The instability of the financial markets had caused Noble Environmental Power to "scale back its development plans for 2009" and "(cut) back its workforce."
Immediately, construction of a 14-turbine windpark planned for the town of Bellmont will be suspended until July or August of 2009, Bellmont Town Supervisor Bruce Russell said Friday.
He also said that a "significant" number of local Noble employees have been laid off, both due to the company's current financial situation and because the construction of Noble's local windparks - one in Chateaugay and another in Altona in Clinton County - is winding down. Construction requires the largest workforce.
Russell said Noble's senior management has officially communicated to the Town of Bellmont that construction will be suspended, and said he believes the company will make good on its word to return next year.
To date, the company has laid foundations for the town's 14 turbines and installed wiring, he said.
"You don't put that much money in the ground and then walk away," he said.
"They were caught in the middle of this (financial) crunch," which he stressed is common with the current state of the economy, and reflects no malfeasance on the part of Noble.
Questions posed to officials at the Noble office in Churubusco about a rumored mass lay off and suspensions of the Bellmont project were directed to the company's legal counsel, and then passed to the company's CEO, Walter Howard, who released a statement late Friday.
"We deeply regret this unfortunate situation," Howard said. "We believe that we have assembled an exceptional group of people at Noble, and these decisions have been extremely difficult for me, our company founders, and others in management. We value all of our employees, and we appreciate their hard work and dedication to Noble."
Russell said that in meeting with Noble's management, he was given more details about the direct cause of the company's financial troubles.
He said that Noble has been in the process of going public by issuing a Initial Public Offering (IPO), during which, generally speaking, a major investment bank puts a value on a company. The company then determines its amount of shares and what percentage of those shares it wants to put in public hands. A price per share is then determined based on the market.
Russell, who spent 30 years in the finance industry both as a stock broker and certified financial planner, said Noble utilized the recently bankrupt Lehman Brothers as its key underwriter, with Goldman Sachs as their secondary. Shares are divided according to this pecking order.
Lehman Brothers never got Noble's IPO off the ground, he said.
At the same time, the New York State Attorney General launched an investigation into Noble and a second wind company for alleged improper dealings with public officials and anti-competitive practices.
"One thing that venture capital and money stays away from are attorney general investigations," he said, stating his own opinion and not information relayed to him by Noble officials.
The perception of wrong doing is enough to drive financing away, and Russell stressed that in his dealings with Noble he has never seen any misdeeds committed by Noble officials and doesn't suspect any have been committed.
"Those kinds of stories get the scent of deceit and deceptive practices, the smell starts to permeate the air, and everyone backs away," he said.
All of the 71 turbines in the Chateaugay windpark have reportedly been raised and the company is finishing the wiring.
Russell said Noble is proceeding with improvement to the Cooper Road, which runs between Bellmont and Chateaugay. The work, which will cost $100,000, was included in the town's Road Use Agreements with Noble.
He stressed that the company has followed through with all of its promises to the Town of Belmont.
However, as a result of its financial troubles, Russell said Noble - like many companies right now - basically has no financing to move forward with the Bellmont project.
"It isn't something to be ashamed of," he said. "When credit stops, the world comes awfully close to a screeching halt."
Malone%20Tel%20%20re%20%20Noble%20paralysis%2010-11-08.pdf
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Clayton wind farm noise study to be aired
The long-awaited full report on the Horse Creek Wind Farm noise study will go public in a week, the town announced Wednesday. But the availability of the report was not enough to satisfy upset residents who stormed into the council meeting demanding that the town start formulating a local law to limit noise levels of wind turbines and establish setbacks.
“We need to start clearing the air,” said Patricia Booras-Miller, vice president of Environmentally Concerned Citizens Organization of Jefferson County.
At Wednesday’s meeting, Ms. Booras-Miller criticized the town, claiming its reason for not releasing the full Cavanaugh Tocci Associates’ noise study report was bogus to begin with.
Last week, Roland A. Baril Jr., chairman of the town Planning Board, said the town’s engineer, Bernier, Carr & Associates, Watertown, told the town not use the full report and to send it back. The initial report was completed in January.
“We’ve received a letter from Bernier and Carr stating that they did not say that,” Mrs. Booras-Miller said.
Initially, the town asked Bernier, Carr to review the full study and the Town Council and Planning Board concluded the document was too technical for the boards and the public to understand. At the town’s request, Cavanaugh Tocci Associates sent a two-page executive summary to the town Aug. 28. The executive summary was made available Friday.
Supervisor Justin A. Taylor said the town is not trying to deceive its residents nor is it making any decisions behind closed doors.
“There is no intention on my part or the board’s to hold back information,” Mr. Taylor said.
He said that the report was indeed too technical for the town representatives and that the initial report was not submitted to the Planning Board or the Town Council.
Diana Peters, Chaumont, who lives near the test wind turbines, said she is concerned about the negative effects of the turbines.
“There are seven turbines across from me and five on the back,” Mrs. Peters said. “We’re semi-retired and we enjoy our peace and quietness. We don’t like the noise.”
Thomas M. Brennan, Depauville, said the town should start revising the wind turbine setbacks.
“I was some shocked at how close they were,” Mr. Brennan said.
Mr. Taylor said the town is not taking any action regarding the wind project because Iberdrola has suspended its application.
The full noise study report will be available for public review Wednesday. The public must submit a Freedom of Information request to the town to view the document.
“We need to start clearing the air,” said Patricia Booras-Miller, vice president of Environmentally Concerned Citizens Organization of Jefferson County.
At Wednesday’s meeting, Ms. Booras-Miller criticized the town, claiming its reason for not releasing the full Cavanaugh Tocci Associates’ noise study report was bogus to begin with.
Last week, Roland A. Baril Jr., chairman of the town Planning Board, said the town’s engineer, Bernier, Carr & Associates, Watertown, told the town not use the full report and to send it back. The initial report was completed in January.
“We’ve received a letter from Bernier and Carr stating that they did not say that,” Mrs. Booras-Miller said.
Initially, the town asked Bernier, Carr to review the full study and the Town Council and Planning Board concluded the document was too technical for the boards and the public to understand. At the town’s request, Cavanaugh Tocci Associates sent a two-page executive summary to the town Aug. 28. The executive summary was made available Friday.
Supervisor Justin A. Taylor said the town is not trying to deceive its residents nor is it making any decisions behind closed doors.
“There is no intention on my part or the board’s to hold back information,” Mr. Taylor said.
He said that the report was indeed too technical for the town representatives and that the initial report was not submitted to the Planning Board or the Town Council.
Diana Peters, Chaumont, who lives near the test wind turbines, said she is concerned about the negative effects of the turbines.
“There are seven turbines across from me and five on the back,” Mrs. Peters said. “We’re semi-retired and we enjoy our peace and quietness. We don’t like the noise.”
Thomas M. Brennan, Depauville, said the town should start revising the wind turbine setbacks.
“I was some shocked at how close they were,” Mr. Brennan said.
Mr. Taylor said the town is not taking any action regarding the wind project because Iberdrola has suspended its application.
The full noise study report will be available for public review Wednesday. The public must submit a Freedom of Information request to the town to view the document.
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Naples holds its nose, takes the cash
Naples, N.Y.
The town attorney is reworking an agreement between Naples and First Wind to make it clear that by accepting a cash payment, the town is not endorsing the Cohocton wind farms now under construction.
The Town Board has voted to accept $50,000 in what are called “mitigation funds,” to make up for any detrimental effect the appearance of windmills may have on Naples’ historic landmarks.
Developer First Wind, formerly known as UPC Wind, set aside a total of $200,000 in mitigation funds for communities with historic sites within view of the wind farms going up on Dutch Hill and Lent Hill in Cohocton, just south of Naples. Naples was determined to qualify for $50,000 with the rest going to Cohocton.
The Town Board agreed in April to take the cash, which must be used on a designated historic site. For Naples, the money will pay for a feasibility study for renovating Memorial Town Hall on Route 21.
Some wind farm opponents have objected to the payment.
“We’ve been pressured not to take the money,” acknowledged Supervisor Frank Duserick.
But the Town Board took a pragmatic view.
“If we don’t take the money, it goes to Cohocton,” he added.
Some have questioned the lower amount for Naples, but Duserick said, “We don’t have a say in that. That was decided well before the town became involved. Basically, it’s out of our hands.”
Duserick, Naples Historical Society President Priscilla Crawford and Town Attorney Ed Brockman reviewed the legal agreement for the mitigation funds and decided to rephrase it before returning it to the developer. They want to make it clear that the acceptance of the funds comes with a protest.
“This does not mean the town agrees with the siting of the wind towers,” Duserick said.
The town attorney is reworking an agreement between Naples and First Wind to make it clear that by accepting a cash payment, the town is not endorsing the Cohocton wind farms now under construction.
The Town Board has voted to accept $50,000 in what are called “mitigation funds,” to make up for any detrimental effect the appearance of windmills may have on Naples’ historic landmarks.
Developer First Wind, formerly known as UPC Wind, set aside a total of $200,000 in mitigation funds for communities with historic sites within view of the wind farms going up on Dutch Hill and Lent Hill in Cohocton, just south of Naples. Naples was determined to qualify for $50,000 with the rest going to Cohocton.
The Town Board agreed in April to take the cash, which must be used on a designated historic site. For Naples, the money will pay for a feasibility study for renovating Memorial Town Hall on Route 21.
Some wind farm opponents have objected to the payment.
“We’ve been pressured not to take the money,” acknowledged Supervisor Frank Duserick.
But the Town Board took a pragmatic view.
“If we don’t take the money, it goes to Cohocton,” he added.
Some have questioned the lower amount for Naples, but Duserick said, “We don’t have a say in that. That was decided well before the town became involved. Basically, it’s out of our hands.”
Duserick, Naples Historical Society President Priscilla Crawford and Town Attorney Ed Brockman reviewed the legal agreement for the mitigation funds and decided to rephrase it before returning it to the developer. They want to make it clear that the acceptance of the funds comes with a protest.
“This does not mean the town agrees with the siting of the wind towers,” Duserick said.
Public needs to be active in wind energy issue
It appears that we have a bit of a problem in this country. We elect people to represent us, and then they ignore that fact and proceed to do as they like. What is even worse, we re-elect them.
I read somewhere that the definition of stupidity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
A few years ago, our government needed an energy policy. Whom did they go to for the best information? The oil companies and the power companies. How is that working out for you? Maybe we should appoint a Wall Street executive to oversee our banking industry. I guess this did not work so well either. We are repeating the same thing in relation to wind energy here in New York state.
Sen. Schumer lobbied hard for the Spanish-owned wind company Iberdrola to come in and buy out some energy companies here in New York. My guess is he, along with most elected officials, got their best wind information from the AWEA or the American Wind Energy Association. Do you believe the AWEA will give you both sides of the wind issues?
Washington politicians influence our state and local elected officials by their example, with deaf ears and no oversight. There are those who will look at issues and how it will affect all of us and some who will look at issues that will only promote their own agenda. However, when the public takes a stand, elected officials get nervous.
Many of our small towns are being sold a bill of goods from the wind company charlatans that are backed by information from the AWEA, which also supplies the U.S. Department Energy its information. The U.S. taxpayer will pay for this in tax subsidies.
This is why it is important for our citizens to attend informational presentations on wind being held throughout Jefferson, County.
Stephen Rutigliano
Three Mile Bay
I read somewhere that the definition of stupidity is "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
A few years ago, our government needed an energy policy. Whom did they go to for the best information? The oil companies and the power companies. How is that working out for you? Maybe we should appoint a Wall Street executive to oversee our banking industry. I guess this did not work so well either. We are repeating the same thing in relation to wind energy here in New York state.
Sen. Schumer lobbied hard for the Spanish-owned wind company Iberdrola to come in and buy out some energy companies here in New York. My guess is he, along with most elected officials, got their best wind information from the AWEA or the American Wind Energy Association. Do you believe the AWEA will give you both sides of the wind issues?
Washington politicians influence our state and local elected officials by their example, with deaf ears and no oversight. There are those who will look at issues and how it will affect all of us and some who will look at issues that will only promote their own agenda. However, when the public takes a stand, elected officials get nervous.
Many of our small towns are being sold a bill of goods from the wind company charlatans that are backed by information from the AWEA, which also supplies the U.S. Department Energy its information. The U.S. taxpayer will pay for this in tax subsidies.
