court

One of the Fox Island Wind turbines on Vinalhaven Island, seen in the moonlight.  The turbines must be lit with flashing red lights to warn aircraft of their presence.

Neighbors living in the shadow and sound-shed of the Fox Island Wind turbines on Vinalhaven Island have been trying to get relief from the debilitating, near-constant noise for two and a half years.  Almost 2 years ago, Maine's Department of Environmental Protection found that the wind facility was out of compliance with the State's noise regulations--but FIW has not been forced to comply.  The story is complicated, but the issue is simple.  The wind facility (FIW) often operates outside the parameters set by law.  The wind facility has not been made to comply.  FIW has been allowed to thumb their noses at Maine Law and at citizens on the Island.  The DEP has not protected the People who are impacted and who have lost their quality of life.

This week, a Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the Neighbors, who petitioned to review the Conditional Compliance Order which DEP's Commissioner issued last summer.  When their motion was filed, FIW then requested the court dismiss the Neighbors' petition. 

Items of note: DEP had issued a Conditional Compliance Order requiring that FIW regularly demonstrate compliance and shut down operations if they weren't in compliance.  The wind facility was also told to post for the public its data on operations, sound and meterological data.  FIW objected to the DEP's order, and "negotiations continued".

Pardon me for this aside...but,  if "Joe Citizen" broke the law--and especially if the law he broke harmed others--he would NOT be allowed to "negotiate"!  How is it that a wind developer is allowed to arbitrarily decide it doesn't need to comply with a Maine law?

Is the system corrupt, or merely incredibly unfair and biased?

The story gets better.  On June 20th, Patricia Aho became Acting Commissioner of the DEP.  Her most recent job was as a lobbyist for Pierce Atwood, the legal firm representing FIW.  Did she recuse herself from having input on the FIW debate once she was directing the agency charged with forcing FIW to comply with DEP regulations?  Certainly not.  In practically her first official action in the DEP, she issued a final Conditional Compliance Order for FIW, and removed the Appendix which required that FIW affirmatively test for compliance, shut down operations when not in compliance, and post their meterological and operational data for the public, which effectively insulated FIW from any further regulation.  This Appendix, so haphazardly thrown out, had been written/recommended by DEP staffers who had worked exhaustively for months on the FIW issue.  In one fell swoop, their hard work was dismissed out of hand.

So, yes; the Neighbors filed a motion to review the Conditional Compliance Order--and FIW filed a motion to dismiss, stating that the Court lacked the jurisdiction to review.  And on March 20, 2012, the Kennebec County Superior Court Justice denied FIW's motion to dismiss the Neighbors' petition to review the Conditional Compliance Order.

Read the New York Times article on this judge's order here. 

To view the decision and other relevant documents, please visit the Fox Island Wind Neighbors website.

Windfall... the "Other Side of the Story"

 

Maine citizens have been hosting the award-winning independent film “Windfall” in different locations around the state for the last five weeks, to coincide with the documentary’s theatrical debut in New York, Chicago, LA and Seattle.  Film-maker Laura Israel’s “Windfall” records the experiences of residents in up-state New York when wind developers came to their towns proposing industrial wind facilities. 

Of particular interest has been the wind industry’s reaction to this documentary.  “Windfall” is not an anti-wind film; it is pro-education and pro-community.  However, in multiple “Windfall” venues, the wind lobby has attempted to insert itself into the program arranged for and set up by volunteers in towns from Fort Kent to Unity, and Farmington to Bar Harbor.  Crying ‘foul’, some leading wind lobbyists began requesting of the sites’ owners that they be given equal time at “Windfall” screenings, in order to offer ‘the other side of the story’.  They wanted to hang posters on the theater doors.  They wanted the host schools and libraries to allow industrial wind propaganda to be handed out during the screenings.  They even wanted to be allowed to show the film “Islands in Wind” before audiences viewed “Windfall”.

The pro-wind film “Islands in the Wind” has been shown several times in Maine, with much fan-fare.  At those times, the wind industry never believed in telling “the other side of the story”.  Nor has it made it a practice to invite an opposing view every time wind developers moved into Maine towns with sales pitches designed to encourage support for the industrial developments they wish to build on the mountain summits in those towns.

The wind industry has had more than six years to convince Mainers of the value of their high-cost, low-value product.  We’ve heard the rhetoric—wind will ‘get us off foreign oil’, ‘reduce greenhouse gasses’, make us ‘energy independent’.  Those arguments have been debunked by science and economics—but still they persist.  I expect the tag lines will continue to be repeated until sufficient numbers of Maine citizens take the time and opportunity to do independent research about this important topic and discover the deception that lies within.  When there are millions of tax-payer dollars at stake, what else can the wind industry do but continue to repeat the same tired arguments which worked so well in the past? 

But let’s not be disingenuous. Wind developers aren’t interested in educating Mainers. If they were, ‘the other side of the story’ would have been told from the very beginning.  The wind industry would not force Maine citizens to sign gag orders when it buys their properties because the homes in the shadow of its developments have become uninhabitable.  It wouldn’t force property owners to sign away their rights to complain about specific developments when they agree to lease their ridge-top land.  And if it respected ‘the other side’ the wind industry would happily comply with DEP sound standards when its wind facilities are found to be out of compliance.  But here in Maine, none of those scenarios are the reality.

In truth, the wind industry wouldn’t be having such a strong reaction to a simple film like “Windfall” if it didn’t feel defensive of its product and threatened by this honest portrayal of what happened in two rural communities when Big Wind came to town.

