Monday, January 15, 2007
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Public Hearing on SDEIS Pine Hill/Lent Hill AND Dutch Hill DEIS
IMPORTANT Public Hearing on SDEIS Phase I Pine Hill/Lent Hill. Also a Public Hearing on the Dutch Hill DEIS, Phase II. Both on the same night.
A big turn out is needed.
Voice your opposition to this UPC project, place your written objections in the record.
Friday - January 19, 2006
7:00 PM to 9:00 PM
Wayland-Cohocton Elementary School
Address: 30 Park Avenue,
Cohocton, NY
A big turn out is needed.
Voice your opposition to this UPC project, place your written objections in the record.
Friday - January 19, 2006
7:00 PM to 9:00 PM
Wayland-Cohocton Elementary School
Address: 30 Park Avenue,
Cohocton, NY
Electricity Output from the Maple Ridge Windplant, 2006
Tug Hill (Lewis County), New York Electric production by Richard Bolton
Bolton%20Maple%20Ridge2.pdf
Maple Ridge has a nameplate capacity factor of 240 MW, but from the graph we see that for 40% of the quarter [July, August, September 2006] (1883 hrs), the wind farm produced a paltry 0-30 MW, or 0-12.5% of nameplate capacity. At no time did the output sustain full 240 MW. Indeed, the output was only above half the rated output 15% of the time. Bear in mind that this graph is based on transaction information.
It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Maple Ridge is a very pathetic energy producer, at least for the 3Q06 [third quarter of 2006] examined, when compared with any other industrial scale plant (hydro or thermal). Recall that 3Q06 [July, August, September 2006] saw record demand for electrical energy in NY due to the hot summer weather that year." - Calvin Luther Martin
Bolton%20Maple%20Ridge2.pdf
Maple Ridge has a nameplate capacity factor of 240 MW, but from the graph we see that for 40% of the quarter [July, August, September 2006] (1883 hrs), the wind farm produced a paltry 0-30 MW, or 0-12.5% of nameplate capacity. At no time did the output sustain full 240 MW. Indeed, the output was only above half the rated output 15% of the time. Bear in mind that this graph is based on transaction information.
It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Maple Ridge is a very pathetic energy producer, at least for the 3Q06 [third quarter of 2006] examined, when compared with any other industrial scale plant (hydro or thermal). Recall that 3Q06 [July, August, September 2006] saw record demand for electrical energy in NY due to the hot summer weather that year." - Calvin Luther Martin
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
LESS FOR MORE: THE RUBE GOLDBERG NATURE OF INDUSTRIAL WIND DEVELOPMENT by Dr. Jonathan Boone
PROLOGUE
Reuben Goldberg (1883-1970) was an American cartoonist famous for conceiving very complicated and impractical machines that accomplish little or nothing. The term “Rube Goldberg” has passed into the lexicon as shorthand for describing such machinery and their products and services. Contemporary industrial wind turbines epitomize this concept. Physically, they are taller than many skyscrapers, with 300-foot rotors that move nearly 200 miles per hour at their tips. They are usually placed in a phalanx numbering five to eight per mile, which, if erected on forested ridge tops, also require the clearcutting of at least four acres per turbine, with another 35-65 acres needed for infrastructure support. Functionally, they produce little energy relative to demand and what little they do produce is incompatible with the standards of reliability and cost characteristic of our electricity system. Moreover, wind plants are unable either to mitigate the need for additional conventional power generation in the face of increased demand or to reliably augment power during times of peak demand. Ironically, as more wind installations are added, almost equal conventional power generation must also be brought on line. Crucially important, wind technology, because of the inherently random variations of the wind, will not reduce meaningful levels of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide produced from fossil-fueled generation, which is its raison d’etre.
To understand the limitations of wind technology, one should know how energy use enables complex modern society and, especially, how energy in the form of electricity is produced and transmitted to hundreds of millions of people on demand. Enormous energies are required to support the way Americans choose to live and work. Industrial modes of transportation and heating/air conditioning technologies have made it possible for large numbers of people to live in regions historically limited to only the hardiest of souls, such as the swamplands of Florida and the ice of Alaska, while newer communication technologies have encouraged widespread development not only for residential suburbanites but commerce and industry as well. The majority of our energy use involves heating and transportation. Demand for electricity accounts for about 39 % of all energy use, even though electricity accounts for 30% of the energy used for heating. (1) We increase both our demand for energy and for electricity at a rate of approximately 2% each year, nearly doubling our consumption every 30 years, as we did from 1970 through 2000.