This is why it is important for our citizens to attend informational presentations on wind being held throughout Jefferson, County.
Stephen Rutigliano
Three Mile Bay
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Horse Creek wind farm: Noise report cover-up
PPM Energy's Horse Creek Wind Farm proposal, now suspended while NY State officials evaluate the potential high bat mortality from the turbines, is the center of a sobering debate concerning preconstruction sound study reports. The proposed project consists of sixty-two industrial wind turbines spanning the towns of Clayton and Orleans in upstate New York. Over 1000 residents reside within the project's proposed footprint.
In January 2007, shortly after the Town of Clayton adopted its Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance (Local Law 1) governing placement of turbines in the town, PPM released its Noise Analysis report on the project prepared by Global engineering giant CH2M HILL. The report's summary states: "The facilities steady state noise levels are predicted to comply with the Town of Clayton's Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance limit of 50 dBA at offsite residences." It further adds "the facilities noise level may exceed the existing levels by 6 dBA at lower wind speeds but maintains compliance with the Town of Clayton's Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance limit of 50 dBA". New York State guidelines suggest that sound level increases over existing background should not exceed 6 dBA.
Serious and substantial complaints filed by Clayton residents regarding possible excessive and harmful noise impacts from the turbines prompted the Planning Board to hire acoustic engineering firm Cavanaugh Tocci Associates (CTA) of Sudbury MA to evaluate the CH2M HILL report. CTA was specifically requested to "re-evaluate noise impact per NYSDEC guidelines and Town of Clayton Local Law 1 2007 Wind Energy Facilities".
The completed CTA report was received by Clayton officials, Town Supervisor Justin Taylor and Planning Board Chairman Roland Baril, on or around February 15, 2008 but never released to other Planning Board members or the public. Apparently, CTA's report was deemed "too complicated" for review. Three Freedom of Information requests were filed with the town, including one from the local newspaper, and all were denied. Clayton Supervisor Mr. Taylor announced through the Town's engineering consultants Bernier & Carr Associates that CTA's report was sent back with the request that an executive summary be provided to help explain CTA's findings. CTA complied and delivered a 2-page summary on August 25. This summary was again held by Taylor and Baril.
During the Oct 1 regular meeting of the Clayton Planning Board, Planning Board Chairman Baril informed the attending residents as well as the Planning Board that it was the recommendation of Bernier & Carr Associates that CTA's report again be refused as too technical for public review and that CTA's executive summary would be the ONLY document released to other Board members. Taxpayers were welcome to a copy of the summary via a Freedom of Information request submitted to the Clayton Town Clerk.
According to the CTA executive summary, there are serious problems with the methodology employed by CH2M HILL in conducting its noise analysis whereby estimated background sound levels were overestimated. CTA also makes clear that participating property owners, those who've entered into lease agreements with PPM, should update their real estate deeds to reflect noise easements. CTA is clear that noise emanating from the turbines, even if compliant with Clayton's Local Law 1, will affect future property owners who might occupy a dwelling.
The problem of Wind Turbine noise is becoming more pronounced as turbines are built close to where people live. Windaction.org is tracking noise issues in numerous locations including Mars Hill, ME, Lowville, NY, Brownsville, WI, McLean County, IL, and Blair County and Meyersdale, PA, in the UK and Canada. In each of these cases, the question of noise was either never raised prior to the towers being erected or the residents were informed there would be no issue. It's remarkable the lengths PPM and some Clayton officials are going to just to avoid the question. Denying a problem exists in the face of growing evidence is unproductive and will ultimately harm the wind industry and its proponents.
In January 2007, shortly after the Town of Clayton adopted its Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance (Local Law 1) governing placement of turbines in the town, PPM released its Noise Analysis report on the project prepared by Global engineering giant CH2M HILL. The report's summary states: "The facilities steady state noise levels are predicted to comply with the Town of Clayton's Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance limit of 50 dBA at offsite residences." It further adds "the facilities noise level may exceed the existing levels by 6 dBA at lower wind speeds but maintains compliance with the Town of Clayton's Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance limit of 50 dBA". New York State guidelines suggest that sound level increases over existing background should not exceed 6 dBA.
Serious and substantial complaints filed by Clayton residents regarding possible excessive and harmful noise impacts from the turbines prompted the Planning Board to hire acoustic engineering firm Cavanaugh Tocci Associates (CTA) of Sudbury MA to evaluate the CH2M HILL report. CTA was specifically requested to "re-evaluate noise impact per NYSDEC guidelines and Town of Clayton Local Law 1 2007 Wind Energy Facilities".
The completed CTA report was received by Clayton officials, Town Supervisor Justin Taylor and Planning Board Chairman Roland Baril, on or around February 15, 2008 but never released to other Planning Board members or the public. Apparently, CTA's report was deemed "too complicated" for review. Three Freedom of Information requests were filed with the town, including one from the local newspaper, and all were denied. Clayton Supervisor Mr. Taylor announced through the Town's engineering consultants Bernier & Carr Associates that CTA's report was sent back with the request that an executive summary be provided to help explain CTA's findings. CTA complied and delivered a 2-page summary on August 25. This summary was again held by Taylor and Baril.
During the Oct 1 regular meeting of the Clayton Planning Board, Planning Board Chairman Baril informed the attending residents as well as the Planning Board that it was the recommendation of Bernier & Carr Associates that CTA's report again be refused as too technical for public review and that CTA's executive summary would be the ONLY document released to other Board members. Taxpayers were welcome to a copy of the summary via a Freedom of Information request submitted to the Clayton Town Clerk.
According to the CTA executive summary, there are serious problems with the methodology employed by CH2M HILL in conducting its noise analysis whereby estimated background sound levels were overestimated. CTA also makes clear that participating property owners, those who've entered into lease agreements with PPM, should update their real estate deeds to reflect noise easements. CTA is clear that noise emanating from the turbines, even if compliant with Clayton's Local Law 1, will affect future property owners who might occupy a dwelling.
The problem of Wind Turbine noise is becoming more pronounced as turbines are built close to where people live. Windaction.org is tracking noise issues in numerous locations including Mars Hill, ME, Lowville, NY, Brownsville, WI, McLean County, IL, and Blair County and Meyersdale, PA, in the UK and Canada. In each of these cases, the question of noise was either never raised prior to the towers being erected or the residents were informed there would be no issue. It's remarkable the lengths PPM and some Clayton officials are going to just to avoid the question. Denying a problem exists in the face of growing evidence is unproductive and will ultimately harm the wind industry and its proponents.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Shell reportedly explores local wind project by LARRY RULISON
BERNE — A subsidiary of Shell Oil is seeking to develop wind farms in Albany County.
The Altamont Enterprise broke the story in its Thursday edition, saying Shell WindEnergy has been contacting landowners in the Hill Towns about installing 50 wind turbines totaling 100 megawatts of capacity — enough to power about 25,000 homes — at sites in Rensselaerville and New Scotland.
"I can only confirm that we are active in the Albany area and elsewhere in the state," Shell spokesman Tim O'Leary told the Times Union on Monday.
O'Leary declined to confirm or deny details in the Enterprise story, which said the project could involve land from the 4,594-acre Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area in the town of Berne.
Shell WindEnergy has developed projects in West Virginia, Texas, Wyoming, Colorado and elsewhere across the country.
The potential project has not been formally presented to any government entity, but some local resistance is apparent.
"I am absolutely opposed to industrial wind power in the town of Berne," said Supervisor Kevin Crosier. "We are the jewel of Albany County."
He said town residents have been coming to Town Hall to complain about Shell representatives telling them a deal was already in place.
"They're going around lying to people," Crosier said. "This is so typical of large industry."
O'Leary, the Shell spokesman, declined to respond to those allegations.
Crosier said he has heard nothing from the state about the possible use of Partridge Run for wind turbines. Officials with the Department of Environmental Conservation said Monday they knew nothing of such a proposal.
DEC spokeswoman Lori O'Connell said Partridge Run was given to the state by the federal government in the 1960s, and the deed specifically states the land must be used only for public benefit.
"If it were to be used for any other purpose, the federal government would get it back," O'Connell said.
David Weiss, a Medusa resident who is developing community-owned wind projects in Rensselaerville, said the town's comprehensive plan, which he worked on, prohibits corporate-owned wind farms unless they "significantly" benefit the town directly in the form of cash payments.
"Shell didn't do their homework," he said.
The Altamont Enterprise broke the story in its Thursday edition, saying Shell WindEnergy has been contacting landowners in the Hill Towns about installing 50 wind turbines totaling 100 megawatts of capacity — enough to power about 25,000 homes — at sites in Rensselaerville and New Scotland.
"I can only confirm that we are active in the Albany area and elsewhere in the state," Shell spokesman Tim O'Leary told the Times Union on Monday.
O'Leary declined to confirm or deny details in the Enterprise story, which said the project could involve land from the 4,594-acre Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area in the town of Berne.
Shell WindEnergy has developed projects in West Virginia, Texas, Wyoming, Colorado and elsewhere across the country.
The potential project has not been formally presented to any government entity, but some local resistance is apparent.
"I am absolutely opposed to industrial wind power in the town of Berne," said Supervisor Kevin Crosier. "We are the jewel of Albany County."
He said town residents have been coming to Town Hall to complain about Shell representatives telling them a deal was already in place.
"They're going around lying to people," Crosier said. "This is so typical of large industry."
O'Leary, the Shell spokesman, declined to respond to those allegations.
Crosier said he has heard nothing from the state about the possible use of Partridge Run for wind turbines. Officials with the Department of Environmental Conservation said Monday they knew nothing of such a proposal.
DEC spokeswoman Lori O'Connell said Partridge Run was given to the state by the federal government in the 1960s, and the deed specifically states the land must be used only for public benefit.
"If it were to be used for any other purpose, the federal government would get it back," O'Connell said.
David Weiss, a Medusa resident who is developing community-owned wind projects in Rensselaerville, said the town's comprehensive plan, which he worked on, prohibits corporate-owned wind farms unless they "significantly" benefit the town directly in the form of cash payments.
"Shell didn't do their homework," he said.
Wind firm scouting Albany County property
ALBANY COUNTY — Shell WindEnergy is scouting rural Albany County for places to develop commercial wind farms.
Representatives from Shell and the Cinco Energy Land Services consulting firm have approached landowners in the Rensselaerville and New Scotland areas about property lease agreements. The Houston firms want to use that land to site up to 50 wind turbines in two separate groups, the Altamont Enterprise weekly newspaper reported last week.
“We are active in the area and elsewhere in the state,” said Shell spokesman Tim O’Leary.
The Shell project, part of which might be located in the Partridge Run Wildlife Management Area in the Helderbergs, would be the closest wind farm to Albany. It would include wind turbines that are 380 feet tall and capable of producing 2 megawatts each, according to the Enterprise, which quoted landowners who had been approached.
The wind farm project is in its early phases and Shell has not submitted plans to local officials. The supervisors of both Rensselaerville and New Scotland said they have not had contact with Shell or Cinco representatives.
The emergence of the wind farm proposal has sent local officials scrambling to develop regulations that address wind turbines. Towns such as New Scotland, Rensselaerville and Knox might join forces to determine turbine setback and height rules, said New Scotland Supervisor Thomas Dolin.
“What we need are some experts and ordinances,” Dolin said.
Caught off guard by Shell’s interest in their community, many Albany County hilltown residents are turning to a Schoharie County nonprofit group for help. Schoharie Valley Watch has spent the past two years fighting a Vermont firm’s plan to erect wind turbines on hilltops in Richmondville and Fulton.
The Manchester, Vt.-based Reunion Power has received permits from Richmondville planning officials to place wind-measuring towers on the David Huse farm and Warnerville Hill. Wind power developers traditionally use those towers to gauge whether an area can support a wind farm.
“We are acutely aware of this … we’re trying to get our arms around it,” said Robert Nied, the co-director of Schoharie Valley Watch in Richmondville.
Schoharie Valley Watch has created a legal defense fund to oppose local laws that accommodate wind developers. In Albany County, Nied said, he is especially worried about local officials’ conflicts of interest and questionable ties to the wind power industry.
For example, Nied said, Albany County Legislator Alexander “Sandy” Gordon represents Berne, Knox and Rensselaerville — communities that might be affected by Shell’s wind project. But Gordon has lobbied for the Reunion Power wind farm in Schoharie County. He also is a principal of Helderberg Community Wind, which has held wind power forums in the hilltowns since 2004.