“Windfall” will be out on DVD very soon.  I encourage Mainers to watch this film and learn from the experiences of our fellow Americans.  And if you want the other side of the story, I encourage you to watch “Islands in the Wind”, as well.  I will be happy to help you obtain copies of both films.  I will also connect you directly with “Windfall” film-maker Laura Israel and with residents of Vinalhaven; the Maine island community portrayed in “Islands in the Wind”.   Get both sides of the story, and then… take a stand.  Please.  We are on the cusp of losing our storied “Quality of Place”.  The least we can do is attempt independent research into both sides of the story to determine if the prize is worth the price.

 

WINDFALL--The Movie...The Voices of Tug Hill and Meredith, New York

Wow, am I behind, here!  There is so much happening in the world of 'wind' that I should be posting and sharing, but I've had difficulty finding the time.  I'll make an attempt to play a little 'catch up' tonight.

Until the phone rings....

Here goes!

Windfall, Laura Israel's award-winning documentary, is coming to Maine!  Click here to watch the official trailer.  This movie is providing us with an incredible opportunity to educate Mainers about the down-side of grid-scale wind development.  Residents in two New York communities learned their lessons the hard way, and their story is poignant-- and contemporary to what is happening right here in Maine. 

Right here and NOW in Maine.

Friends of Maine's Mountains is sponsoring multiple events during the month of February and into early March.  Be sure to check FMM's website for more information (and while you're there, check out the information about the Tim Sample Event at the Harraseeket Inn in Freeport on St. Patrick's Day!)

We hope you will take advantage of this great opportunity.  The dates and venues will be confirmed on February 1st, but I do know that The Strand Theater in Rockland has already confirmed showings on Saturday, March 3rd at 2:00 p.m. and Sunday, March 4th at 3:00 p.m. 

An anonymous benefactor has donated money so that any resident of Vinalhaven Island (the home of the three Fox Island Wind turbines) can attend the movie at the Rockland venue for FREE.  Please call me for more information (207-628-2070)--and please help us spread the word.  Folks who have already seen this movie say the similarities to our present circumstances are chilling and that the move will change your life... and for sure, it will open your eyes.

Stay tuned and then, please join us! Coming soon to a venue near you!

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.

Vinalhaven Voices--No Longer Willing to Be Ignored

Below is a press release from Fox Island Wind Neighbors.  These folks--some of whom are friends of mine--have struggled for 20 months to get some relief... some justice.  For additional background on this story, including a copy of the lawsuit FIWN has just filed, please visit their website, http://fiwn.wordpress.com/.

*************************************

Vinalhaven citizen lawsuit alleges political interference in wind turbine regulatory process at top level of Maine government
Contact: Alan Farago, Fox Islands Wind Neighbors, 207-867-4770


(July 28, 2011 For Immediate Release) Vinalhaven, once only famous for its lobsters, is now also nefarious for demonstrating what happens when wind turbines are improperly permitted too close to homes.

Today neighbors of the Vinalhaven wind turbine farm filed a lawsuit against the state of Maine—after a year and a half controversy-- for failing to enforce noise regulations against Fox Islands Wind, the turbine operator. The neighbors’ lawsuit charges that the decision by Maine DEP (Department of Environmental Protection) on June 30th meant to resolve the year and a half controversy of noise violations by the turbines was arbitrary and capricious and driven by political meddling at the highest levels of Maine government against the recommendation of its own regulatory staff.

The citizen lawsuit documents how DEP abandoned its regulatory mission one step at a time and finally caved to political pressure instead of protecting nearby residents from noise violations that have impacted neighbors’ health, peace and quiet, and property values. The neighbors are asking the Maine court to vacate the politically driven decision and order DEP to go back and follow the recommendations of its own regulators; the effect of those recommendations would have placed the burden of proof of compliance on the wind turbine operator and held the turbine operator accountable for ongoing violations of noise standards.

Since the moment the 3 GE 1.5 megawatt turbines on Vinalhaven began to spin in November 2009, nearby residents complained their quiet properties on the island had turned into dumping grounds for noise pollution in excess of state regulations. Everywhere industrial wind turbines are placed too close to residences, there are complaints. What distinguishes Vinalhaven from other aggrieved victims of wind turbine noise is the extent to which neighbors initiated their own acoustical measurements and engagement with state regulators who admit that state standards fail to capture the acoustical impacts of wind turbines. For a year and a half, Vinalhaven neighbors carefully documented violations of the state noise standard while the wind turbine farm operator, Fox Islands Wind, continuously denied it was breaking state law. The complaint filed today details these facts.

Initially, DEP regulators were willing to use the Vinalhaven problem—where wind shear was a known, significant factor in upsetting noise and acoustic models—to pin down gaps in the state’s protocol for evaluating the noise generated by wind turbines and especially violations at night-time according to the 45dbA standard.

While costs mounted for neighbors, including acoustics engineering and legal resources, state regulators began to assemble a new regulatory schematic to capture the gaps in existing law. At the same time, the Vinalhaven turbine operator launched a strong, politically driven counter-offensive against the regulators. Over time, this push-back from local advocates and finally political intervention by the Office of the Governor overwhelmed the regulators.

“We invited board members of Fox Island Electric Coop to come up and spend a few nights listening to the terrible noise,” says Art Lindgren, who mastered both the methodology and presentation of acoustical measurements taken from equipment often in the dead of night. “None took us up on the offer. Instead we have moved from our home because of the noise.”