Electricity is the cleanest and most important form of industrial energy; its supply continuity is essential to enable and protect a vast range of services we often take for granted—modern hospitals, traffic controls, information storage and retrieval, entertainment, food storage, to name only a few. As the British engineer, David White, has written, “It is a truism that electrical power supply at a competitive cost underpins the world’s economies….”
THE GRID ENSEMBLE
Unlike the municipal water supply, electricity at industrial levels cannot be stored in reservoirs. It must be used immediately. Above all, it must be reliable, accommodating demand instantaneously, while its costs, ideally, should be affordable to all. Over the last hundred years, large regional networks known as electricity “grids” have evolved to collect, rhythmically organize, and dispatch a mixture of power sources, considering, among other things, expectations of demand levels, availability, predictability, cost, exactly balancing forecasted supply with demand at all times and transmitting power over a range of distances to a variety of users within their respective regions. In the United States., the North American Electric Reliability Council, working with its regional reliability councils, develops and monitors the reliability standards each grid’s power line owners and operators usually follow, taking into account scheduled and reasonably expected unscheduled outages while also accommodating “contingencies”—the unexpected failure or outage of a system component such as a generator, transmission line, circuit breaker, switch or other electrical element.
Although the mix of power fuels varies among grids in the United States, on the whole fossil fuels account for 70.7% of the nation’s electricity generation (coal 51.4%, natural gas 16.3% and oil 3%) with the balance coming from nuclear power (20.7%) and renewable sources (8.5%, of which 84% is hydropower).
Collectively, along with biomass, geothermal, and a few other fuels, these are known as “conventional generation.” Except for hydro, they are also called “thermal generation.”
Except for hydro, they are also called “thermal generation.” The conventional fuels heat water (or gas) to create steam that drives turbine rotors around an electro-magnetic motor. In the case of hydro, the turbines are driven by water either falling on or moving past turbine rotors. Conventional generation has a proven ability over many years to produce reliably and continuously at industrial scales. Nuclear and large coal plants, along with certain hydro facilities, are best at providing a base level of supply upon which other levels of supply can be built. Smaller conventional generators are often highly responsive to commands and can be dispatched to cover a range of tactical, even immediate, needs. In fact, this quality of “dispatchability” is highly prized by grid operators.
CAPACITY MATTERS
In grid parlance, the term “capacity” is used as a measure of firm generation and transmission capability—that is, how reliable a power source is for meeting various levels of demand in timely fashion. Each power plant is engineered to produce a specified amount of electricity over a year’s time, a concept known as its “rated or installed capacity” (also known as “nameplate” capacity). However, because of equipment damage, routine maintenance, machine or human error, etc, no machine works at full power all the time. The energy community has developed a concept known as a “capacity factor” to project the average amount of production a machine will yield in a specified amount of time; this is expressed as a fraction of rated/installed capacity. Grid system operators also use a concept known variously as “capacity credit” or “effective.
Reuben Goldberg (1883-1970) was an American cartoonist famous for conceiving very complicated and impractical machines that accomplish little or nothing. The term “Rube Goldberg” has passed into the lexicon as shorthand for describing such machinery and their products and services. Contemporary industrial wind turbines epitomize this concept. Physically, they are taller than many skyscrapers, with 300-foot rotors that move nearly 200 miles per hour at their tips. They are usually placed in a phalanx numbering five to eight per mile, which, if erected on forested ridge tops, also require the clearcutting of at least four acres per turbine, with another 35-65 acres needed for infrastructure support. Functionally, they produce little energy relative to demand and what little they do produce is incompatible with the standards of reliability and cost characteristic of our electricity system. Moreover, wind plants are unable either to mitigate the need for additional conventional power generation in the face of increased demand or to reliably augment power during times of peak demand. Ironically, as more wind installations are added, almost equal conventional power generation must also be brought on line. Crucially important, wind technology, because of the inherently random variations of the wind, will not reduce meaningful levels of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide produced from fossil-fueled generation, which is its raison d’etre.