“ … That’s just one more problem to add to my list,” said Dolin, who was not aware of Gordon’s ties to the wind power industry.
Gordon did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
Assemblyman John McEneny, D-Albany, who represents the hilltowns in the Assembly, said he is inquiring with the Department of Environmental Conservation as to whether the alienation of park land provision of New York’s constitution applies to the Partridge Run Wildlife Management Area.
Under that provision, state lawmakers must approve changes to the boundaries of parks. However, it is not clear whether Partridge Ridge is technically a park or if Shell would have to go through the Legislature to build turbines in it.
“There’s all types of mixed concerns here. The positive and negative,” McEneny said.
Although McEneny acknowledged the benefits of renewable energy, he noted tall wind turbines would damage the hilltowns’ viewscapes. Dolin said he is concerned about potential health threats posed by vibrations and noise from turbines plus the underground transmission of electricity.
“I’m a believer in utilization of the sun … There are better ways to do it,” said Rensselaerville Supervisor Jost Nickelsberg.
The Albany and Schoharie county wind power projects come as the state is struggling to reach its goal of increasing New York’s renewable energy supply to meet 25 percent of electricity demand by 2013. By 2007, wind turbines contributed 873 gigawatts, or 0.58 percent of all the electricity generated in the state.
Although the hilltowns can be windy, they largely lack an electricity infrastructure.
“We’re not familiar with this project. There’s very good wind resources in the Helderbergs. The challenge is transmission,” said Tom Lynch, the director of external affairs for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.
Representatives from Shell and the Cinco Energy Land Services consulting firm have approached landowners in the Rensselaerville and New Scotland areas about property lease agreements. The Houston firms want to use that land to site up to 50 wind turbines in two separate groups, the Altamont Enterprise weekly newspaper reported last week.
“We are active in the area and elsewhere in the state,” said Shell spokesman Tim O’Leary.
The Shell project, part of which might be located in the Partridge Run Wildlife Management Area in the Helderbergs, would be the closest wind farm to Albany. It would include wind turbines that are 380 feet tall and capable of producing 2 megawatts each, according to the Enterprise, which quoted landowners who had been approached.
The wind farm project is in its early phases and Shell has not submitted plans to local officials. The supervisors of both Rensselaerville and New Scotland said they have not had contact with Shell or Cinco representatives.
The emergence of the wind farm proposal has sent local officials scrambling to develop regulations that address wind turbines. Towns such as New Scotland, Rensselaerville and Knox might join forces to determine turbine setback and height rules, said New Scotland Supervisor Thomas Dolin.
“What we need are some experts and ordinances,” Dolin said.
Caught off guard by Shell’s interest in their community, many Albany County hilltown residents are turning to a Schoharie County nonprofit group for help. Schoharie Valley Watch has spent the past two years fighting a Vermont firm’s plan to erect wind turbines on hilltops in Richmondville and Fulton.
The Manchester, Vt.-based Reunion Power has received permits from Richmondville planning officials to place wind-measuring towers on the David Huse farm and Warnerville Hill. Wind power developers traditionally use those towers to gauge whether an area can support a wind farm.
“We are acutely aware of this … we’re trying to get our arms around it,” said Robert Nied, the co-director of Schoharie Valley Watch in Richmondville.
Schoharie Valley Watch has created a legal defense fund to oppose local laws that accommodate wind developers. In Albany County, Nied said, he is especially worried about local officials’ conflicts of interest and questionable ties to the wind power industry.
For example, Nied said, Albany County Legislator Alexander “Sandy” Gordon represents Berne, Knox and Rensselaerville — communities that might be affected by Shell’s wind project. But Gordon has lobbied for the Reunion Power wind farm in Schoharie County. He also is a principal of Helderberg Community Wind, which has held wind power forums in the hilltowns since 2004.
“ … That’s just one more problem to add to my list,” said Dolin, who was not aware of Gordon’s ties to the wind power industry.
Gordon did not immediately return calls seeking comment.
Assemblyman John McEneny, D-Albany, who represents the hilltowns in the Assembly, said he is inquiring with the Department of Environmental Conservation as to whether the alienation of park land provision of New York’s constitution applies to the Partridge Run Wildlife Management Area.
Under that provision, state lawmakers must approve changes to the boundaries of parks. However, it is not clear whether Partridge Ridge is technically a park or if Shell would have to go through the Legislature to build turbines in it.
“There’s all types of mixed concerns here. The positive and negative,” McEneny said.
Although McEneny acknowledged the benefits of renewable energy, he noted tall wind turbines would damage the hilltowns’ viewscapes. Dolin said he is concerned about potential health threats posed by vibrations and noise from turbines plus the underground transmission of electricity.
“I’m a believer in utilization of the sun … There are better ways to do it,” said Rensselaerville Supervisor Jost Nickelsberg.
The Albany and Schoharie county wind power projects come as the state is struggling to reach its goal of increasing New York’s renewable energy supply to meet 25 percent of electricity demand by 2013. By 2007, wind turbines contributed 873 gigawatts, or 0.58 percent of all the electricity generated in the state.
Although the hilltowns can be windy, they largely lack an electricity infrastructure.
“We’re not familiar with this project. There’s very good wind resources in the Helderbergs. The challenge is transmission,” said Tom Lynch, the director of external affairs for the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.
Sunday, October 05, 2008
New York Probes Mass. Wind-Power Developer
LINCOLN - As First Wind of Massachusetts finishes building a wind farm on Stetson Mountain and prepares applications for another on Rollins Mountain, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo continues probing allegations that the company dealt improperly with public officials in upstate New York.
Begun in July, Cuomo's investigation probes whether First Wind and another company based in Connecticut improperly sought or obtained land-use agreements with residents and public officials; whether public officials received improper benefits to influence their actions; and whether they entered into anti-competitive agreements or practices.
"The use of wind power, like all renewable energy sources, should be encouraged to help clean our air and end our reliance on fossil fuels," Cuomo said in a statement released in July. "However, public integrity remains a top priority of my office and if dirty tricks are used to facilitate even clean-energy projects, my office will put a stop to it."
The investigation is continuing, said Cuomo's spokesman, John Milgrim. He declined to comment further.
First Wind is cooperating fully with the investigation, company spokesman John Lamontagne said. The company denies any wrongdoing. In fact, it tries to be a good neighbor, occasionally assisting community relief efforts.
This week, First Wind split a $30,000 donation among four county- based community programs to help Maine residents handle home heating costs this winter.
The four programs receiving donations are: Aroostook County Action Program Inc.; Community Concepts; Penquis Keep ME Warm Fund; and the Washington Hancock Community Agency THAW Fund. All of the programs are members of the Maine Community Action Association Inc.
"First Wind strives to be a good corporate citizen in all of the communities in which we work. Part of that is giving back to these communities," LaMontagne said Thursday.
Cuomo sought all documents concerning any benefits conferred on any individual or entity in connection with wind farm activity, plus all agreements, easements or contracts with individuals regarding placement of wind turbines, agreements between wind companies that may indicate anti-competitive practices and all documents pertaining to any payments or benefits received from local, state or federal agencies.
First Wind has seven wind farms operating, in development or under construction in New York, according to its Web site, www.firstwind.com.
Steel Winds I, a 20-megawatt farm of eight 2.5-megawatt Clipper Liberty wind turbines, generates enough to power about 9,000 New York homes in Lackawanna, on the shore of Lake Erie. A 125-megawatt farm, Cohocton I, is under construction in Cohocton, N.Y.
In Maine, First Wind has the 42-megawatt Mars Hill farm operational and a 57-megawatt wind farm on Stetson Mountain in Washington County under construction.
Another 25-megawatt farm for Stetson Mountain is being planned, as is the 60-megawatt Rollins Mountain farm, which is slated to be built in Burlington, Lee, Lincoln and Winn if approved. The megawatt listings represent peak outputs.
nsambides@bangordailynews.net
Begun in July, Cuomo's investigation probes whether First Wind and another company based in Connecticut improperly sought or obtained land-use agreements with residents and public officials; whether public officials received improper benefits to influence their actions; and whether they entered into anti-competitive agreements or practices.
"The use of wind power, like all renewable energy sources, should be encouraged to help clean our air and end our reliance on fossil fuels," Cuomo said in a statement released in July. "However, public integrity remains a top priority of my office and if dirty tricks are used to facilitate even clean-energy projects, my office will put a stop to it."
The investigation is continuing, said Cuomo's spokesman, John Milgrim. He declined to comment further.
First Wind is cooperating fully with the investigation, company spokesman John Lamontagne said. The company denies any wrongdoing. In fact, it tries to be a good neighbor, occasionally assisting community relief efforts.
This week, First Wind split a $30,000 donation among four county- based community programs to help Maine residents handle home heating costs this winter.
The four programs receiving donations are: Aroostook County Action Program Inc.; Community Concepts; Penquis Keep ME Warm Fund; and the Washington Hancock Community Agency THAW Fund. All of the programs are members of the Maine Community Action Association Inc.
"First Wind strives to be a good corporate citizen in all of the communities in which we work. Part of that is giving back to these communities," LaMontagne said Thursday.
Cuomo sought all documents concerning any benefits conferred on any individual or entity in connection with wind farm activity, plus all agreements, easements or contracts with individuals regarding placement of wind turbines, agreements between wind companies that may indicate anti-competitive practices and all documents pertaining to any payments or benefits received from local, state or federal agencies.
First Wind has seven wind farms operating, in development or under construction in New York, according to its Web site, www.firstwind.com.
Steel Winds I, a 20-megawatt farm of eight 2.5-megawatt Clipper Liberty wind turbines, generates enough to power about 9,000 New York homes in Lackawanna, on the shore of Lake Erie. A 125-megawatt farm, Cohocton I, is under construction in Cohocton, N.Y.
In Maine, First Wind has the 42-megawatt Mars Hill farm operational and a 57-megawatt wind farm on Stetson Mountain in Washington County under construction.
Another 25-megawatt farm for Stetson Mountain is being planned, as is the 60-megawatt Rollins Mountain farm, which is slated to be built in Burlington, Lee, Lincoln and Winn if approved. The megawatt listings represent peak outputs.
nsambides@bangordailynews.net
Farmersville may freeze wind farm permits
FARMERSVILLE — The Farmersville Town Board will meet in a special session at 7 p. m. Monday to discuss the possibility of placing a moratorium on permits for wind-energy generating facilities.
Officials also canceled a public hearing Wednesday on a proposal to increase wind project application fees and amended the town’s law regulating wind farms.
The board met in a closed-door session Sept. 24 with the town’s wind-energy consultant, Donald Swanz, and a representative of Noble Environmental Power, which has met with the board several times to discuss a possible wind farm to connect with a proposed project, Noble Freedom Windpark in the neighboring Town of Freedom.
Noble Environmental Power has secured a number of wind turbine site easements from Farmersville landowners and installed two meteorological data-collection towers. However, a project application has not been submitted.
Acting Supervisor Joe Brodka said Swanz was hired to negotiate with wind farm developers and the Cattaraugus County Industrial Development Agency.
Farmersville officials, along with representatives from Freedom and Machias, objected to sharing wind farm revenues with the IDA when the Cattaraugus County Legislature passed its own law lifting the state’s 15-year tax exemptions for alternative energy systems, and opened the door to payments-in-lieu-of-taxes from wind developers.
That law will impact at least four projects expected to seek local permits. Officials say the county could see $600 million or more in wind-energy development over the next five years.
Monday’s meeting will be held in Town Hall, 8963 Lake Ave., east of Harwood Lake.
Officials also canceled a public hearing Wednesday on a proposal to increase wind project application fees and amended the town’s law regulating wind farms.
The board met in a closed-door session Sept. 24 with the town’s wind-energy consultant, Donald Swanz, and a representative of Noble Environmental Power, which has met with the board several times to discuss a possible wind farm to connect with a proposed project, Noble Freedom Windpark in the neighboring Town of Freedom.
Noble Environmental Power has secured a number of wind turbine site easements from Farmersville landowners and installed two meteorological data-collection towers. However, a project application has not been submitted.
Acting Supervisor Joe Brodka said Swanz was hired to negotiate with wind farm developers and the Cattaraugus County Industrial Development Agency.