Neighbors’ hopes were dashed on June 30th, the date when the Maine DEP approved an operational plan for Fox Island Wind turbines that ignored, in its key details, recommendations of its own staff.  Maine has four major wind farms, including Kibby Mountain in Franklin County, Mars Hill in Aroostook County and Stetson Mountain in Washington County. Rollins is about to commence operation and construction is underway at Spruce Mountain in Woodstock and Record Hill near Rumford. Wherever turbines are sited too close to residences, there are complaints from property owners whose lives have been turned upside down.

Noise from wind turbines has emerged as a serious concern in Maine where the legislature has mandated 2000 Megawatts of power to be generated from renewable energy sources by the year 2015. Financial incentives for wind power include lucrative depreciation benefits for investors. According to a recent report in Forbes, subsidies for wind power per kilowatt energy produced are 200 times the subsidy for oil and gas.

These subsidies provide huge motivation for investors to steamroller environmental protections, including noise pollution. At a recent public hearing in Augusta, one industry spokesperson referred to Vinalhaven has a facility that had given the industry "a black eye". The reason is evidence-- withheld from neighbors in the permitting phase of the project-- that neighbors would likely be subject to very high levels of noise.

The lawsuit alleges a pattern of political interference in the normal regulatory process that had already stretched out more than a year and a half at considerable expense to neighbors. The complaint alleges that the Office of the Governor interceded through the newly installed DEP Director, Patricia Aho, whose immediate prior employment had been with Pierce Atwood, the law firm that represents the wind turbine operator, Fox Islands Wind. Rather than recuse herself, one of her first decisions as newly appointed head of the state environmental agency was to reach around career regulators and change the final compliance protocol according to what Fox Island Wind wanted.

Alan Farago, a neighbor, says; "First DEP agreed with the neighbors that Fox Islands Wind was violating state noise regulations. Then with the turn of the political screw, DEP began ratcheting back the recommendations of its consultant and finally backed out of the decision by its own regulatory staff. This all happened because politics is covering up an energy project of dubious value that is profitable for a prominent Maine investor, Horace Hildreth, while imposing a heavy financial burden on nearby residents who purchased their property for rural peace and quiet and now have health issues, property value destruction, and industrial noise."

A year ago, as a result of ongoing frustration with the state regulatory agency, Farago initiated a petition, signed by 174 Maine citizens, to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging a study of wind turbine noise.  He wrote, "Noise from wind turbines has emerged as a national issue ... State regulations on turbine noise are an obsolete patchwork. As a result, affected individuals, homeowners and entire communities are left without defense. The time for federal regulation of wind turbine noise is long overdue."

In December 2010, EPA turned the petitioners down. The federal agency referred citizens back to Maine regulators; the same staff who were left in the dark on June 30th. Farago says, "The position taken by DEP forced ordinary taxpayers into litigation. We use after-tax dollars while Fox Islands Wind uses its marketing budget to fight us. For the misfortune of being guinea pigs of a new energy economy, we are paying through the nose.”

In a separate matter, the neighbors recently filed a complaint against the Vinalhaven Electric Cooperative with the Maine Public Utilities Commission, charging that the utility had improperly billed ratepayers for the turbine operator's expenses related to ongoing regulatory issues. (https://files.me.com/alanfarago/34e13t) But at this week’s annual meeting of the Fox Islands Electric Coop, news that the utility was required to respond to the Maine PUC by August 1st was not even raised. One defender of the wind turbines said, “We are bending over backwards for the neighbors.” At the same time, the Town of Vinalhaven is considering whether to take back administration of the noise rule for the wind turbines from the state. The town proposes to give the responsibility to the local Code Enforcement Officer; a position that often changes hands and is chronically subject to local influence peddling.

The neighbors hope the Maine court will vacate the decision by DEP, based on evidence that it was an arbitrary and capricious action that violated recommendations of staff. They hope the Maine Public Utilities Commission will look at the serious inequities levied on ratepayers. The neighbors also hope that the US EPA will understand that noise from wind turbines is a major public concern and needs to be regulated so there are no more Vinalhavens. In the meantime the neighbors are weighing other legal recourse to protect their health, peace and quiet, and property.

Voices on Noise

This, and subsequent postings, are testimonies from Mainers, provided to the Bureau of Environmental Protection, in response to a Public Hearing activated by a citizens' petition, and held on July 7th in Augusta, for Noise Rule Changes pertaining to wind turbines.
********************

My name is Karen Bessey Pease and I am a resident of Lexington Township.

On Thursday, July 7^th, the Bureau of Environmental Protection will hear technical and lay testimony regarding industrial wind turbine noise.  I thank you for allowing me the opportunity to comment on the proposed noise rule amendment.

In the pre-filed testimony submitted by Juliet Browne of Verrill Dana LLP, Ms. Browne states “These limits are fully protective of human health and there is no credible scientific evidence to the contrary.”

I am acquainted with many Maine citizens who are suffering from the effects of wind turbine noise, and they are very ‘credible’ people.  Many of them are citizens who, at the outset, fully supported the wind developments proposed for their communities.  It was not until they were subjected to the sounds produced by the turbines that they began to attempt to seek relief.  They did not have an agenda and they did not expect that their lives would be turned inside-out; but once the facilities went online, they began to suffer in many ways.  Their health and their finances have been negatively impacted and their quality of life is diminished.

“Credible scientific evidence…” 

We cannot ‘prove’ pain, but we know it exists.  Doctors routinely treat their patients when they complain of acute or chronic pain.  They don’t dismiss them because they cannot see or hear or feel their pain.  The patient’s complaint is sufficient ‘credible evidence’ for the doctor to provide relief.  When a man complains of numbness or tingling, or ringing in his ears, or phantom shadows in his vision, he is not ignored.  These complaints, while not able to be proven, are treated.  Why, then, are complaints of health problems due to turbine noises given little or no credence?