To understand the limitations of wind technology, one should know how energy use enables complex modern society and, especially, how energy in the form of electricity is produced and transmitted to hundreds of millions of people on demand. Enormous energies are required to support the way Americans choose to live and work. Industrial modes of transportation and heating/air conditioning technologies have made it possible for large numbers of people to live in regions historically limited to only the hardiest of souls, such as the swamplands of Florida and the ice of Alaska, while newer communication technologies have encouraged widespread development not only for residential suburbanites but commerce and industry as well. The majority of our energy use involves heating and transportation. Demand for electricity accounts for about 39 % of all energy use, even though electricity accounts for 30% of the energy used for heating. (1) We increase both our demand for energy and for electricity at a rate of approximately 2% each year, nearly doubling our consumption every 30 years, as we did from 1970 through 2000.
Electricity is the cleanest and most important form of industrial energy; its supply continuity is essential to enable and protect a vast range of services we often take for granted—modern hospitals, traffic controls, information storage and retrieval, entertainment, food storage, to name only a few. As the British engineer, David White, has written, “It is a truism that electrical power supply at a competitive cost underpins the world’s economies….”
THE GRID ENSEMBLE
Unlike the municipal water supply, electricity at industrial levels cannot be stored in reservoirs. It must be used immediately. Above all, it must be reliable, accommodating demand instantaneously, while its costs, ideally, should be affordable to all. Over the last hundred years, large regional networks known as electricity “grids” have evolved to collect, rhythmically organize, and dispatch a mixture of power sources, considering, among other things, expectations of demand levels, availability, predictability, cost, exactly balancing forecasted supply with demand at all times and transmitting power over a range of distances to a variety of users within their respective regions. In the United States., the North American Electric Reliability Council, working with its regional reliability councils, develops and monitors the reliability standards each grid’s power line owners and operators usually follow, taking into account scheduled and reasonably expected unscheduled outages while also accommodating “contingencies”—the unexpected failure or outage of a system component such as a generator, transmission line, circuit breaker, switch or other electrical element.
Although the mix of power fuels varies among grids in the United States, on the whole fossil fuels account for 70.7% of the nation’s electricity generation (coal 51.4%, natural gas 16.3% and oil 3%) with the balance coming from nuclear power (20.7%) and renewable sources (8.5%, of which 84% is hydropower).
Collectively, along with biomass, geothermal, and a few other fuels, these are known as “conventional generation.” Except for hydro, they are also called “thermal generation.”
Except for hydro, they are also called “thermal generation.” The conventional fuels heat water (or gas) to create steam that drives turbine rotors around an electro-magnetic motor. In the case of hydro, the turbines are driven by water either falling on or moving past turbine rotors. Conventional generation has a proven ability over many years to produce reliably and continuously at industrial scales. Nuclear and large coal plants, along with certain hydro facilities, are best at providing a base level of supply upon which other levels of supply can be built. Smaller conventional generators are often highly responsive to commands and can be dispatched to cover a range of tactical, even immediate, needs. In fact, this quality of “dispatchability” is highly prized by grid operators.
CAPACITY MATTERS
In grid parlance, the term “capacity” is used as a measure of firm generation and transmission capability—that is, how reliable a power source is for meeting various levels of demand in timely fashion. Each power plant is engineered to produce a specified amount of electricity over a year’s time, a concept known as its “rated or installed capacity” (also known as “nameplate” capacity). However, because of equipment damage, routine maintenance, machine or human error, etc, no machine works at full power all the time. The energy community has developed a concept known as a “capacity factor” to project the average amount of production a machine will yield in a specified amount of time; this is expressed as a fraction of rated/installed capacity. Grid system operators also use a concept known variously as “capacity credit” or “effective.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Local Activists to Discuss Impacts of Wind Developments in Hornell
January 9, 2007. Hornell. To help the public understand more about the impacts wind developments will have on our local economies in Steuben County, the Steuben Greens have organized a panel discussion on wind issues with five local activists on Thursday, January 18, 2007 at 7:00 pm. The program will be held at 198 Main St. in Hornell.
Brad Jones from Naples will speak on his research into the promises of wind power. Steve Trude and James Hall from Cohocton will update us on the efforts of their group, Cohocton Wind Watch, to get more accountability in the DEIS process. Valerie Gardner and Jack Ossont from Yates County will discuss how their group, Democracy NY, works with local communities who want to reclaim decisionmaking powers.