Farmersville officials, along with representatives from Freedom and Machias, objected to sharing wind farm revenues with the IDA when the Cattaraugus County Legislature passed its own law lifting the state’s 15-year tax exemptions for alternative energy systems, and opened the door to payments-in-lieu-of-taxes from wind developers.
That law will impact at least four projects expected to seek local permits. Officials say the county could see $600 million or more in wind-energy development over the next five years.
Monday’s meeting will be held in Town Hall, 8963 Lake Ave., east of Harwood Lake.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Friday, October 03, 2008
Shell Oil plans wind farms on crest of Helderbergs
Shell Oil and Cinco Energy Land Services are looking to build commercial wind farms on both state and private land in Rensselaerville and New Scotland.
Representatives have been approaching residents about leasing their properties. Shell has been tight-lipped about the project’s details, and neither town has zoning regulating the building of windmills.
Part of this project involves building on the Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area in the Helderbergs.
“I can confirm that we are active in the Albany area, and also elsewhere in the state,” Shell WindEnergy, Inc. Communications Manager Tim O’Leary told The Enterprise this week, “but, beyond that, I can’t really say anything.”
“At the present time, there’s nothing in the zoning specific to windmills, but we haven’t even entertained any application for that,” Paul Cantlin, New Scotland’s zoning administrator, said yesterday. “You’re the first to let me know about it.”
“I think it’s awful,” said Rensselaerville Supervisor Jost Nickelsberg, although he hadn’t heard about it either. “I think there are so many more efficient ways to harness energy, specifically harnessing the sun, which is far more effective, and for a longer period of time than using the winds to generate electricity.”
Nickelsberg said that he often travels to Lauterbach, a town in Germany that is ringed by these large machines. “The noise and appearance is objectionable,” he said, “and, in fact, that town has lost significant value as far as real estate and land. All the ridges surrounding the town have windmills on them, and it’s the ugliest thing you’ve ever seen.”
The plan
While some do support the use of wind energy, other residents near the proposed areas for the wind farm projects are displeased with Shell’s proposal.
“I’ve been pushing for 20 years to get wind power up here,” Steven Dickerson of Camp Winsoki Road in Rensselaerville said this week. “Most of us up here would love wind energy, I just don’t think the smaller owners think it’s a fair distribution of the proceeds,” he said.
“My neighbors have already been visited by Shell Oil representatives, and I’m scheduled to have a rep come to my house on Friday,” Dickerson said. He’ll be meeting with Kevin Johnson from Cinco, he said. Johnson didn’t return phone calls from The Enterprise.
Peter Boudreaux, who lives down the street from Dickerson, has already met twice with representatives from Cinco.
“We had a group meeting with some of the neighbors on the street,” Boudreaux said. “Shell Oil drops down to Shell WindEnergy, which drops down to Cinco Land Energy — that’s the chain of command.”
Boudreaux said that Cinco sent two representatives from Houston, Texas: Kevin Johnson and Chanon Motheral. “They’re the ones who are contracted by Shell. They gave us a contract to be reviewed,” he said.
Cinco told Boudreaux that they’re estimating these turbines to be 380 feet high, from the ground to the tip of the blades, and 20 feet around at the base. Each turbine must be at least 500 feet away from any homes.
“I asked them how noisy they are; they said, at 500 feet, it’s 45 decibels,” Boudreaux said. “I asked them what the frequency was; they wouldn’t tell me.”
He went on, “They’re talking about putting up 50 towers in two locations, 25 in each location, and roughly five acres of land are needed. Each turbine puts out two megawatts, which means 100 megawatts total.” Construction is expected to take 12 to 18 months, he said.
By signing the contract, the landowner will be agreeing to an option that gives Shell the right to build on their property for seven years, and the landowner will be paid $30 per acre. Half of the option fee will be paid upon signing, and the other half will be paid within 90 days subject to a title search.
Shell can also build a meteorological tower for a wind study on the property. The landowner will be paid $5,000 if Shell decides to build this tower.
Additionally, if the landowner wants to have the contract reviewed by a third party, Shell will pay for all the legal fees up to $2,000, whether or not the landowner decides to sign the contract.
Should Shell decide that the property is suitable for windmills, it will enter a 30-year lease, in which case the landowner will receive a fixed annual royalty payment of 4 percent of gross revenue per turbine on the property.
The lease also offers a minimum annual payment of $6,000, per turbine, per year, after commercial operation of the turbines begins; a $1,000 flat fee per year is offered before commercial operation.
“So,” said Boudreaux, “if I had one turbine on my land, and I only have nine acres, I don’t get the $5,000 signing bonus. But, if someone next to me had one turbine and had 100 acres, they’d get way more in royalties than I would,” he said.
“They don’t even do an environmental impact study until after you sign,” Boudreaux said.
Location
Two sites have been designated for the project, dubbed Site 16 and Site 10.
“Site 16 is where we live in the Helderbergs, the highest point in Albany County, just outside of Rensselaerville,” said Boudreaux. This site, he said, includes Pond Hill Road, Camp Winsoki Road, Wood Road, and Peasley Road.
“They’re proposing to put up 25 towers here,” Boudreaux said, “of which no less than three-quarters are going to go on state land.” That land, he said, is the Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area. “Among the 200 landowners they have to contact within Site 16, they’re only offering the landowners seven or eight of these windmills. And, since it’s state owned land, they have to pay taxes and all that, so the state is going to make out on it as well,” said Boudreaux. “They say it’s a done deal.”
The other site, Site 10, is designated as Wolf Hill, New Scotland, he said.
“I think it would be that ridge along Berne, just on the backside of Thacher Park,” said Boudreaux. “The map wasn’t very clear, and they wouldn’t give us the names of the other landowners of that area that they were planning on building on.”
A new proposal
Boudreaux sees no reason to sign the contract because it’s not equitable, he said. “My property value may go down, and there’s nothing in their clause saying that I can recoup my loss of property value,” he said.
Dickerson is worried, too, about reduction of property value, though wind-energy advocates call this an invalid concern.
“It seems reasonable that, if you have a huge wind turbine in your backyard, you might have issues trying to sell it,” Dickerson said.
In a letter to the Enterprise editor this week, Dickerson writes, “Shell’s proposal will reduce the values of our properties by substantial amounts, while only compensating [landowners] based solely on the number of acres and number of windmills on their land.”
The problem with this, he says, is that, while many landowners will suffer reduction of property values, those with larger acreage will receive far more income from the wind farm proposal.
He plans on making a proposal of his own when he meets with Cinco on Friday.
“I am introducing a proposal,” the letter goes on, “which probably should be a model for other wind farm proposals, which will compensate the affected property owners based on tax valuation ratios, rather than simple acreage.
“I am also proposing protection for the land owners, so that, if they choose to sell, but cannot achieve their tax valued amount, Shell Oil would have to pay them, after the sale…the difference between the sale price and the tax valuation amount,” said Dickerson.
“They’re saying anyone who has 20 acres or more, and signs off before Nov. 1, will get a $5,000 bonus,” Dickerson said this week. “I don’t know all the details yet, but supposedly they already have approval to use the [Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area] at the top of the Helderbergs, which is the highest point in the Helderbergs, other than my land. There’s a ridgeline in there that’s very conducive for wind energy,” the ridgeline being the topmost edge of a mountain ridge.
(Click to read entire article)
Representatives have been approaching residents about leasing their properties. Shell has been tight-lipped about the project’s details, and neither town has zoning regulating the building of windmills.
Part of this project involves building on the Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area in the Helderbergs.
“I can confirm that we are active in the Albany area, and also elsewhere in the state,” Shell WindEnergy, Inc. Communications Manager Tim O’Leary told The Enterprise this week, “but, beyond that, I can’t really say anything.”
“At the present time, there’s nothing in the zoning specific to windmills, but we haven’t even entertained any application for that,” Paul Cantlin, New Scotland’s zoning administrator, said yesterday. “You’re the first to let me know about it.”
“I think it’s awful,” said Rensselaerville Supervisor Jost Nickelsberg, although he hadn’t heard about it either. “I think there are so many more efficient ways to harness energy, specifically harnessing the sun, which is far more effective, and for a longer period of time than using the winds to generate electricity.”
Nickelsberg said that he often travels to Lauterbach, a town in Germany that is ringed by these large machines. “The noise and appearance is objectionable,” he said, “and, in fact, that town has lost significant value as far as real estate and land. All the ridges surrounding the town have windmills on them, and it’s the ugliest thing you’ve ever seen.”
The plan
While some do support the use of wind energy, other residents near the proposed areas for the wind farm projects are displeased with Shell’s proposal.
“I’ve been pushing for 20 years to get wind power up here,” Steven Dickerson of Camp Winsoki Road in Rensselaerville said this week. “Most of us up here would love wind energy, I just don’t think the smaller owners think it’s a fair distribution of the proceeds,” he said.
“My neighbors have already been visited by Shell Oil representatives, and I’m scheduled to have a rep come to my house on Friday,” Dickerson said. He’ll be meeting with Kevin Johnson from Cinco, he said. Johnson didn’t return phone calls from The Enterprise.
Peter Boudreaux, who lives down the street from Dickerson, has already met twice with representatives from Cinco.
“We had a group meeting with some of the neighbors on the street,” Boudreaux said. “Shell Oil drops down to Shell WindEnergy, which drops down to Cinco Land Energy — that’s the chain of command.”
Boudreaux said that Cinco sent two representatives from Houston, Texas: Kevin Johnson and Chanon Motheral. “They’re the ones who are contracted by Shell. They gave us a contract to be reviewed,” he said.
Cinco told Boudreaux that they’re estimating these turbines to be 380 feet high, from the ground to the tip of the blades, and 20 feet around at the base. Each turbine must be at least 500 feet away from any homes.
“I asked them how noisy they are; they said, at 500 feet, it’s 45 decibels,” Boudreaux said. “I asked them what the frequency was; they wouldn’t tell me.”
He went on, “They’re talking about putting up 50 towers in two locations, 25 in each location, and roughly five acres of land are needed. Each turbine puts out two megawatts, which means 100 megawatts total.” Construction is expected to take 12 to 18 months, he said.
By signing the contract, the landowner will be agreeing to an option that gives Shell the right to build on their property for seven years, and the landowner will be paid $30 per acre. Half of the option fee will be paid upon signing, and the other half will be paid within 90 days subject to a title search.
Shell can also build a meteorological tower for a wind study on the property. The landowner will be paid $5,000 if Shell decides to build this tower.
Additionally, if the landowner wants to have the contract reviewed by a third party, Shell will pay for all the legal fees up to $2,000, whether or not the landowner decides to sign the contract.
Should Shell decide that the property is suitable for windmills, it will enter a 30-year lease, in which case the landowner will receive a fixed annual royalty payment of 4 percent of gross revenue per turbine on the property.
The lease also offers a minimum annual payment of $6,000, per turbine, per year, after commercial operation of the turbines begins; a $1,000 flat fee per year is offered before commercial operation.
“So,” said Boudreaux, “if I had one turbine on my land, and I only have nine acres, I don’t get the $5,000 signing bonus. But, if someone next to me had one turbine and had 100 acres, they’d get way more in royalties than I would,” he said.
“They don’t even do an environmental impact study until after you sign,” Boudreaux said.
Location
Two sites have been designated for the project, dubbed Site 16 and Site 10.
“Site 16 is where we live in the Helderbergs, the highest point in Albany County, just outside of Rensselaerville,” said Boudreaux. This site, he said, includes Pond Hill Road, Camp Winsoki Road, Wood Road, and Peasley Road.
“They’re proposing to put up 25 towers here,” Boudreaux said, “of which no less than three-quarters are going to go on state land.” That land, he said, is the Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area. “Among the 200 landowners they have to contact within Site 16, they’re only offering the landowners seven or eight of these windmills. And, since it’s state owned land, they have to pay taxes and all that, so the state is going to make out on it as well,” said Boudreaux. “They say it’s a done deal.”
The other site, Site 10, is designated as Wolf Hill, New Scotland, he said.
“I think it would be that ridge along Berne, just on the backside of Thacher Park,” said Boudreaux. “The map wasn’t very clear, and they wouldn’t give us the names of the other landowners of that area that they were planning on building on.”
A new proposal
Boudreaux sees no reason to sign the contract because it’s not equitable, he said. “My property value may go down, and there’s nothing in their clause saying that I can recoup my loss of property value,” he said.