The fact that dozens of Mainers are negatively affected by wind turbine noise should be enough—and in fact, by standards of humanity, it IS enough—to make this issue one which must be addressed and alleviated.

Ms. Browne states “…the question before the Board is what level of sound impact is reasonable and strikes an appropriate balance between allowing development, including wind power, and protecting existing uses.”

The ‘existing uses’ she speaks of are Mainers’ homes.  For many of the victims, their homes are their major (or only) investments—investments of money, time, and emotion.  These ‘existing uses’ are absolutely worthy of protecting.  When a citizen is not able live in good health and with enjoyment of ‘home’, there is no impact that is ‘reasonable’ and no ‘balance’ that is ‘appropriate’.  Wind developers do not have the right to initiate a ‘taking’ of citizens’ properties.  They do not have the right to cause a citizen to suffer serious health problems.

Ms. Browne directs the Board by saying you “must consider the benefits of that type of development.  Wind energy provides not only energy and environmental benefits, but substantial economic benefits to the people and businesses in the State of Maine.”

The citizens who petitioned for this hearing have intended to stay ‘on topic’; realizing that this venue is not the proper one to debate the pros and cons of industrial wind development.  However, since Ms. Browne has opened that door, it is important to mention that last month the Legislature passed LD 1366, “And Act to Update the Maine Wind Energy Act…”  The Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee, the same committee of which Ms. Browne’s husband is a member, voted “Ought To Pass” on this bill, which directs the Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security to undertake an assessment of progress on meeting the wind energy development goals pursuant to PL 2007, chapter 661, section A-8.  Due to many serious issues raised in public hearings during the spring Session of the 125^th Legislature, the OEIS is charged with considering several specific issues regarding wind development, including, but not limited to: an evaluation of the accuracy of the estimates generated by State agencies and wind energy developers for greenhouse gas reductions that are a result of wind energy development in Maine; and the number of turbines necessary to meet the goal, market conditions, development trends, emissions goals, siting policies, cumulative impacts or other factors that may indicate it is necessary to amend the wind energy development goals.  The OEIS is also charged with considering whether places should be removed from the expedited permitting area, including, but not limited to, mountain area protection sub-districts, as defined by the Land Use Regulatory Commission rules, Chapter 10. Also, the OEIS will study the economic impacts of wind energy development on the tourism industry, and evaluate the costs associated with transmission upgrades for the purpose of transmitting wind energy, as well as decommissioning plans and visual impacts.

As you can see, the ‘benefits’ Ms. Browne extols are presumptions, only.  Whether or not they actually exist is not yet proven.

Ms. Browne states “Pursuant to their home rule authority, municipalities may adopt local ordinances regulating sound emissions and other aspects of wind energy development.”

Ms. Browne is correct, and many Maine communities have, in fact, done exactly that.  They have enacted protective wind ordinances.  One point of significance is that wind developers—including First Wind, which Ms. Browne recently represented in the Bowers/Champlain Wind Public Hearings in Lincoln—routinely oppose protective wind ordinances in every town they target for grid-scale wind facilities.  Their actions as they attempt to ‘control the scene’ often create divisiveness within these communities, and it is disingenuous for Ms. Browne to imply that ‘home rule’ (unless it works in their favor) is something which wind developers espouse. 

Even as Maine municipalities are taking proactive measures to protect their residents and define their communities, it is reasonable to assume that most town Select Boards, Assessors and Planning Boards do not understand the science of ‘noise’—whether it is of high, low, or ultra-low frequency. Just as the State sets minimum standards for shore land zoning, allowing towns to enact more stringent standards within their borders; so do communities look to the professionals at the State level for guidance on complicated topics such as ‘sound’.  By invoking the ‘home rule’ argument, Ms. Browne is attempting to divert the Commission’s attention with a reasonable-sounding argument about the basic rights of municipalities to self-govern.  Such statements might be credible if wind developers stepped back and allowed communities to adopt wind ordinances without their ‘input’, and without those developers exerting unwarranted pressure on the voters in those communities.

While reasonable individuals anticipate and expect some level of disturbance from industrial development, I believe it is fair to say that none of the current victims of wind turbine noise could foresee the huge impact this phenomenon would have on their health and quality of life.  They did not expect to suffer through endless nights of sleeplessness.  They did not anticipate living lives wherein they craved moments of stillness in which no breeze blew.  They had no idea that their homes would become prisons instead of sanctuaries.

In her argument, Ms. Browne invokes the Freedom, Mars Hill and Vinalhaven wind projects and directs the Board to dismiss the complaints which have resulted from those wind facility sites.  In the case of Freedom, she accurately states that the Beaver Ridge development was not subject to Site Law permitting.  That does not make Freedom residents’ suffering acceptable.  In Mars Hill, she is correct in stating that a variance was granted.  That ‘granting’ does not make the Mars Hill residents’ suffering acceptable.  And on Vinalhaven Island--because Fox Island Wind has already been determined by the DEP to be out of compliance--she disregards those citizens’ complaints, as if their grievances have been redressed.  They have not.

I am not an expert on sound.  However, I have had the opportunity to talk to many of the residents of Maine who are now victims of noises and vibrations which cannot be predicted, and which cannot be controlled or alleviated when they become unbearable.  If the Wind Energy Plan ordained for Maine comes to full fruition, there will be countless citizens of this State who will become victims of this phenomenon. 