“The Steuben Greens and almost everyone we’ve met in the county support the development of renewable energy sources, including wind energy,” said Joe Duffy from Hornell, chair of the Steuben Greens. “But we want to see it done in a way that is good for the environment and makes sense economically. This is most likely to happen when the decisions are made democratically by local communities. We have organized this program to give people a chance to discuss better ways to develop wind energy.”
“Communities in Steuben County are finding that the impact industrial wind developments will have on our local economies is more complicated than the rosy picture outlined by wind developers,” said Brad Jones. Currently, there are nine proposed wind farms in Steuben and Yates counties with a total of 519 wind turbines. Together, these projects will comprise the largest wind farm east of the Mississippi.”
“I am not a member of any advocacy group,” Jones said recently. “My wife Linda and I are lifelong environmentalists who are blessed to live at our conservation project adjacent to the state’s Hi Tor property. I have conducted extensive research and analysis of the wind energy developments proposed for our area in the belief that informed citizens who understand all sides of important issues will make decisions that are in the best interests of their families and their communities. I have been disappointed to discover that in nearly every case the benefits of wind energy are exaggerated while the actual risks and costs are overlooked or understated."
"The economics at the core of these projects are government subsidies,” said James Hall from Cohocton Wind Watch. “The fact that our region does not have consistently sufficient wind velocity to make wind generation projects economically viable is being concealed from the public and from our government officials. Wind developers should be required to show that the prevailing wind patterns are sufficient before approval of a project is granted."
"One of my fundamental objections to the wind development proposals being touted in our area by out-of-state corporate LLC shell companies is their 95% retention of cash flow revenue,” Hall added. “The insufficient revenue sharing provided in the PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) programs being offered will cause bankruptcies in our local townships as overall revenues are reduced and real estate devaluations for individual property owners as their taxes increase."
"The problem is compounded by the proposal to create Empire Zones and exempt developers from paying full industrial tax assessment rates,” said Steve Trude, President of Cohocton Wind Watch. “We have crunched the numbers, and this scheme gives wind developers a free ride at the expense of average citizens."
“Look at the facts these citizens have gathered,” said Valerie Gardner, “and then look at who gets to make the decisions about the wind developments. The citizens of the communities where the projects are located should be the ones deciding, not the unelected directors and officers of out-of-state wind development corporations.” Gardner is an attorney in private practice in Penn Yan and a long term Board Member and Co-Chairperson of the Citizens Environmental Coalition. She currently serves on the coordinating committee of Democracy NY, a not-for-profit corporation founded to encourage community education through rights based organizing. Her husband, Jack Ossont is the volunteer coordinator of Democracy NY. Ossont has been an activist for over 30 years and has served in several elected and appointed political positions including county legislator, national convention delegate and political county chairperson.
Gardner and Ossont’s group organizes weekend sessions called Democracy Schools in our region. The schools were founded by historian Richard Grossman from the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD) and attorney Thomas Linzey from the Community Environmental Defense Fund (CELDF). Democracy Schools educate citizens on the evolution of undemocratic structures in our society. Grossman and Linzey have worked with over 100 townships in Pennsylvania and elsewhere in configuring local laws to permit citizens to determine health, safety and welfare issues in their communities.
The meeting is free and open to the public. There will be time for discussion following the presentations.
For more information:
Steuben Greens, http://www.steubengreens.org
Democracy School, http://www.celdf.org
Cohocton Wind Watch, http://cohoctonwindwatch.org
Brad Jones from Naples will speak on his research into the promises of wind power. Steve Trude and James Hall from Cohocton will update us on the efforts of their group, Cohocton Wind Watch, to get more accountability in the DEIS process. Valerie Gardner and Jack Ossont from Yates County will discuss how their group, Democracy NY, works with local communities who want to reclaim decisionmaking powers.
“The Steuben Greens and almost everyone we’ve met in the county support the development of renewable energy sources, including wind energy,” said Joe Duffy from Hornell, chair of the Steuben Greens. “But we want to see it done in a way that is good for the environment and makes sense economically. This is most likely to happen when the decisions are made democratically by local communities. We have organized this program to give people a chance to discuss better ways to develop wind energy.”
“Communities in Steuben County are finding that the impact industrial wind developments will have on our local economies is more complicated than the rosy picture outlined by wind developers,” said Brad Jones. Currently, there are nine proposed wind farms in Steuben and Yates counties with a total of 519 wind turbines. Together, these projects will comprise the largest wind farm east of the Mississippi.”
