BITTINGER, Md. -- Gov. Martin O’Malley said today that his administration will not allow commercial wind turbines on state forest land, ending a heated four-month debate.
“While we must continue to explore and make progress on creating a more sustainable and independent energy future for Maryland, we will not do so at the expense of the special lands we hold in the public trust,” the Democratic governor said.
O’Malley spoke at a news conference at a scenic overlook in the Savage River State Forest. Opponents had claimed that allowing 40-story windmills on state-owned land in mountainous western Maryland would reduce its recreational value, spoil the landscape and lower property values, especially in the thriving Deep Creek Lake resort area of Garrett County.
O’Malley said the ban applies only to conservation lands owned outright by the state and managed by the Department of Natural Resources. It is not meant to discourage wind power development on other local, federal or privately owned land, he said.
The announcement follows four months of debate triggered by The (Baltimore) Sun’s report in December that Pennsylvania-based U.S. Wind Force was seeking to lease and clear about 400 acres in the Potomac and Savage River state forests to erect about 100 wind turbines. The company has estimated that the leases could bring Maryland about $30 million over 20 years.
The state sought public comment on the concept, bringing 1,400 responses, 83 percent of them opposed, DNR spokeswoman Olivia Campbell said. About 500 people packed a January hearing in Garrett County and nearly shouted down wind-power industry spokesman Frank Maisano when he likened wind farms to logging, which he called an “industrial” use of the land.
Advocates for state wind farm leases have cited the growing demand for energy in Maryland, which faces the risk of rolling blackouts as early as 2011 without additional power generation, according to PJM Interconnection, which runs the transmission grid for a 13-state area.
A bill proposed by O’Malley and passed by the just-concluded General Assembly requires that 20 percent of Maryland’s power come from renewable sources by 2022.
Maisano said on Friday that regardless of O’Malley’s decision, wind-power developers would keep pursuing projects on private land in western Maryland. “Some are moving forward toward construction as early as next year,” he said.
David F. McAnally, whose company is seeking Public Service Commission approval for a 28-turbine project on private and county-owned property in Garrett County, said: “We must have wind projects in order for the state to meet its renewable policy priorities, as well as providing important jobs and tax revenue for local communities.”
Two other companies are planning at least two other wind farms, totaling 42 turbines, on private land in western Maryland.
In Delaware, Delmarva Power recently included existing and planned Maryland wind farms among the 1,697 megawatts of onshore wind electricity sources potentially available to Delaware customers as an alternative to the Bluewater Wind offshore wind plan.
Company officials said wind from Maryland, Pennsylvania, Indian and Illinois would cost from one-third to one half less than Bluewater's proposed rates for a 25-year contract. Amounts are "more than enough" to meet local needs, the company reported.
Bluewater spokesman Jim Lanard quickly accused Delmarva of omitting some costs for transmission and regional grid charges from the onshore wind estimates, creating an unfair comparision. Lanard said Bluewater's project also will bring jobs to Delaware.
Bill Yingling, a spokesman for Delmarva, said the company was still analyzing bids from 10 land-based developers and confirmed that the recently released estimates were for wind-farm supplies only. Final estimates still will show a large savings over electricity from Bluewater's plan, Yingling said.
Yingling said Bluewater's cost estimates also omit some expenses, including costs created by a 300 megawatt "must take" contract that could force Delmarva to sell excess, higher-priced offshore wind electricity during low demand periods.
Lanard said that Delmarva also unfairly compared its onshore wind project solely with Bluewater's, despite a Public Service Commission recommendation to include a backup, on-shore gas fired plant that would have a lower combined electricity rate.
In a related development, New Jersey's Board of Public Utilities this week announced the formation of a review committee to examine bids for offshore wind projects in that state. Three companies have submitted proposals for rights to develop up to 350 megawatts of offshore wind production, under a New Jersey plan that requires bidders to make their own private arrangements for electricity sales. Up to $19 million will be available to assist developers in the form of a one-time state subsidy.
No comments:
Post a Comment