I ask that you listen to the People of Maine and enact stringent sound standards which will protect their health, their property values, and their quality of life.

Thank you.

Karen Bessey Pease

Lexington Township, Maine

*********************

 

Hearing Voices on the Wind in Augusta

I’ve seen, first-hand, the way the wind blows in Augusta. It’s a Big Wind, and very, very powerful.

Citizens across Maine have looked to our Legislators for shelter from the storm. Once Industrial Wind was given preferential treatment in Maine, the negative effects of these sprawling industrial turbine facilities soon became apparent. Serious health effects, loss to value of real estate, higher electric rates, and loss of potential revenue which might be obtained through increases in property tax bases through the granting of TIF’s are only a few of the negative impacts which have been--or will be--created by the Wind Energy Plan.

And so, finding little recourse, citizens who wished to see measures adopted which would protect health, finances and Quality of Life wrote concepts which would do exactly that. We contacted our Legislators, who sponsored these measures. They were submitted to the Reviser’s Office, and drafted as bills. We were granted Public Hearings, and came out in force from every corner of Maine to testify. As pertains to a dozen of these bills, we were limited to three minutes of testimony… for 3-4 bills at a time.

Yes, that bears repeating.

We were required to testify on bundles of three or four bills at a time—and had a TOTAL of three minutes in which to give our testimony on the whole ‘package’. One minute or less, per bill. Most of these bills went before the Energy, Utilities and Technology Committee, but LD 1157, “An Act to Protect Revenue in the Unorganized Territory”, was heard by the Taxation Committee.

At their work session, Taxation voted “Ought to Pass” by a vote of 9-4. Subsequently, the Committee members were pressured by others (Rep. Stacey Fitts and Rep. Cornell du Houx from the EUT Committee, among others) to reconvene and vote again. Is it unconventional for the members of one Committee to lobby another Committee to re-think and re-cast their votes? Is this not tantamount to saying that the members of the Energy Committee know more about taxation issues than the Taxation Committee members do? I was present for the second vote, and once again Taxation approved the bill by a vote of 6-3 by those present. In the interim, two Representatives had been convinced to change their votes—but their stated reasoning for doing so was weak and not based on fact. Still, I was pleased and relieved that the corporate wind lobby hadn’t been able to change the outcome.

I was shocked when I was informed that the Taxation Committee ONCE MORE came under pressure by the wind lobby to take a THIRD vote! Surely, it isn’t standard for the Senate president and others to try to influence the votes of a Joint Standing Committee!? Such tactics showed the desperation of the wind lobby. This time, however, the Committee stood their ground, refusing to revisit LD 1157.

On Wednesday morning, LD 1157 was debated in the House and voted on. The bill was struck down by a vote of 99-49. Two thirds of the House voted against the Taxation Committee’s recommendation that the bill ought to pass.

Several Legislators told me that the lobbying and the pressure by the wind industry was fierce. I’ve seen and heard it myself, first hand. My naïve vision of what Augusta stood for and how it operates has been shattered by a dozen trips to the Capital. I watched as the wind lobby created theater out of the Public Hearings, pulling in workers dressed in hard hats and reflective vests who admitted to being paid to appear before the Committee to plead for their jobs. I listened as one senior Democrat on the EUT Committee, whose wife is a prominent attorney for wind developers, embarrassed the Representative who was sponsoring some of the protective ‘wind’ legislation. Confident that his apparent conflict of interest will not affect his position of power, he brazenly told those workers that “THAT guy wants to put you out of a job!” as our Representative passed by in the hall.

That statement was untrue. Uncalled-for. And extremely unprofessional. Conduct unbecoming an elected official, and most especially when referring to a colleague sitting on the same Committee. Those are bullying tactics in the highest degree.

But that is what the wind industry does. It is appalling that such behavior is allowed—and even, condoned--in our State capital.

As disillusioning as this process is, I have learned that there are many courageous men and women representing us in Augusta.
Some of them listen to their ‘everyday’ constituents instead of the few corporations with power. Some listen to voices of reason and common sense rather than bow under the weight of intimidation. Some of them even listen to their hearts. In a different world, I would name some of these ethical and brave Legislators, but I fear that to do so would cause them to bear the brunt of subsequent pressure or public disparagement by the powerful wind lobby. That’s how bad it is in Augusta… and how domineering the industrial wind groups have become.

These brave Legislators know who they are, though… and they have my deepest gratitude and respect.

On Friday, June 3rd, Friends of Maine’s Mountains held a press conference in the State House, calling on members of Maine’s 125th Legislature to support Representative Larry Dunphy’s minority report version of LD 1366, “An Act to Update the Maine Wind Energy Act”. Out of more than a dozen measures introduced and voted down by the EUT Committee this session, his version of LD 1366 is the only one remaining which might give Mainers protection. It introduces setbacks for industrial-sized wind turbines, to a distance which should protect Mainers from the unique high, low and ultra-low (infrasound) frequency noises and shadow flicker effects created by the huge machines. It also allows those living within that setback area to sign a waiver, thereby giving individuals the right to choose for themselves how close they want to live to wind turbine facilities. It calls for moving up studies of Maine’s Wind Energy Plan from 2013 to 2012—something the EUT Committee members all approved of—but removed the portion mandating that ‘sound’ be studied. With that adjustment to the bill, Rep. Dunphy’s version will save Maine tax-payers money.

Sounds simple, right? Something every Legislator can get on board with? After all, it saves money, protects Mainers, and gives them a choice, all at the same time. The Wind Energy Act COST Mainers money, did NOT protect them, and TOOK AWAY their right to choose whether or not to live in close vicinity to industrial wind facilities. This is a fair and balanced bill.