“I am not a member of any advocacy group,” Jones said recently. “My wife Linda and I are lifelong environmentalists who are blessed to live at our conservation project adjacent to the state’s Hi Tor property. I have conducted extensive research and analysis of the wind energy developments proposed for our area in the belief that informed citizens who understand all sides of important issues will make decisions that are in the best interests of their families and their communities. I have been disappointed to discover that in nearly every case the benefits of wind energy are exaggerated while the actual risks and costs are overlooked or understated."
"The economics at the core of these projects are government subsidies,” said James Hall from Cohocton Wind Watch. “The fact that our region does not have consistently sufficient wind velocity to make wind generation projects economically viable is being concealed from the public and from our government officials. Wind developers should be required to show that the prevailing wind patterns are sufficient before approval of a project is granted."
"One of my fundamental objections to the wind development proposals being touted in our area by out-of-state corporate LLC shell companies is their 95% retention of cash flow revenue,” Hall added. “The insufficient revenue sharing provided in the PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) programs being offered will cause bankruptcies in our local townships as overall revenues are reduced and real estate devaluations for individual property owners as their taxes increase."
"The problem is compounded by the proposal to create Empire Zones and exempt developers from paying full industrial tax assessment rates,” said Steve Trude, President of Cohocton Wind Watch. “We have crunched the numbers, and this scheme gives wind developers a free ride at the expense of average citizens."
“Look at the facts these citizens have gathered,” said Valerie Gardner, “and then look at who gets to make the decisions about the wind developments. The citizens of the communities where the projects are located should be the ones deciding, not the unelected directors and officers of out-of-state wind development corporations.” Gardner is an attorney in private practice in Penn Yan and a long term Board Member and Co-Chairperson of the Citizens Environmental Coalition. She currently serves on the coordinating committee of Democracy NY, a not-for-profit corporation founded to encourage community education through rights based organizing. Her husband, Jack Ossont is the volunteer coordinator of Democracy NY. Ossont has been an activist for over 30 years and has served in several elected and appointed political positions including county legislator, national convention delegate and political county chairperson.
Gardner and Ossont’s group organizes weekend sessions called Democracy Schools in our region. The schools were founded by historian Richard Grossman from the Program on Corporations, Law and Democracy (POCLAD) and attorney Thomas Linzey from the Community Environmental Defense Fund (CELDF). Democracy Schools educate citizens on the evolution of undemocratic structures in our society. Grossman and Linzey have worked with over 100 townships in Pennsylvania and elsewhere in configuring local laws to permit citizens to determine health, safety and welfare issues in their communities.
The meeting is free and open to the public. There will be time for discussion following the presentations.
For more information:
Steuben Greens, http://www.steubengreens.org
Democracy School, http://www.celdf.org
Cohocton Wind Watch, http://cohoctonwindwatch.org
Monday, January 08, 2007
Sunday, January 07, 2007
Berry’s Mountain neighbors battle over road
A neighbor’s use of a little-known Pennsylvania law is wreaking havoc with Janet Greene and Randy Wolfe.
The Halifax Twp. couple live in the woods on Berry’s Mountain in northern Dauphin County. Their neighbor, Glenn R. Noblit, is demanding the right to build a private road across their land. Late last year, he sued the couple and their lawyer, Joel M. Wiest of Sunbury, for $105,000 for standing in his way.
“He wants to run a 50-foot [wide] road just behind the house,” said Greene, 50, citing Noblit’s original petition to have the private road built. “I’m not afraid of him, but I’m afraid of his actions. He thinks he can come and do whatever he wants on this property.”
(click above link to read more)
The Halifax Twp. couple live in the woods on Berry’s Mountain in northern Dauphin County. Their neighbor, Glenn R. Noblit, is demanding the right to build a private road across their land. Late last year, he sued the couple and their lawyer, Joel M. Wiest of Sunbury, for $105,000 for standing in his way.
“He wants to run a 50-foot [wide] road just behind the house,” said Greene, 50, citing Noblit’s original petition to have the private road built. “I’m not afraid of him, but I’m afraid of his actions. He thinks he can come and do whatever he wants on this property.”
(click above link to read more)
Opponents of proposed wind farm projects in the town of Prattsburgh will have their day in court by Mary Perham
January 6, 2007 The Leader steubencourier.com
Opponents of proposed wind farm projects in the town of Prattsburgh will have their day in court.