Dickerson is worried, too, about reduction of property value, though wind-energy advocates call this an invalid concern.
“It seems reasonable that, if you have a huge wind turbine in your backyard, you might have issues trying to sell it,” Dickerson said.
In a letter to the Enterprise editor this week, Dickerson writes, “Shell’s proposal will reduce the values of our properties by substantial amounts, while only compensating [landowners] based solely on the number of acres and number of windmills on their land.”
The problem with this, he says, is that, while many landowners will suffer reduction of property values, those with larger acreage will receive far more income from the wind farm proposal.
He plans on making a proposal of his own when he meets with Cinco on Friday.
“I am introducing a proposal,” the letter goes on, “which probably should be a model for other wind farm proposals, which will compensate the affected property owners based on tax valuation ratios, rather than simple acreage.
“I am also proposing protection for the land owners, so that, if they choose to sell, but cannot achieve their tax valued amount, Shell Oil would have to pay them, after the sale…the difference between the sale price and the tax valuation amount,” said Dickerson.
“They’re saying anyone who has 20 acres or more, and signs off before Nov. 1, will get a $5,000 bonus,” Dickerson said this week. “I don’t know all the details yet, but supposedly they already have approval to use the [Partridge Run State Wildlife Management Area] at the top of the Helderbergs, which is the highest point in the Helderbergs, other than my land. There’s a ridgeline in there that’s very conducive for wind energy,” the ridgeline being the topmost edge of a mountain ridge.
(Click to read entire article)
Carbon Tax Provisions Hidden in Bailout Bill
Perhaps one of the biggest side-effects of the Senate bailout bill passed yesterday may prove to be the carbon tax measures tucked away in its 451 pages.
News Busters reveals that Section 117 mandates a ‘carbon audit of the tax code’ to be completed within the next two years that will determine which carbon tax measures will be put into place.
SEC. 117. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to undertake a comprehensive review of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to identify the types of and specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those effects.
Among other global warming taxation pimps, Goldman Sachs, under Henry Paulson’s direction, released a statement several years ago pushing for carbon trading, stating that “voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem.” Now we are on the cusp of compulsory measures taking hold.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel indicated that these tax breaks and others were likely pass in some other legislation anyway. Forbes reports:
In 2008 another piece of major legislation was introduced: the Lieberman-Warner bill, which would implement a nationwide cap-and-trade program on carbon emissions. That would instantly change the landscape for any energy producer. The bill failed this year but is likely to return for the next Congress–both presidential candidates favor a cap-and-trade program.
Additionally, various other ‘carbon credit’ schemes and incentives have been put into place for businesses utilizing carbon mitigation, carbon sequestering, renewable energy, biofuels and/or other alternative energy sources. (Ref. DIVISION B—Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 , summary pages 114-115).
Subtitle A–Renewable Energy Incentives
Sec. 101. Renewable energy credit.
Sec. 102. Production credit for electricity produced from marine renewables.
Sec. 103. Energy credit.
Sec. 104. Energy credit for small wind property.
Sec. 105. Energy credit for geothermal heat pump systems.
Sec. 106. Credit for residential energy efficient property.
Sec. 107. New clean renewable energy bonds.
Sec. 108. Credit for steel industry fuel.
Sec. 109. Special rule to implement FERC and State electric restructuring policy.
Subtitle B—Carbon Mitigation and Coal Provisions
Sec. 111. Expansion and modification of advanced coal project investment credit.
Sec. 112. Expansion and modification of coal gasification investment credit.
Sec. 113. Temporary increase in coal excise tax; funding of Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
Sec. 114. Special rules for refund of the coal excise tax to certain coal producers and exporters.
Sec. 115. Tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration.
Sec. 116. Certain income and gains relating to industrial source carbon dioxide treated as qualifying income for publicly traded partnerships.
Sec. 117. Carbon audit of the tax code.
So the bailout will not only facilitate the government takeover of assets with broad and very unchecked power, but will pave the way to carbon taxation schemes? And how does CO2 hysteria bear any relation to our economic woes? Only in that both are movements towards greater consolidation and control.
Forcing the economy to develop a ‘carbon conscience’ not only would likely be a stumbling block to economic stimulation, but trading carbon-credits on the market seemingly puts real assets in even greater jeopardy and goes beyond leveraging and fiat federal reserve currency further into the realm of imaginary-fiction funny money– and puts globalist monopoly men one step closer to total control.
News Busters reveals that Section 117 mandates a ‘carbon audit of the tax code’ to be completed within the next two years that will determine which carbon tax measures will be put into place.
SEC. 117. CARBON AUDIT OF THE TAX CODE.
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to undertake a comprehensive review of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to identify the types of and specific tax provisions that have the largest effects on carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions and to estimate the magnitude of those effects.
Among other global warming taxation pimps, Goldman Sachs, under Henry Paulson’s direction, released a statement several years ago pushing for carbon trading, stating that “voluntary action alone cannot solve the climate change problem.” Now we are on the cusp of compulsory measures taking hold.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel indicated that these tax breaks and others were likely pass in some other legislation anyway. Forbes reports:
In 2008 another piece of major legislation was introduced: the Lieberman-Warner bill, which would implement a nationwide cap-and-trade program on carbon emissions. That would instantly change the landscape for any energy producer. The bill failed this year but is likely to return for the next Congress–both presidential candidates favor a cap-and-trade program.
Additionally, various other ‘carbon credit’ schemes and incentives have been put into place for businesses utilizing carbon mitigation, carbon sequestering, renewable energy, biofuels and/or other alternative energy sources. (Ref. DIVISION B—Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 , summary pages 114-115).
Subtitle A–Renewable Energy Incentives
Sec. 101. Renewable energy credit.
Sec. 102. Production credit for electricity produced from marine renewables.
Sec. 103. Energy credit.
Sec. 104. Energy credit for small wind property.
Sec. 105. Energy credit for geothermal heat pump systems.
Sec. 106. Credit for residential energy efficient property.
Sec. 107. New clean renewable energy bonds.
Sec. 108. Credit for steel industry fuel.
Sec. 109. Special rule to implement FERC and State electric restructuring policy.
Subtitle B—Carbon Mitigation and Coal Provisions
Sec. 111. Expansion and modification of advanced coal project investment credit.
Sec. 112. Expansion and modification of coal gasification investment credit.
Sec. 113. Temporary increase in coal excise tax; funding of Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
Sec. 114. Special rules for refund of the coal excise tax to certain coal producers and exporters.
Sec. 115. Tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration.
Sec. 116. Certain income and gains relating to industrial source carbon dioxide treated as qualifying income for publicly traded partnerships.
Sec. 117. Carbon audit of the tax code.
So the bailout will not only facilitate the government takeover of assets with broad and very unchecked power, but will pave the way to carbon taxation schemes? And how does CO2 hysteria bear any relation to our economic woes? Only in that both are movements towards greater consolidation and control.
Forcing the economy to develop a ‘carbon conscience’ not only would likely be a stumbling block to economic stimulation, but trading carbon-credits on the market seemingly puts real assets in even greater jeopardy and goes beyond leveraging and fiat federal reserve currency further into the realm of imaginary-fiction funny money– and puts globalist monopoly men one step closer to total control.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
What are the problems with wind power?
Demand for electricity varies from hour to hour, but there is a basic demand all the time. Slow fire up time means conventional power stations can’t respond to fluctuating demands so must maintain a steady base load. Wind power is only produced when the wind blows in a relatively narrow range, therefore the availability to the electrical grid surges. Conventional power stations cannot respond to the surges and must produce to meet the demand whether the wind blows or not.
It is difficult to determine when wind speed is going to be strong enough to drive the turbine. It also takes considerable wind to start the turbine turning; so many are kept rotating by drawing power from the grid. A rapid wind speed increase causes a power surge and potential widespread damage to the grid.
Conventional power stations maintain a level known as spinning standby to meet fluctuating demand. Most systems have other power stations operating on spinning standby to deal with a supply failure. Wind farms increase the risk of supply failures, which increases significantly with the percentage of power they contribute. Many countries limit the percentage of power from wind usually to about 12 to 14%.
Wind turbulence restricts the number of turbines to 5 to 8 turbines per square mile. 1700 600 KW turbines over 200 square miles are required to equal the output of a 1000 MW power station. The 600 KW output is with wind speeds between 30 and 40 mph. This reduces to 124 KW at 15 mph, which is below the average wind speed for the US. A wind speed of 15 mph would need 8,500 turbines covering 1000 square miles to produce the power of a 1000 MW conventional station. Source
Most wind turbines are only safely operated at low wind speed where they are inefficient. It is estimated an average wind speed of 14 mph is required to produce energy competitive with conventional sources. Average wind speed for the continental US is 10 mph. There are regions down the center of the country where the average is higher and where Pickens wants to place most of his turbines.
Birds and wind turbines are a lethal combination. European estimates claim losses up to 35 million birds a year. It’s reported that a wind farm at Altamont Pass, California kills thousands of birds a year, including an average of 1,000 raptors. Understandably, wind farm companies challenge the numbers and downplay the dangers. It’s a conflict for environmentalists who want wind power but don’t want to kill birds. However, there is no doubt they kill birds. Pickens’ main region for best wind speed potential coincides with the major flyway of migrating birds. Here are diagrams of the Mississippi and Central Flyways illustrating the problem. (see attached) It is a natural route for the birds, which my research shows fly 88% of the time with a tail wind. They migrate north with the southerly winds in spring and south with northerly winds in Fall.
Other environmental problems include noise pollution downwind and subsonic noise reportedly causing health problems in humans and other animals. Many consider them unsightly and even ardent environmentalist Robert Kennedy opposed tower construction near Cape Cod for that reason.
There are concerns about the tracts of land needed for extensive transmission lines over great distances, but there is a more important issue. Many potential power sites such as hydroelectric or tidal exist but they are unusable because they are remote. Line loss puts an economic limit to the distance you can transmit electricity. Loss is higher for alternating current (AC) then direct current (DC), so in some cases they produce AC, convert to DC for transmission and reconvert to AC for the grid. This is only possible with low production costs.
The need to maintain more conventional power plants for spinning standby coupled with the high construction, maintenance and operating costs of wind farms mean they do not save money or reduce conventional sources of pollution.
Richard Courtney has summarized wind power as follows; “ Wind farms are expensive, polluting, environmentally damaging bird swatters that produce negligible useful electricity but threaten electricity cuts.” Source
Even crude analysis of the costs of wind power shows it is an expensive and essentially useless alternative, incapable of producing 20% of US energy as Pickens claims. Rudimentary research reveals this information, which Pickens either ignored or did not do. Regardless, it must put his credibility and/or his real objective in question.
Others confirm the concerns about the Pickens plan beyond the wind power issues. Epstein and Ridenour title their paper “The Pickens Plan: Questions Unanswered.” Amy Ridenour, President of the National Center for Public Policy Research, says, “On the surface, Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens appears to be a man with all the energy answers” then asks, “But would the Pickens plan really work? What would it cost taxpayers? Do parts of it raise Constitutional questions? And would private parties-including Mr. Pickens himself - benefit financially?” As Ridenour notes, “The fine print must be examined. In this case, the fine print reveals the Pickens Plan requires billions in government subsidies and the widespread use of government eminent domain powers. It also would further enrich Mr. Pickens.” Source
Making money is fine and I generally agree with his proposals for natural gas, nuclear power and the need for US energy independence. What I object to is deception, especially using wind power as a cloak of green. Apparently Pickens doesn’t know or want to acknowledge the serious limitations of wind power. Finally, he wraps his cloak of green in the national flag. As Samuel Johnson said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”
Pickens has committed $58 million to sell his plan, which is a bizarre mixture of hucksterism and advocacy that will enormously benefit Mr. Pickens. Haven’t we had enough of this kind of deception from Enron through the current financial crisis and many points in between? Pickens and the public should heed Milton Friedman’s observation, “There is only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits without deception or fraud.”
It is difficult to determine when wind speed is going to be strong enough to drive the turbine. It also takes considerable wind to start the turbine turning; so many are kept rotating by drawing power from the grid. A rapid wind speed increase causes a power surge and potential widespread damage to the grid.