It’s not ‘anti-wind’… it’s ‘pro-Mainer’.


Jeremy Payne of Maine Renewable Energy Association ‘crashed’ FMM’s press conference. As if he’d been invited, he marched in and took a seat just as the press conference was beginning. That was okay…. We were on State property, and he is a Maine citizen. Besides… we’ve nothing to hide. We have the truth on our side; truth based on science, economics, and ethics.

Representative Dunphy’s ‘minority report’ hadn’t yet been made public-- so I’m sure, once Mr. Payne ‘caught wind’ of FMM’s press conference, he decided it would behoove him to learn all he could about how his lobbying efforts should be directed. After all, his job isn’t finished yet. To date, the corporate lobby he is a member of has only killed 95% of the legislation we’ve submitted or supported.


As FMM’s Government Affairs Director, Chris O’Neil, outlined details of the minority report for the press, Mr. Payne tapped away at his hand-held computer. After Chris spoke, FMM’s Executive Director, Susan Davis gave a statement. Mr. Payne tapped some more.

And then… Art Lindgren from Vinalhaven Island walked to the podium.


Art spoke of how his life had been ruined by industrial wind turbines. How the “24/7 noise is a killer”. How the investment he and his wife made in their home has been rendered practically worthless. How dreams had been shattered and health impaired. He talked about a gentleman who’d testified for the wind lobby at the public hearing in April—a fellow who’d been homeless and unable to pay his child support payments. This man was picked up while hitch-hiking, and had been offered a job by a subcontractor for a wind developer. This formerly homeless man called wind turbines ‘three hundred foot trophies’.

But Art and his wife and his neighbors don’t see it that way, nor do several families in Freedom and Mars Hill. They see wind turbines--and the developers who built them--as dream killers. As stealers of their health and happiness, and robbers of their investments. Like the rest of us, Art doesn’t begrudge Mainers their jobs… and yet—those wind industry jobs have ruined his life, and the lives of many others.

I don’t get emotional very often, but tears came to my eyes as I listened to his story.

Jeremy Payne didn’t listen, however. Perhaps he felt guilty or ashamed, as most of us would, for promoting something which is proven to negatively impact Mainers’ lives. Perhaps Art’s story struck a nerve. Maybe he was bored by the press statements. Or maybe, Mr. Payne had gleaned the information he needed from the Press Conference, and it was imperative that he scurry off to rally his troops and scrounge up some support, so that he could begin to mount a defense against the minority report.

If WCSH TV’s evening report is any indication; that is exactly what Mr. Payne did. Reporter Chris Rose is seen in the video, interviewing Rep. Stacey Fitts in the corridor of the State House, while Jeremy Payne rests nonchalantly back in a corner, leg bent, one shoe propped up against the wall of that venerable building.

Rep. Fitts told the reporter that our voices weren’t “falling on deaf ears” but that our needs had to be balanced against “the needs of the energy issues for the state of Maine…. For the country and for the region”.

How many times must we debunk the value of ‘wind’? How many times must we point out wind’s negligible contribution, and its negative impacts? Not just to the health and well-being of Mainers, but to the state, the country, and the region?

And then Mr. Payne was interviewed. As has become typical Standard Operating Procedure for the wind industry, he resorted to dire predictions. Threats, almost.

He said that ‘wind’ is the only industry that has been ‘investing in Maine in the last couple of years.’ That as long as we had a predictable and reliable climate for wind, developers would continue to invest… but if there were ‘efforts to derail them and change things along the way’, it would result in grim circumstances. He stated with assurance that the ‘investors will go away’.

Grid-scale industrial wind facilities are not investments. Those hundreds of thousands of dollars which have been spread around Maine by the wind industry and touted as the be-all, end-all for our economic salvation are paid for--in large part--by you and me. Worse, because America does not have a surplus of tax-payer dollars sitting around in the bank, we borrow much of that money. Borrow, with interest due, from countries such as China. And then… we spend the lion’s share of those borrowed funds on turbines. Turbines manufactured in and purchased from countries such as… China. THAT is not investment. That is not a sustainable goal. That is not a reliable way to get a return on our money.

That is a disaster in the making.

If wind facilities were valuable and viable, they would not require that 60-70% of their cost come from subsidizations of one type or another. Subsidies like no-strings-attached 1603 cash grants from the Federal government. TIF’s granted from municipalities or counties. REC’s, carbon credits, accelerated depreciation. And more.

A press conference is designed to call attention to an issue of significance. The hope is that reporters will take what they hear and see, and follow up on those observations by doing some real investigative reporting. That they’ll not blindly believe the group hosting the press conference, nor will they have faith in or promote the agendas of those who speak in opposition to the statements made. The hope is that the press will research the FACTS.

I haven’t yet figured out why the media shows indifference to a topic of such major importance. I’ve yet to understand how dozens of Mainers can complain about significant health issues, but be given little credence. I can’t comprehend why those who have the power to change public policy and institute common-sense plans and procedures are turning deaf ears and blind eyes to a problem that will have long-term impacts on the economy, environment, health and well-being of this state.

What I have figured out, to my consternation, is which way the wind blows in Augusta.

Mainers are seeking shelter from the storm. I hope the members of the 125th Legislature hear us when we ask them to support Rep. Larry Dunphy’s minority report version of LD 1366, ‘An Act to Update the Maine Wind Energy Act’.