The state Appellate Court recently ruled against a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against the Steuben County Industrial Development Agency by the Advocates for Prattsburgh.
The Advocates allege SCIDA did not adequately review environmental information provided by wind farm developer EcoGen before the board gave the review its final approval late last year.
SCIDA’s approval gave EcoGen the go-ahead - with restrictions - to build 53 wind turbines in Prattsburgh. But the board said every site considered for one of EcoGen’s 400-foot high turbines must meet the same environmental guidelines as the review.
Advocates charge the final study was not adequately reviewed by SCIDA, which had the responsibility of making sure the project met state environmental standards.
SCIDA’s consultant on the environmental studies was Richard venVertloh, an engineer for LaBella Associates, in Rochester.
Allegations by the Prattsburgh group include that EcoGen provided incorrect data and that there was insufficient information on specific groundwater supplies and wells. Also, an analysis on the impact of property values was inconclusive, the group claims.
Advocates attorney Glenn Pezzulla said SCIDA should have required more exact information, such as what properties were used to determine the average effect of turbines on property values.
“Are we looking at property five miles away or next door?” he asked. “Define the area.”
Another issue that required greater scrutiny by SCIDA was EcoGen’s finding that a proposed wind farm in Prattsburgh would not have a cumulative effect with another proposed farm in the neighboring town of Cohocton.
SCIDA moved to dismiss the legal action because EcoGen was not named in the lawsuit.
The motion was first dismissed in early October by state Supreme Court Justice Harold Galloway, who is presiding over the case.
Galloway’s decision was upheld by the Appellate Court last week.
The action by the Appellate Court clears the way for Galloway’s ruling, although there’s no way to know when the ruling will be made, Pezzulo said.
“I’m not in the least bit surprised it’s taking a while,” he said. “There were voluminous papers, including an exhibit 3,000 pages long.”
Galloway’s rejection of the original dismissal motion should not be seen as an
indication of how the judge will rule, Pezzulo said.
James Sherron, SCIDA executive director said the board is now waiting for the judge’s decision.
“We’ve heard it’s not going to take that long, but it’s been quite a while already,” Sherron said.
Wind farm development in the county has been the source of controversy since they were first proposed in the town of Prattsburgh in 2002.
Supporters claim the 400- foot high turbines provide an essential source of renewable energy and local revenue.
Opponents charge the turbines do not generate significant amounts of electricity and threaten people and the environment.
The Prattsburgh lawsuit is one of three current legal actions filed by opponents of proposed wind farms in the county. Recently, new lawsuits have been filed against the towns of Howard and Cohocton.
Opponents of proposed wind farm projects in the town of Prattsburgh will have their day in court.
The state Appellate Court recently ruled against a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against the Steuben County Industrial Development Agency by the Advocates for Prattsburgh.
The Advocates allege SCIDA did not adequately review environmental information provided by wind farm developer EcoGen before the board gave the review its final approval late last year.
SCIDA’s approval gave EcoGen the go-ahead - with restrictions - to build 53 wind turbines in Prattsburgh. But the board said every site considered for one of EcoGen’s 400-foot high turbines must meet the same environmental guidelines as the review.
Advocates charge the final study was not adequately reviewed by SCIDA, which had the responsibility of making sure the project met state environmental standards.
SCIDA’s consultant on the environmental studies was Richard venVertloh, an engineer for LaBella Associates, in Rochester.
Allegations by the Prattsburgh group include that EcoGen provided incorrect data and that there was insufficient information on specific groundwater supplies and wells. Also, an analysis on the impact of property values was inconclusive, the group claims.
Advocates attorney Glenn Pezzulla said SCIDA should have required more exact information, such as what properties were used to determine the average effect of turbines on property values.
“Are we looking at property five miles away or next door?” he asked. “Define the area.”
Another issue that required greater scrutiny by SCIDA was EcoGen’s finding that a proposed wind farm in Prattsburgh would not have a cumulative effect with another proposed farm in the neighboring town of Cohocton.
SCIDA moved to dismiss the legal action because EcoGen was not named in the lawsuit.
The motion was first dismissed in early October by state Supreme Court Justice Harold Galloway, who is presiding over the case.
Galloway’s decision was upheld by the Appellate Court last week.