Conventional power stations maintain a level known as spinning standby to meet fluctuating demand. Most systems have other power stations operating on spinning standby to deal with a supply failure. Wind farms increase the risk of supply failures, which increases significantly with the percentage of power they contribute. Many countries limit the percentage of power from wind usually to about 12 to 14%.
Wind turbulence restricts the number of turbines to 5 to 8 turbines per square mile. 1700 600 KW turbines over 200 square miles are required to equal the output of a 1000 MW power station. The 600 KW output is with wind speeds between 30 and 40 mph. This reduces to 124 KW at 15 mph, which is below the average wind speed for the US. A wind speed of 15 mph would need 8,500 turbines covering 1000 square miles to produce the power of a 1000 MW conventional station. Source
Most wind turbines are only safely operated at low wind speed where they are inefficient. It is estimated an average wind speed of 14 mph is required to produce energy competitive with conventional sources. Average wind speed for the continental US is 10 mph. There are regions down the center of the country where the average is higher and where Pickens wants to place most of his turbines.
Birds and wind turbines are a lethal combination. European estimates claim losses up to 35 million birds a year. It’s reported that a wind farm at Altamont Pass, California kills thousands of birds a year, including an average of 1,000 raptors. Understandably, wind farm companies challenge the numbers and downplay the dangers. It’s a conflict for environmentalists who want wind power but don’t want to kill birds. However, there is no doubt they kill birds. Pickens’ main region for best wind speed potential coincides with the major flyway of migrating birds. Here are diagrams of the Mississippi and Central Flyways illustrating the problem. (see attached) It is a natural route for the birds, which my research shows fly 88% of the time with a tail wind. They migrate north with the southerly winds in spring and south with northerly winds in Fall.
Other environmental problems include noise pollution downwind and subsonic noise reportedly causing health problems in humans and other animals. Many consider them unsightly and even ardent environmentalist Robert Kennedy opposed tower construction near Cape Cod for that reason.
There are concerns about the tracts of land needed for extensive transmission lines over great distances, but there is a more important issue. Many potential power sites such as hydroelectric or tidal exist but they are unusable because they are remote. Line loss puts an economic limit to the distance you can transmit electricity. Loss is higher for alternating current (AC) then direct current (DC), so in some cases they produce AC, convert to DC for transmission and reconvert to AC for the grid. This is only possible with low production costs.
The need to maintain more conventional power plants for spinning standby coupled with the high construction, maintenance and operating costs of wind farms mean they do not save money or reduce conventional sources of pollution.
Richard Courtney has summarized wind power as follows; “ Wind farms are expensive, polluting, environmentally damaging bird swatters that produce negligible useful electricity but threaten electricity cuts.” Source
Even crude analysis of the costs of wind power shows it is an expensive and essentially useless alternative, incapable of producing 20% of US energy as Pickens claims. Rudimentary research reveals this information, which Pickens either ignored or did not do. Regardless, it must put his credibility and/or his real objective in question.
Others confirm the concerns about the Pickens plan beyond the wind power issues. Epstein and Ridenour title their paper “The Pickens Plan: Questions Unanswered.” Amy Ridenour, President of the National Center for Public Policy Research, says, “On the surface, Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens appears to be a man with all the energy answers” then asks, “But would the Pickens plan really work? What would it cost taxpayers? Do parts of it raise Constitutional questions? And would private parties-including Mr. Pickens himself - benefit financially?” As Ridenour notes, “The fine print must be examined. In this case, the fine print reveals the Pickens Plan requires billions in government subsidies and the widespread use of government eminent domain powers. It also would further enrich Mr. Pickens.” Source
Making money is fine and I generally agree with his proposals for natural gas, nuclear power and the need for US energy independence. What I object to is deception, especially using wind power as a cloak of green. Apparently Pickens doesn’t know or want to acknowledge the serious limitations of wind power. Finally, he wraps his cloak of green in the national flag. As Samuel Johnson said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”
Pickens has committed $58 million to sell his plan, which is a bizarre mixture of hucksterism and advocacy that will enormously benefit Mr. Pickens. Haven’t we had enough of this kind of deception from Enron through the current financial crisis and many points in between? Pickens and the public should heed Milton Friedman’s observation, “There is only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits without deception or fraud.”
AWEA Wind Power Finance & Investment Workshop
Note the list of foreign names and their company's attending a AWEA Wind Workshop.
15888 Rashid Abdul, P.E.
Gamesa Energy USA
16330 Scott Abramson
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
15967 James Adams
AWS Truewind, LLC
16318 Sunil Akole
GE Energy Financial Services
15698 Srinivas Alai
Iberdrola Renewables
16691 Daniel Alcain
Iberdrola Renewables
16935 Jeff Alliston
BP Alternative Energy North America Inc.
16698 Parthiv Amin
Winergy Drive Systems Corporation
16600 Leif Andersen
Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation
16641 Sabri Arca
Aksa Akrilik Kimya San. A.S.
15928 Hiroshi Asai
Mitsui & CO.(U.S.A.),INC.
16071 Richard Ashby
Renewable Energy Systems, Ltd.
15693 Hamed Baatout
Iberdrola Renewables
16916 Sam Badawi
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
16512 John Bain
16703 Alfred Bakos
Powersource Transportation, Inc.
16103 Carroll Beaman
American Star Energy & Minerals Corporation
16920 Randy Becker
R. W. Beck
16807 Kathy Belyeu
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16394 Peter Bender
Careba Mott MacDonald, LLC
16704 Stacie Benes
Reznick Group, P.C.
16631 David Benson
Stoel Rives LLP
16437 Charles Berckmann
Moody's Investors Service
16580 Brent Bergland
Outland Renewable Energy, LLC
16955 David Berry
Horizon Wind Energy
16357 Matthew Bertolatus
Geronimo Wind Energy
16689 Laird Bieger
Baron Capital, Inc.
16719 John Bodt
Bluewater Wind
15989 Jon Bonanno
Principle Power, Inc.
16700 John Bosche
Chinook Wind
16936 Jacques Bouthillier
Impala Asset Management
16532 David Boyce
Wind Capital Group
16735 Ted Brandt
Marathon Capital, LLC
16890 Paul Brandus
Talk Radio Network
16783 Matthew Brasler
Advantage for Analysts LLC
15855 Skip Brennan, III
Iberdrola Renewables
16654 Mr. John Brost
Outland Renewable Energy, LLC
16951 Sherri Brudner
Macquarie Cook Power
16861 Chris Cadwell
16912 David Callen
Padoma Wind Power, LLC
15611 Robert Campbell
Genivar
16311 Michael Campson
Competitive Power Ventures, Inc. - CPV
16267 Ilan Caplan
Clipper Windpower, Inc.
16324 David Capparelli
Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation
16656 Jack Cargas
Banc of America Leasing
15308 Mark Carroll
Windlab Developments USA Ltd.
16884 Andrew Chant
ORTECH Power
16919 Gilbert Chauny
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16447 Lisa Chavarria
STAHL, BERNAL & DAVIES, L.L.P.
16977 Jonathan Ching
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16530 Thompson Chris
Western Wind Energy Corporation
16863 Sarah Chuba
The Timken Company
16940 Barry Clark
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16692 Clay Coleman
Iberdrola Renewables
16076 Chuck Conlen
DTE Energy
16682 Cory Cox
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16697 Toby Cozart
Piedmont Law Partners
16559 Joseph Cruz, Jr.
Reznick Group, P.C.
15692 Kara Cubbage
RES America - Renewable Energy Systems
16767 Paul Curran
BQ Energy, LLC
16820 Joe Anthony Cusanelli
Padoma Wind Power, LLC
16659 Joshua Cynamon
Acciona Wind Energy USA, LLC
16309 Ajay Das
The Timken Company
15861 Charlie Davidson
Hilliard Energy, Inc.
16959 Eli Davis
Commerzbank
15362 Jeffrey G. Davis
McKee Nelson LLP
16508 Roger Dawson
CEI Land Surveying Group
16647 Steve Dayney
REpower USA Corp
16702 Sol De Leon
AES Wind Generation
16601 Terri Denning
Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation
16956 Jayshree Desai
Horizon Wind Energy
15895 Scott DeSilva
Avanti Wind Systems
15856 Steve Dever
Great Lakes Energy Task Force
16947 Olivier Dewez
Nature Energies, Inc.
16572 Charles Digate
Clean Energy Venture Partners
16736 Ata Dinlenc
Baker & McKenzie LLP
16305 Thomas Donoghue
Gamesa Eolica
16889 Martin Dowideit
Die Welt/Welt Am Sonntang
16948 Oliver Duguet
Nature Energies, Inc.
16494 Doug Duimering
John Deere Wind Energy
15922 Justin Dunkelberger
Penn Wind, LLC.
16853 Derek Dyson
Duncan, Weinberg, Genzer & Pembroke, P.C.
16316 John M. Eber
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16670 Daniel Edmundson
Troutman Sanders LLP
16677 Erica Egan
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16954 Edward Einowski
Stoel Rives LLP
16733 Gregg Elesh
Marathon Capital, LLC
16189 Dan Elkort
Babcock and Brown LP
16639 Chris Elrod
Element Markets, LLC
16799 Sakura Emerine
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16480 Marcia F Emmons
Renewable Energy Systems
16109 Frank A. Epps
Emergya Wind Technolgies Americas - EWT
16116 Sara Epps
Emergya Wind Technolgies Americas - EWT
16775 Patricia Farmer
Stewart Tyler
15859 Ed F. Feo
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
16745 Matt Ferguson
Reznick Group
16860 Graham Findlay
3G Energy Corporation
16308 Sean J. Finnerty
Competitive Power Ventures, Inc. - CPV
16452 Bill Fisher
Generation Energy, Inc.
16874 George Freeman
Plante & Moran PLLC
16995 Ellen Friedman
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP
16876 Rick Fruehauf
Fruehauf Production Company
16358 Alison Gardner
Stalh Bernal & Davies
16832 Bryan Gartenberg
Deutsche Bank AG
16245 Bob Gates
Clipper Windpower, Inc.
16289 Mary Geddry
Rogue River Wind, LTD
16674 Robert Giebel
Frontier Wind LLC
16727 Beind Globke
Ventotec GMBH
16931 John Gordon
BP Alternative Energy North America Inc.
16444 Krista Gordon
Iberdrola Renewables
16805 Eugene Grace
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16972 Jessica Graf
Nixon Peabody LLP
16331 Brian J. Greenman
Greenman Financial Advisors, LLC
16636 Gregory S. Grigorian
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
15296 Ken Grismore
Oak Creek Energy
16887 Nathanial Gronewold
Greenwire/Climate Wire
16857 Michael Grundmeyer
3TIER
16873 Vandana Gupta
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16790 David Halligan
First Wind
16921 Mike Hammond
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16426 Nacera Hanafi
Gamesa Energy USA
16395 Stephen Harris
Luxor Capital Group
16028 Daryl Hart
FPL Energy LLC
16939 Douglas Hechtman
BP Alternative Energy North America Inc.
15452 Linda Hicken
RMT WindConnect LLC
16531 Brian Hicks
Wind Capital Group
15613 James Highsmith
Skala
15580 Andrew Hinckley
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16895 Charles Hinckley
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16831 Arnd Hirschberg
Siemens Wind Power A/S
16634 Richard D. Homich
Advantage for Analysts LLC
16723 Albert Hong
Win & P., Ltd.
16675 George Humphrey
Andrews Kurth LLP
16359 Steven Ignelzi
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16345 Brian Ipsen
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
16740 Josh Irwin
EAPC Architects Engineers
15297 Masayuki Ito
Oak Creek Energy
16680 Stephen Ives
Cheyenne Petroleum Company
16815 Kord Jablonski
Kaintuck
16427 Kris Jacobs
Gamesa Energy USA
16633 Rich Jigarjian
Iberdrola Renewables
16625 Stark Joe
Cielo Wind Power, LP
16446 Bernice Jones
16927 Gunaratnam Joshua
Citadel Investments Corp.
15845 Jean Judson
JT Energy Development, LLC
15846 Tim Judson
JT Energy Development, LLC
16945 Manu Kalia
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16505 Rosemary Kamau
16988 Edward Kayukov
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
16383 Milone Keith
Wagner Forest Management Ltd.
16978 Benjamin D Kelahan
The Saint Consulting Group
16997 Kevin Kelly
Cielo Wind Power, LP
16687 Rich Kenny
Alternity Wind Power, LLC
16255 Dr. Dilip Khatri
URS Corporation
16981 Vidyaniwas Khetawat
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16327 Carl Kiesel
RES America Developments Inc.