Voices in Dispute--From the Huffington Post

What follows is an article from the Huffington Post regarding the ongoing controversy on Vinalhaven Island, Maine. As I've watched this story unfold, I have been shocked and saddened by the actions of Fox Island Wind and George Baker, as well as the behavior of a few of the islanders who have gone out of their way to belittle and demean the residents who are suffering from the unexpected effects of the turbines. It is my sincere hope that this community will come together and not let this issue further divide them.

I believe that the time is up for the developer. FIW has had months to comply with the DEP. FIW has refused. FIW has thumbed its nose at the DEP and taken blatant steps to create controversy on the island, pitting neighbor against neighbor.

If you or I did not comply with the law, we'd be arrested and thrown in jail. Are industrial wind developers above the law?

Maine citizens deserve to know the answer to that question.


Wind Power Noise Dispute On Tranquil Maine Island Intensifies

A three-turbine wind farm on the island village of Vinalhaven in Maine has caused a multi-year rift that recently intensified.

While thousands of wind power enthusiasts and industry representatives gather in Anaheim Calif. for Windpower 2011, the American Wind Power Association's popular annual conference and exhibition, some 3,300 miles due east, wind power is tearing a tiny island community asunder.

In the latest turn, an attorney representing several homeowners living closest to a three-turbine wind installation on the tiny island of Vinalhaven in Maine's Penobscot Bay filed a formal complaint with the Maine Public Utilities Commission on Monday.

The complaint charges that the Fox Island Electric Cooperative, the local utility, and Fox Island Wind, the developer of the wind installation which is owned by the utility, have engaged in repeated harassment of the homeowners, who have argued since shortly after the turbines came online in late 2009 that the machines have been in violation of state noise ordinances. That assertion was subsequently supported by the state Department of Environmental Protection.

The developer has repeatedly disputed those findings, and the majority of the island's residents support the wind farm, which is seen as a source of eco-pride and sensible thrift, ostensibly saving the island from the need to import pricier power from the mainland.

But Monday's complaint states that the residents nearest the turbines have legitimate concerns that have long gone unheeded, despite multiple attempts to resolve the issue through negotiation, and that instead the local utility has recently upped the rhetorical ante by placing two separate "inserts" inside all islanders' utility bills. The inserts claim that legal expenses associated with the neighbors' noise complaints were costing the cooperative hundreds of thousands of dollars, and that as a result, a 5 percent increase in utility rates was needed.

The announcement caused the neighbors, perhaps not surprisingly, to suffer "retribution, harassment and hostility" from fellow Vinalhaven residents who are not within earshot of the turbines, according to the complaint. The utility's tactic also amounted to what the complaint called "intimidation and an abuse of the powers of a utility."

Vinalhaven became a flashpoint last year for a small but persistent backlash against industrial wind power, as residents living nearest the spinning behemoths became vocal about their experiences.

Like nearly all residents of the island, they supported the idea of a wind farm at first. Yet the Fox Island Wind Neighbors, as the loosely knit group of a dozen or so residents dubbed themselves, said they soon began to worry about the noise, being within a one-mile radius of the project site.

Representatives of Fox Island Wind assured them the noise would be minimal. But as Art Lindgren, one of the neighbors, told this reporter last year, their worst fears were confirmed once the turbines were switched on.

“In the first 10 minutes, our jaws dropped to the ground,” he said. “Nobody in the area could believe it. They were so loud.”

Lindgren's lament has been echoed in jurisdictions across the land, as an increasing number of communities come to weigh the innumerable collective benefits of wind power -- clean, non-toxic, no emissions, climate-friendly, water-friendly, renewable, sustainable -- against some of the downsides experienced by those living nearby.

Indeed, proximate residents around the country have cited everything from the throbbing, low-frequency drone to mind-numbing strobe effects as the rising or setting sun slices through the spinning blades:

Others have gone so far as to describe something called "wind turbine syndrome," arising from turbine-generated low-frequency noise and "infrasound," and causing all manner of symptoms -- from headache and dizziness to ear pressure, nausea, visual blurring, racing heartbeat, and panic episodes -- though the science on these claims is still thin.

And there are still lingering and long-standing concerns over hazards presented by turbines to migrating birds and bats.

At Vinalhaven, for example, a 28-month study conducted by ornithologist Richard Podolsky, who was hired by Fox Island Wind, the project's developer, recently declared the turbines' impacts on local eagle and osprey populations to be negligible.


But in March, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent a letter to attorneys representing the Fox Island Wind project, lambasting those conclusions. The letter questioned the study's methodologies for studying eagle, bat and bird collision assessment and mortality, suggesting that they needed to be more rigorous and better-defined and described.

The wildlife regulators asked that new studies be conducted before a permit necessary to allow the project to proceed -- despite the potential for incidental harm to bald and golden eagle species in the area -- is issued. Both are protected by federal legislation.

Meanwhile, the complaint filed on Monday asks the Maine Public Utility Commission to sanction the Vinalhaven utility and Fox Island Wind for the utility bill inserts, and urges them to prevent any similar communications with ratepayers in the future.

It also asks that the state commission prevent the island utility from attempting to raise rates to cover expenses from its dispute with the affected homeowners going forward -- characterizing such expenses as "the product of mismanagement, and reckless conduct."

Queries sent to officials at Fox Island Wind and the Vinalhaven electric cooperative were not immediately returned Tuesday morning. This report will be updated if they respond.