The action by the Appellate Court clears the way for Galloway’s ruling, although there’s no way to know when the ruling will be made, Pezzulo said.
“I’m not in the least bit surprised it’s taking a while,” he said. “There were voluminous papers, including an exhibit 3,000 pages long.”
Galloway’s rejection of the original dismissal motion should not be seen as an
indication of how the judge will rule, Pezzulo said.
James Sherron, SCIDA executive director said the board is now waiting for the judge’s decision.
“We’ve heard it’s not going to take that long, but it’s been quite a while already,” Sherron said.
Wind farm development in the county has been the source of controversy since they were first proposed in the town of Prattsburgh in 2002.
Supporters claim the 400- foot high turbines provide an essential source of renewable energy and local revenue.
Opponents charge the turbines do not generate significant amounts of electricity and threaten people and the environment.
The Prattsburgh lawsuit is one of three current legal actions filed by opponents of proposed wind farms in the county. Recently, new lawsuits have been filed against the towns of Howard and Cohocton.
Friday, January 05, 2007
Steuben Greens public information meeting - MEDIA RELEASE
Impact of Industrial Wind Developments on Local Economies and Taxes
January 8, 2007. Hornell. Local activists are finding out the impact industrial wind developments will have on our local economies is different than the rosy picture outlined in the wind developers environmental impact statements. The EIS filings made pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act are required to weigh the economic benefit of a project against its environmental impact, but the EIS filings being made by wind developers in our area do not explain how economic benefit will be obtained from the projects.
Some local residents are trying to fill this gap. The public has an opportunity to learn about their findings Thursday, January 18, 2007, at a public meeting in Hornell organized by the Steuben Greens. Brad Jones of Italy group and Steve Trude and James Hall from Cohocton Wind Watch will speak about the impact of wind developments on our local economies and taxes at the meeting, which will be held at 198 Main St. in Hornell at 7:00 pm.
The meeting is free and open to the public.
For more information about the Steuben Greens, visit http://www.steubengreens.org
For More Information: Rachel Treichler, 607-569-2114, rachel@ecobooks.com
or contact Steve Trude, James Hall and Brad Jones directly.
January 8, 2007. Hornell. Local activists are finding out the impact industrial wind developments will have on our local economies is different than the rosy picture outlined in the wind developers environmental impact statements. The EIS filings made pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act are required to weigh the economic benefit of a project against its environmental impact, but the EIS filings being made by wind developers in our area do not explain how economic benefit will be obtained from the projects.
Some local residents are trying to fill this gap. The public has an opportunity to learn about their findings Thursday, January 18, 2007, at a public meeting in Hornell organized by the Steuben Greens. Brad Jones of Italy group and Steve Trude and James Hall from Cohocton Wind Watch will speak about the impact of wind developments on our local economies and taxes at the meeting, which will be held at 198 Main St. in Hornell at 7:00 pm.
The meeting is free and open to the public.
For more information about the Steuben Greens, visit http://www.steubengreens.org
For More Information: Rachel Treichler, 607-569-2114, rachel@ecobooks.com
or contact Steve Trude, James Hall and Brad Jones directly.
Congress has extended through 2008 the 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour subsidy
For you information below are the members of congress who voted against
extension. A very interesting mix, including some of the most radical,
liberal, and conservative members of congress.
Senate Nays: 9
>Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY-)
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT-)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC-)
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK-)
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI-)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC-)
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH-)
Sen. John Sununu (R-NH-)
Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH-)
House Nays: 45
Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ-1)
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI-2)
Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA-1)
Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA-23)
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI-14)
Rep. Jim Davis (D-FL-11)
Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA-17)
Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA-51)
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA-4)
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ-7)
Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL-4)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA-36)
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL-23)
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY-22)
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ-12)
Rep. Jesse Jackson (D-IL-2)
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH-10)
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA-9)
Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA-9)
Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA-7)
Rep. James McGovern (D-MA-3)
Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA-4)
Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-FL-17)
Gwen Moore (D-WI-4)
Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA-38)
Rep. John Olver (D-MA-1)
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ-6)
Rep. Ed Pastor (D-AZ-4)
Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ-10)
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL-18)
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA-34)
Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA-39)
Rep. Bernard Sanders (I-VT-AL)
Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D-IL-9)
Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID-2)
Rep. Fortney Stark (D-CA-13)
Rep. John Tierney (D-MA-6)
Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-IN-1)
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL-20)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA-35)
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA-30)
Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL-19)
Rep. Edward Whitfield (R-KY-1)
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA-6)
extension. A very interesting mix, including some of the most radical,
liberal, and conservative members of congress.