16672 Ernie Kilbride
Cianbro Corporation
16993 Brittany Kindle
Heartland Renewable Energy LLC
16984 Jeramy Kindle
Heartland Renewable Energy LLC
16514 Travis Klohs
John Deere Renewables, LLC
15847 Andreas Knauer
AWEM Corp.
16925 Jerry Kooiman
PPC Construction
16985 James Kosch
Leclair Ryan Pc
16693 Kenny Kramer
Iberdrola Renewables
16994 Richard Krauze
3TIER
16449 Ranganathan Krishnan
16838 Gisela Kroess
HVB - HypoVereinsbank
16743 Vittorio Lacagnina
Babcock & Brown LP
15334 Pierre Lacombe, Eng., M.Sc., MBA
Genivar
15612 Pierre Lacombe, Eng., M.Sc., MBA
Genivar
16124 Jarrad Landry
Try Square Land Company
16313 Russell Laplante
OwnEnergy, Inc.
16747 Bennett Lasko
Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
16673 Wayne Led
Bank of America Leasing
16738 Young Ho Lee
Institute of Renewable Engergy and Environment
16806 Carl Levesque
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16791 William Lewis
NEBF
16953 Yong Li
Galileo Weather Risk Management
16741 Jim Like
Aristeo Construction Company
16923 Jose Ignacio Llorente
Gamesa Energy USA
16365 Matt Lynch
General Electric Power Systems
16880 Timothy MacDonald
Meridian Clean Fuels
15338 Shawn Mahoney
The General Investment & Development Companies
16387 Randall Male
RSE Wind
16950 Martin Malinow
Galileo Weather Risk Management
15995 Randolph Mann
Edison Mission Energy (EME)
16746 Sylvain Mansier
First Wind
15683 Trent Markell
Harris Group, Inc.
16302 Lance Marram
Gamesa Wind US LLC
16864 Keith Martin
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
15963 Carlos Martinez
16202 Paul Matthew
John Deere Renewables, LLC
15313 Andrew McCarthy
MidOcean Partners
15893 Shane McClung
Outsource, LLC
15631 Glen McCombs
North American Energy Services
16897 Chris McCormick
Gyre Capital
16493 Daniel McCrystal
Generation Energy, Inc.
16439 Billi R. McCullough
Holland & Hart LLP
16771 Amy McGinty
Iberdrola Renewables
16872 Dr. Keith McLeay
Careba Mott MacDonald, LLC
16859 Brian McNiff
McNiff Light Industry
15926 Jorge Mercado-Portilla
16836 Alan Merkle
Stoel Rives LLP
16798 Stephen Miner
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16356 Phil Mintun
Capstar Partners Llc
16730 Camelia Miu
E.ON Climate & Renewables North American Inc.
16241 Christopher Mone
Vestas Americas
16839 Michael Moore
Maverick Capital
16361 Ronald Moore
Mizuho Corporate Bank, Ltd.
16867 John Morrison
Barnard Construction Co., Inc.
16941 Ron Moschetta
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16627 Tony Muoser
HSH Nordbank
15685 Rudolph Murgo
Iberdrola Renewables
16197 Andy Murray
Babcock & Brown
15315 Frank Nash
MidOcean Partners
16870 Joe Nelson
Barnard Construction Co., Inc.
16929 Blake Nixon
Geronimo Wind Energy
16678 Michael Novack
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
15932 Mike Novello
Wagner Forest Management Ltd.
16334 James O'Connor
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16866 Elling Olson
Mortenson Construction
16251 Karen Olson
WindLogics Inc.
15788 Evan Osler
NRG Systems, Inc.
15326 Mark Osten
RMT WindConnect LLC
16854 Steven Owenson
John Deere Renewables, LLC
16774 Michael Papadakis
KeyBanc Capital Markets
16946 Glenn Payne
First Reserve Corp.
16367 Denise Person
Moody's Investors Service
16031 Jim Peters
enXco
16800 Elesha Peterson Carr
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16882 Trent Philipp
Gyre Capital, LLC
16224 Craig Poff
Iberdrola Renewables
15961 John Purcell
Leeco Steel, LLC
16695 Andrew Ragland
Vestas Americas
16368 Maria M Ramirez-Sandoval
Ubarri Construction
16363 Tushita Ranchan
Mubadala
16712 Gordon Randall
DNV Global Energy Concepts - DNV-GEC
16812 Bree A. Raum
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16804 Christine Real de Azua
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16714 Gopal Reddy
Fidelity Investments
16772 Andrew Redinger
KeyBanc Capital Markets
16779 JASON REID
INTREPID CAPITAL
16777 F. Brian Reilly
15430 Matt Riley
Infinity Wind Power, Inc.
16637 Joe Roach
Briggs and Morgan, P.A.
16922 John Roe, Jr.
16705 Katie Roek
Stoel Rives LLP
16290 Simon Root
Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.
16288 Wolfgang Rose
BV Capital
16696 Tim Rosenzweig
First Wind
16296 Dora Ross
Caprock Plains Wind Energy Association
16511 Timothy Ryan
BQ Energy, LLC
15444 Niels L. Rydder
Oak Creek Energy Systems, Inc.
16690 Michael Sams
Export Import Bank Of The Us
16847 Jeff Schlichting
HMH Energy Resources, Inc.
16776 Michael Schmid
FC Windenergy Gmbh
16671 ANU SHARMA
E.ON Climate & Renewables North American Inc.
16734 Ichiro Shukuri
Metal One Holdings America
16862 David Simkins
NRG Systems, Inc.
16938 Timothy H. Simons
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
15977 Warren Small
15894 Daniel Smartt
Energy for Generations, LLC
16943 Leslie Solomon
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16520 Rubiao Song
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16491 Benjamin Speed
Maxon
16744 Charles Spiliotis
First Wind
16865 Dany St-Pierre
Siemens Power Generation
16436 Robert Stolpestad
Exeter Realty Company
16846 Jim Stover
Northern Power Systems
16844 Steve Stroup
16685 Daniel Sturrock
Macquarie Securities (USA) Inc.
16699 Gerald Susman
Penn State University
16333 Pamela Sutton-Hall
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16701 Regina Sweet
Chinook Wind
16797 Randall Swisher
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16803 Annie R. Sznajder
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16821 Shunsuke Takahashi
Oak Creek Energy Systems, Inc.
16668 Vanessa G. Tanaka
McDermott Will & Emery LLP
16944 Russell Tencer
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16708 Dahl Thompson
Andrews Kurth LLP
16885 Mark Thuber
Andrews Kurth LLP
15904 Billy Tiller
Co-Op Wind Energy
16583 Aaron Tippie
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
16753 Steve Tonissen
SmartSignal
16888 Tyler Tringas
New Energy Finance Ltd.
15609 James T. Tynion, III
Foley & Lardner LLP
16684 Hans-Jurgen Uffhaus
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16686 Debra Urman
Sempra Energy
15892 Asit Vashisht
16729 Charles Vaughan
Clipper Windpower, Inc.
16879 Andrew Vernon
Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale New York - NORD/LB
16694 Robert M. Vilter
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP
16786 Matthew Virant
16683 Gaelle Waddington
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16445 Thomas B Walker
16595 Jon Walters
NOV
15988 Joshua Weinstein
Principle Power, Inc.
16952 Rick Weiss
Rick Weiss and Associates
15979 Adam Wenner
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
16801 Gregory Wetstone
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
15970 Eric White
AWS Truewind, LLC
15622 Jamie White
Iberdrola Renewables
16881 Sugiharto Widjaja
Fidelity Investments
16486 Joseph Wiley
Wind Energy Consulting and Contracting Inc.
16915 Robert Williams
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
15432 Johnny Winton
Blumberg Capital Partners
15402 Dr. Yi Ye
FPL Energy LLC
16842 Chad Yeftich
Maverick Capital
16784 Edward Zaelke
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
16827 Luis Zavaleta
16352 Richard Zellmer
RMT WindConnect LLC
16384 Mike Ziemke
Macquarie Securities (USA) Inc.
15888 Rashid Abdul, P.E.
Gamesa Energy USA
16330 Scott Abramson
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
15967 James Adams
AWS Truewind, LLC
16318 Sunil Akole
GE Energy Financial Services
15698 Srinivas Alai
Iberdrola Renewables
16691 Daniel Alcain
Iberdrola Renewables
16935 Jeff Alliston
BP Alternative Energy North America Inc.
16698 Parthiv Amin
Winergy Drive Systems Corporation
16600 Leif Andersen
Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation
16641 Sabri Arca
Aksa Akrilik Kimya San. A.S.
15928 Hiroshi Asai
Mitsui & CO.(U.S.A.),INC.
16071 Richard Ashby
Renewable Energy Systems, Ltd.
15693 Hamed Baatout
Iberdrola Renewables
16916 Sam Badawi
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
16512 John Bain
16703 Alfred Bakos
Powersource Transportation, Inc.
16103 Carroll Beaman
American Star Energy & Minerals Corporation
16920 Randy Becker
R. W. Beck
16807 Kathy Belyeu
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16394 Peter Bender
Careba Mott MacDonald, LLC
16704 Stacie Benes
Reznick Group, P.C.
16631 David Benson
Stoel Rives LLP
16437 Charles Berckmann
Moody's Investors Service
16580 Brent Bergland
Outland Renewable Energy, LLC
16955 David Berry
Horizon Wind Energy
16357 Matthew Bertolatus
Geronimo Wind Energy
16689 Laird Bieger
Baron Capital, Inc.
16719 John Bodt
Bluewater Wind
15989 Jon Bonanno
Principle Power, Inc.
16700 John Bosche
Chinook Wind
16936 Jacques Bouthillier
Impala Asset Management
16532 David Boyce
Wind Capital Group
16735 Ted Brandt
Marathon Capital, LLC
16890 Paul Brandus
Talk Radio Network
16783 Matthew Brasler
Advantage for Analysts LLC
15855 Skip Brennan, III
Iberdrola Renewables
16654 Mr. John Brost
Outland Renewable Energy, LLC
16951 Sherri Brudner
Macquarie Cook Power
16861 Chris Cadwell
16912 David Callen
Padoma Wind Power, LLC
15611 Robert Campbell
Genivar
16311 Michael Campson
Competitive Power Ventures, Inc. - CPV
16267 Ilan Caplan
Clipper Windpower, Inc.
16324 David Capparelli
Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation
16656 Jack Cargas
Banc of America Leasing
15308 Mark Carroll
Windlab Developments USA Ltd.
16884 Andrew Chant
ORTECH Power
16919 Gilbert Chauny
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16447 Lisa Chavarria
STAHL, BERNAL & DAVIES, L.L.P.
16977 Jonathan Ching
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16530 Thompson Chris
Western Wind Energy Corporation
16863 Sarah Chuba
The Timken Company
16940 Barry Clark
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16692 Clay Coleman
Iberdrola Renewables
16076 Chuck Conlen
DTE Energy
16682 Cory Cox
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16697 Toby Cozart
Piedmont Law Partners
16559 Joseph Cruz, Jr.
Reznick Group, P.C.
15692 Kara Cubbage
RES America - Renewable Energy Systems
16767 Paul Curran
BQ Energy, LLC
16820 Joe Anthony Cusanelli
Padoma Wind Power, LLC
16659 Joshua Cynamon
Acciona Wind Energy USA, LLC
16309 Ajay Das
The Timken Company
15861 Charlie Davidson
Hilliard Energy, Inc.
16959 Eli Davis
Commerzbank
15362 Jeffrey G. Davis
McKee Nelson LLP
16508 Roger Dawson
CEI Land Surveying Group
16647 Steve Dayney
REpower USA Corp
16702 Sol De Leon
AES Wind Generation
16601 Terri Denning
Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation
16956 Jayshree Desai
Horizon Wind Energy
15895 Scott DeSilva
Avanti Wind Systems
15856 Steve Dever
Great Lakes Energy Task Force
16947 Olivier Dewez
Nature Energies, Inc.
16572 Charles Digate
Clean Energy Venture Partners
16736 Ata Dinlenc
Baker & McKenzie LLP
16305 Thomas Donoghue
Gamesa Eolica
16889 Martin Dowideit
Die Welt/Welt Am Sonntang
16948 Oliver Duguet
Nature Energies, Inc.