Strong Voices Fall on Deaf Ears

There are many, many personal dramas in the battle to restore Mainers' 'quality of life' after a wind facility has been improperly sited. In the previous posting, I shared a letter written by Cheryl Lindgren of Vinalhaven Island. Since that pervasive noise first infiltrated their lives, the Lindgrens and their neighbors have spent countless dollars and hours trying to get the Department of Environmental Protection to enforce already inadequate sound standards so that they can live without the damaging effects of wind turbine sounds. Below is a press release regarding their attempts to regain the peace and enjoyment of their homes. And this link, regarding Art Lindgren, Cheryl's husband, tells a poignant story. A story which may be repeated over and over again--but with different casts of characters and different outcomes--if we do not succeed in forcing wind developers to properly site their developments and comply with noise standards. Please take a moment to visit this link. It's important.

Thank you.
*********************

FOX ISLANDS WIND NEIGHBORS PRESS RELEASE
State of Maine to Wind Turbine Farm on Vinalhaven: Turn Down the Noise
Neighbors of Wind Turbine Farm Stand Their Ground

November 29, 2010
Contact: Cheryl Lindgren, 207-867-4773

(For Immediate Release)

Last week, the State of Maine affirmed that the Vinalhaven
wind turbine farm violates state standards for noise. Neighbors afflicted by the turbine noise are hoping it is a turning point in the year-long dispute between the operation of three 1.5 megawatt GE turbines.

Since the commissioning of the wind turbine project a year ago, the local utility—Fox
Islands Electric Coop and Fox Islands Wind—had denied noise violations. During this
time, neighbors endured excessive noise on a regular and frequent basis. In its finding, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection calls this a “very serious matter”.

The agency undertook a rigorous analysis to determine its position, based on a July 18th complaint filed by the neighbors. Fox Islands Wind has until December 3rd to outline exactly what its intentions for addressing the problems. Within 60 days, the utility is required to implement a noise mitigation plan. On Nov. 6th, the neighbors filed a second official complaint and have more than a dozen additional complaints cued up for submittal.

From its commissioning in November 2009, neighbors were shocked by high noise levels
produced by the turbines. Their efforts to validate noise complaints and the ensuing
disagreement with the wind turbine operator has attracted national attention including front page stories in the Boston Globe, the New York Times, and AP.

The Vinalhaven neighbors set out to make sure that the utility conformed to state law. This required a significant effort and investment in understanding acoustics and
measurement metrics and technologies. The efforts of the neighbors prompted the DEP to reexamine the adequacy of wind turbine compliance procedures. There had been no
regulatory mechanism to detect and validate noise complaints from wind turbines. If the Vinalhaven neighbors had not undertaken their own costly efforts, the local operator—Fox Islands Wind, LLC-- could have continued to operate in violation of their license conditions.

After filing numerous complaints between April and June 2010, the state, the neighbors and the local utility finally established a formal protocol requiring acoustical proof of violation. On July 18, 2010, the neighbors met the newly established requirements with a single complaint that was representative of excessive noise that could be measured on a regular basis.

Island Voices

What follows is a November, 2009 letter sent from Cheryl Lindgren of Vinalhaven Island, off the coast of Maine, to Dr. Monique Aniel, co-chair of the Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power. I share this letter with the author's permission. Fox Island Wind built a 3-turbine wind facility with the Islanders' support. But those living closest to the development were not apprised of the intrusive and damaging effects of living in the shadow of industrial wind. More about the ongoing saga on Vinalhaven in the days to come....
*****************************
Monique,

As to my "reflections on the sound"....

We had been told that there would be little or no noise from the turbines, particularly at our location of approx. 2400 ft. As each turbine was put into operation mode the noise increased. I was a bit surprise(d), almost speechless as I tried to grasp what the reailty of the situation was. It was soon apparent that there was a pervasive jet noise. Indeed I still look to the sky to see which direction the jet is going. It never passes. It took a day to be able to articulate what I was actually experiencing because my normal experience would say you hear sound. But my senses were telling me much more. I was hearing the whoosh of the blades, the jet of the nacelle's but there was something else. I was feeling the thrump of the turbines in my chest. A physical sensation that is impossible to escape. I can only say that I feel the sound. To a person who hasn't experienced the sound I usually get a funny look. Anyone within the turbines area knows exactly what I am speaking of. After a day and night of this I can also say that the thrumping can begin to make me feel ever so slightly off balance, in a mild way. I can't figure out if it's lack of sleep, emotional stress or the sounds. Probably all three. After nine years of sleeping with my window open to the quiet of an island night (which can include fog horns, buoy bells, and a babbling brook) I now close my window to try and block the turbine sound, but to no avail. It permeates. I awake in the middle of the night to a heaviness in my chest and my jaw clenched as I try to overcome the creep of the, for lack of a better phrase, the compression of the turbines.

Daily life has changed dramatically. Some days the wind will carry the jet sound to my neighbors instead of me...those days I try to garden outside. "Bad" days are spent inside and I am learning to have music on all the time....it sometimes helps but if there is a moment of silence the thrumping leaks through. The other night was one of the first sparkling clear dark winter nights....stars blazing in a jet black sky. I used to take walks in the darkness, the entire outdoors my cathedral. Now I hide inside. But you really can't hide. When the turbines are at full speed it's a constant, constant sound. Tears come easily these days.

The"'sound" has also affected our flock of ducks who just won't eat on days when the turbines are at 20RPM. When the turbines are off, or slowed down considerably they will eat. And there was one evening when we found an eider duck sitting on our back porch, as surprised as we were to find him there. I have heard that animals will flee the area around the wind farms. I think they have more sense than we do.

I hope this is of some help. Thanks for all your efforts.

Cheryl Lindgren