Senate Nays: 9
>Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY-)
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-MT-)
Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC-)
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK-)
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI-)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC-)
Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH-)
Sen. John Sununu (R-NH-)
Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH-)
House Nays: 45
Rep. Robert Andrews (D-NJ-1)
Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI-2)
Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA-1)
Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA-23)
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI-14)
Rep. Jim Davis (D-FL-11)
Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA-17)
Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA-51)
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA-4)
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ-7)
Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL-4)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA-36)
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL-23)
Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY-22)
Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ-12)
Rep. Jesse Jackson (D-IL-2)
Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH-10)
Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA-9)
Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA-9)
Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA-7)
Rep. James McGovern (D-MA-3)
Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA-4)
Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-FL-17)
Gwen Moore (D-WI-4)
Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA-38)
Rep. John Olver (D-MA-1)
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ-6)
Rep. Ed Pastor (D-AZ-4)
Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ-10)
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL-18)
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA-34)
Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA-39)
Rep. Bernard Sanders (I-VT-AL)
Rep. Janice Schakowsky (D-IL-9)
Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID-2)
Rep. Fortney Stark (D-CA-13)
Rep. John Tierney (D-MA-6)
Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-IN-1)
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL-20)
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA-35)
Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA-30)
Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL-19)
Rep. Edward Whitfield (R-KY-1)
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA-6)
Next big test of power to seize property? by Warren Richey
Bart Didden wanted to put a CVS pharmacy on his property in Port Chester, N.Y. He even obtained approvals from the local planning board.
But because a portion of the CVS site was in a blighted redevelopment zone, Mr. Didden was told that planning board approval wasn't enough. He'd have to reach an understanding with a private company that had been selected by Port Chester officials to control all construction inside the renewal zone.
The developer, Gregg Wasser of G&S Port Chester, told Didden he'd have to pay $800,000 or give G&S a 50 percent stake in the CVS business. If Didden refused, Mr. Wasser said, he would have Port Chester condemn and seize his property and instead of a CVS he'd put a Walgreens drugstore on the site.
Didden refused. The next day, the Village of Port Chester began legal proceedings to seize Didden's land by eminent domain.
(click above link to read entire article)
But because a portion of the CVS site was in a blighted redevelopment zone, Mr. Didden was told that planning board approval wasn't enough. He'd have to reach an understanding with a private company that had been selected by Port Chester officials to control all construction inside the renewal zone.
The developer, Gregg Wasser of G&S Port Chester, told Didden he'd have to pay $800,000 or give G&S a 50 percent stake in the CVS business. If Didden refused, Mr. Wasser said, he would have Port Chester condemn and seize his property and instead of a CVS he'd put a Walgreens drugstore on the site.
Didden refused. The next day, the Village of Port Chester began legal proceedings to seize Didden's land by eminent domain.
(click above link to read entire article)
IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE - SDEIS Phase I
Steuben County - The Planning Board of the Town of Cohocton, as lead agency, has accepted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Cohocton Wind Power Project. A public hearing on the Draft EIS will be held on January 19, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. at the Wayland-Cohocton Elementary School, 30 Park Avenue, Cohocton, New York. Public comments will be accepted until February 1, 2007. The action involves Site Plan and Special Use Permit approval and all the permits and approvals necessary to construct and operate a wind-powered generating facility consisting of up to thirty-six (36) turbines with a capacity of up to ninety (90) megawatts, a 115 kV overhead transmission line, interconnect substation, collection substation, operations and maintenance building, electrical collection system, gravel access roads and necessary public road improvements, and up to three meteorological towers, on approximately 5,700 acres of private lands. The project is located in the Town of Cohocton, County of Steuben, State of New York. The turbines are proposed to be located primarily along Pine Hill and Lent Hill northeast of the Village of Cohocton. The transmission line will be located through the Cohocton River Valley south of the turbine area.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Dutch Hill Wind Turbines - Video
The view of industrial wind turbines on Dutch Hill, Cohocton, NY if the UPC project is built. Only a small section of the sixteen 2.5 MW 423 feet high towers.
Thirty-six more slated for the Pine Hill/Lent Hill section.
Thirty-six more slated for the Pine Hill/Lent Hill section.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)