16494 Doug Duimering
John Deere Wind Energy
15922 Justin Dunkelberger
Penn Wind, LLC.
16853 Derek Dyson
Duncan, Weinberg, Genzer & Pembroke, P.C.
16316 John M. Eber
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16670 Daniel Edmundson
Troutman Sanders LLP
16677 Erica Egan
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16954 Edward Einowski
Stoel Rives LLP
16733 Gregg Elesh
Marathon Capital, LLC
16189 Dan Elkort
Babcock and Brown LP
16639 Chris Elrod
Element Markets, LLC
16799 Sakura Emerine
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16480 Marcia F Emmons
Renewable Energy Systems
16109 Frank A. Epps
Emergya Wind Technolgies Americas - EWT
16116 Sara Epps
Emergya Wind Technolgies Americas - EWT
16775 Patricia Farmer
Stewart Tyler
15859 Ed F. Feo
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
16745 Matt Ferguson
Reznick Group
16860 Graham Findlay
3G Energy Corporation
16308 Sean J. Finnerty
Competitive Power Ventures, Inc. - CPV
16452 Bill Fisher
Generation Energy, Inc.
16874 George Freeman
Plante & Moran PLLC
16995 Ellen Friedman
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP
16876 Rick Fruehauf
Fruehauf Production Company
16358 Alison Gardner
Stalh Bernal & Davies
16832 Bryan Gartenberg
Deutsche Bank AG
16245 Bob Gates
Clipper Windpower, Inc.
16289 Mary Geddry
Rogue River Wind, LTD
16674 Robert Giebel
Frontier Wind LLC
16727 Beind Globke
Ventotec GMBH
16931 John Gordon
BP Alternative Energy North America Inc.
16444 Krista Gordon
Iberdrola Renewables
16805 Eugene Grace
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16972 Jessica Graf
Nixon Peabody LLP
16331 Brian J. Greenman
Greenman Financial Advisors, LLC
16636 Gregory S. Grigorian
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
15296 Ken Grismore
Oak Creek Energy
16887 Nathanial Gronewold
Greenwire/Climate Wire
16857 Michael Grundmeyer
3TIER
16873 Vandana Gupta
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16790 David Halligan
First Wind
16921 Mike Hammond
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16426 Nacera Hanafi
Gamesa Energy USA
16395 Stephen Harris
Luxor Capital Group
16028 Daryl Hart
FPL Energy LLC
16939 Douglas Hechtman
BP Alternative Energy North America Inc.
15452 Linda Hicken
RMT WindConnect LLC
16531 Brian Hicks
Wind Capital Group
15613 James Highsmith
Skala
15580 Andrew Hinckley
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16895 Charles Hinckley
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16831 Arnd Hirschberg
Siemens Wind Power A/S
16634 Richard D. Homich
Advantage for Analysts LLC
16723 Albert Hong
Win & P., Ltd.
16675 George Humphrey
Andrews Kurth LLP
16359 Steven Ignelzi
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16345 Brian Ipsen
Vestas Wind Systems A/S
16740 Josh Irwin
EAPC Architects Engineers
15297 Masayuki Ito
Oak Creek Energy
16680 Stephen Ives
Cheyenne Petroleum Company
16815 Kord Jablonski
Kaintuck
16427 Kris Jacobs
Gamesa Energy USA
16633 Rich Jigarjian
Iberdrola Renewables
16625 Stark Joe
Cielo Wind Power, LP
16446 Bernice Jones
16927 Gunaratnam Joshua
Citadel Investments Corp.
15845 Jean Judson
JT Energy Development, LLC
15846 Tim Judson
JT Energy Development, LLC
16945 Manu Kalia
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16505 Rosemary Kamau
16988 Edward Kayukov
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
16383 Milone Keith
Wagner Forest Management Ltd.
16978 Benjamin D Kelahan
The Saint Consulting Group
16997 Kevin Kelly
Cielo Wind Power, LP
16687 Rich Kenny
Alternity Wind Power, LLC
16255 Dr. Dilip Khatri
URS Corporation
16981 Vidyaniwas Khetawat
Hudson Clean Energy Partners
16327 Carl Kiesel
RES America Developments Inc.
16672 Ernie Kilbride
Cianbro Corporation
16993 Brittany Kindle
Heartland Renewable Energy LLC
16984 Jeramy Kindle
Heartland Renewable Energy LLC
16514 Travis Klohs
John Deere Renewables, LLC
15847 Andreas Knauer
AWEM Corp.
16925 Jerry Kooiman
PPC Construction
16985 James Kosch
Leclair Ryan Pc
16693 Kenny Kramer
Iberdrola Renewables
16994 Richard Krauze
3TIER
16449 Ranganathan Krishnan
16838 Gisela Kroess
HVB - HypoVereinsbank
16743 Vittorio Lacagnina
Babcock & Brown LP
15334 Pierre Lacombe, Eng., M.Sc., MBA
Genivar
15612 Pierre Lacombe, Eng., M.Sc., MBA
Genivar
16124 Jarrad Landry
Try Square Land Company
16313 Russell Laplante
OwnEnergy, Inc.
16747 Bennett Lasko
Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
16673 Wayne Led
Bank of America Leasing
16738 Young Ho Lee
Institute of Renewable Engergy and Environment
16806 Carl Levesque
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16791 William Lewis
NEBF
16953 Yong Li
Galileo Weather Risk Management
16741 Jim Like
Aristeo Construction Company
16923 Jose Ignacio Llorente
Gamesa Energy USA
16365 Matt Lynch
General Electric Power Systems
16880 Timothy MacDonald
Meridian Clean Fuels
15338 Shawn Mahoney
The General Investment & Development Companies
16387 Randall Male
RSE Wind
16950 Martin Malinow
Galileo Weather Risk Management
15995 Randolph Mann
Edison Mission Energy (EME)
16746 Sylvain Mansier
First Wind
15683 Trent Markell
Harris Group, Inc.
16302 Lance Marram
Gamesa Wind US LLC
16864 Keith Martin
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
15963 Carlos Martinez
16202 Paul Matthew
John Deere Renewables, LLC
15313 Andrew McCarthy
MidOcean Partners
15893 Shane McClung
Outsource, LLC
15631 Glen McCombs
North American Energy Services
16897 Chris McCormick
Gyre Capital
16493 Daniel McCrystal
Generation Energy, Inc.
16439 Billi R. McCullough
Holland & Hart LLP
16771 Amy McGinty
Iberdrola Renewables
16872 Dr. Keith McLeay
Careba Mott MacDonald, LLC
16859 Brian McNiff
McNiff Light Industry
15926 Jorge Mercado-Portilla
16836 Alan Merkle
Stoel Rives LLP
16798 Stephen Miner
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16356 Phil Mintun
Capstar Partners Llc
16730 Camelia Miu
E.ON Climate & Renewables North American Inc.
16241 Christopher Mone
Vestas Americas
16839 Michael Moore
Maverick Capital
16361 Ronald Moore
Mizuho Corporate Bank, Ltd.
16867 John Morrison
Barnard Construction Co., Inc.
16941 Ron Moschetta
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16627 Tony Muoser
HSH Nordbank
15685 Rudolph Murgo
Iberdrola Renewables
16197 Andy Murray
Babcock & Brown
15315 Frank Nash
MidOcean Partners
16870 Joe Nelson
Barnard Construction Co., Inc.
16929 Blake Nixon
Geronimo Wind Energy
16678 Michael Novack
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
15932 Mike Novello
Wagner Forest Management Ltd.
16334 James O'Connor
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16866 Elling Olson
Mortenson Construction
16251 Karen Olson
WindLogics Inc.
15788 Evan Osler
NRG Systems, Inc.
15326 Mark Osten
RMT WindConnect LLC
16854 Steven Owenson
John Deere Renewables, LLC
16774 Michael Papadakis
KeyBanc Capital Markets
16946 Glenn Payne
First Reserve Corp.
16367 Denise Person
Moody's Investors Service
16031 Jim Peters
enXco
16800 Elesha Peterson Carr
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16882 Trent Philipp
Gyre Capital, LLC
16224 Craig Poff
Iberdrola Renewables
15961 John Purcell
Leeco Steel, LLC
16695 Andrew Ragland
Vestas Americas
16368 Maria M Ramirez-Sandoval
Ubarri Construction
16363 Tushita Ranchan
Mubadala
16712 Gordon Randall
DNV Global Energy Concepts - DNV-GEC
16812 Bree A. Raum
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16804 Christine Real de Azua
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16714 Gopal Reddy
Fidelity Investments
16772 Andrew Redinger
KeyBanc Capital Markets
16779 JASON REID
INTREPID CAPITAL
16777 F. Brian Reilly
15430 Matt Riley
Infinity Wind Power, Inc.
16637 Joe Roach
Briggs and Morgan, P.A.
16922 John Roe, Jr.
16705 Katie Roek
Stoel Rives LLP
16290 Simon Root
Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.
16288 Wolfgang Rose
BV Capital
16696 Tim Rosenzweig
First Wind
16296 Dora Ross
Caprock Plains Wind Energy Association
16511 Timothy Ryan
BQ Energy, LLC
15444 Niels L. Rydder
Oak Creek Energy Systems, Inc.
16690 Michael Sams
Export Import Bank Of The Us
16847 Jeff Schlichting
HMH Energy Resources, Inc.
16776 Michael Schmid
FC Windenergy Gmbh
16671 ANU SHARMA
E.ON Climate & Renewables North American Inc.
16734 Ichiro Shukuri
Metal One Holdings America
16862 David Simkins
NRG Systems, Inc.
16938 Timothy H. Simons
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
15977 Warren Small
15894 Daniel Smartt
Energy for Generations, LLC
16943 Leslie Solomon
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16520 Rubiao Song
JPMorgan Capital Corporation
16491 Benjamin Speed
Maxon
16744 Charles Spiliotis
First Wind
16865 Dany St-Pierre
Siemens Power Generation
16436 Robert Stolpestad
Exeter Realty Company
16846 Jim Stover
Northern Power Systems
16844 Steve Stroup
16685 Daniel Sturrock
Macquarie Securities (USA) Inc.
16699 Gerald Susman
Penn State University
16333 Pamela Sutton-Hall
Noble Environmental Power, LLC
16701 Regina Sweet
Chinook Wind
16797 Randall Swisher
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16803 Annie R. Sznajder
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
16821 Shunsuke Takahashi
Oak Creek Energy Systems, Inc.
16668 Vanessa G. Tanaka
McDermott Will & Emery LLP
16944 Russell Tencer
Crownbutte Wind Power LLC
16708 Dahl Thompson
Andrews Kurth LLP
16885 Mark Thuber
Andrews Kurth LLP
15904 Billy Tiller
Co-Op Wind Energy
16583 Aaron Tippie
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
16753 Steve Tonissen
SmartSignal
16888 Tyler Tringas
New Energy Finance Ltd.
15609 James T. Tynion, III
Foley & Lardner LLP
16684 Hans-Jurgen Uffhaus
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16686 Debra Urman
Sempra Energy
15892 Asit Vashisht
16729 Charles Vaughan
Clipper Windpower, Inc.
16879 Andrew Vernon
Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale New York - NORD/LB
16694 Robert M. Vilter
Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner LLP
16786 Matthew Virant
16683 Gaelle Waddington
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen (Helaba)
16445 Thomas B Walker
16595 Jon Walters
NOV
15988 Joshua Weinstein
Principle Power, Inc.
16952 Rick Weiss
Rick Weiss and Associates
15979 Adam Wenner
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
16801 Gregory Wetstone
AWEA - American Wind Energy Association
15970 Eric White
AWS Truewind, LLC
15622 Jamie White
Iberdrola Renewables
16881 Sugiharto Widjaja
Fidelity Investments
16486 Joseph Wiley
Wind Energy Consulting and Contracting Inc.
16915 Robert Williams
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP
15432 Johnny Winton
Blumberg Capital Partners
15402 Dr. Yi Ye
FPL Energy LLC
16842 Chad Yeftich
Maverick Capital
16784 Edward Zaelke
Chadbourne & Parke LLP
16827 Luis Zavaleta
16352 Richard Zellmer
RMT WindConnect LLC
16384 Mike Ziemke
Macquarie Securities (USA) Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)