VAD%20press%20release%205-31-07.pdf
PRESS RELEASE
May 31, 2007
Issued by
Professor Mariana Alves-Pereira
School of Health Sciences (ERISA)
Lusofona University
Portugal
and/
Department of Environmental Sciences & Engineering
New University of Lisbon
Portugal
Nuno Castelo Branco, MD
Surgical Pathologist
President, Scientific Board
Center for Human Performance (CPH)
The Center for Human Performance is a civilian, non-profit organization dedicated to research in vibro-acoustic disease. CPH was founded in 1992 and has been the organization which coordinates all the different teams that work on vibro-acoustic disease research, and that include (in Portugal) the cardiology and pulmonary departments of the Cascais Hospital, the neurophysiology department of the National Institute of Cancer, the department of human genetics of the National Institute of Public Health, the department of speech pathology of the School of Health Sciences of the Polytechnical Institute of Setúbal, among several others over the past 25 years.
Contact: Professor Alves-Pereira, vibroacoustic.disease@gmail.com
Excessive exposure to infrasound and low frequency noise (ILFN, defined as all acoustical phenomena occurring at or below the frequency bands of 500 Hz) can cause vibro-acoustic disease (VAD).1
Research into VAD has been ongoing since 1980, conducted by a multidisciplinary team of scientists led by pathologist Nuno Castelo Branco, MD. In March 2007, for the first time, the Portuguese National Center for Occupational Diseases gave 100% professional disability to a 40-year-old flight attendant who had been diagnosed with VAD since 2001. Two other VAD patients also have been given a similar disability status.
Initially, only ILFN-rich occupational environments were investigated. However, over the past several years, many individuals and their families have approached our team because of the ILFN contaminant in their homes. The sources of residential ILFN vary from industrial complexes, to large volume highways, to public transportation systems, etc.
In a case study published in Proceedings of Internoise 2004 (an annual scientific meeting dedicated to all aspects of acoustics), one of the first documented cases of environmental VAD was reported in a family of four, exposed to the ILFN produced by a nearby port grain terminal.2
Over the past three years, several families have contacted this team complaining of noise caused by the proximity of industrial wind turbines (windmills). However, only within this past month (April 2007) has this team obtained detailed acoustical measurements within a home surrounded by four recently installed industrial windmills.
This acoustical data was essential in order to compare in-home, windmill-produced acoustical environments with the residential, ILFN-rich environments that are known to be conducive to VAD.
The levels of ILFN inside the windmill-surrounded home are larger than those obtained in the home contaminated by the port grain terminal.
The scientific report on this will be formally presented at Internoise 2007, to be held on 28-31 August in Istanbul, Turkey.3
These results irrefutably demonstrate that wind turbines in the proximity of residential areas produce acoustical environments that can lead to the development of VAD in nearby home-dwellers.
In order to protect Public Health, ILFN-producing devices must not be placed in locations that will contaminate residential areas with this agent of disease.
1 Castelo Branco NAA, Alves-Pereira M. (2004) Vibroacoustic disease. Noise & Health 2004; 6(23): 3-20.
2 Castelo Branco NAA, Araujo A., Joanaz de Melo J, Alves-Pereira M. (2004) Vibroacoustic disease in a 10-year-old male. Proc. Internoise 2004, Prague, Czech Republic, August 22-25, 2004: No. 634 (7 pages).
3 www.internoise2007.org.tr
Saturday, June 09, 2007
Friday, June 08, 2007
Maple Ridge Wind Farm Completes First Year of Study
New York’s Largest Wind Farm Conducts Most Extensive Evaluation of Birds and Bats for a Wind Project in the Eastern U.S.
LOWVILLE, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--In order to demonstrate their commitment to the environment, the Maple Ridge Wind Farm and its owners, PPM Energy and Horizon Wind Energy are conducting the most extensive post-construction avian and bat mortality studies ever performed at an eastern United States wind project.
The project today released the “Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Post-construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study — 2006” prepared by the consulting firm Curry and Kerlinger (May, 2007). The study concluded that “bird and bat fatalities found at the Maple Ridge turbines were within the range of fatalities found during late summer and fall migration at turbines in the United States.”
Because the project itself was not operational until mid-2006, the report did not cover portions of the spring bird migration, and thus definitive estimates of bird mortality are not yet available. However, the bird carcasses that were found during the study included no species listed in state or federal endangered species lists, and only one raptor, an American kestrel. The study found that “as with most turbine facilities across the United States, the number of fatalities of night migrants was fairly low at the Maple Ridge facility....the numbers were especially small in comparison with fatality rates of these birds at tall, guyed communication towers in the Midwestern and eastern United States, where fatalities sometimes involve hundreds or even thousands of birds in a single night or migration season.”
For bats, the June to November study covered an estimate 90 percent of the period during which bats are at risk and resulted in an estimated 9.2 to 14.9 bats per megawatt per season. Although higher than predicted in pre-project studies this rate is, according to the study, lower than rates reported from Appalachian Ridges. The mix of species identified included a similar mix of species found during other wind project mortality surveys, with the largest number of incidents among hoary bats, with smaller numbers of silver-haired, little brown, red and other relatively common bat species. No bat species listed in state or federal endangered species lists were found.
A multi-agency public/private team conducted the first year of a four-year study using methodology defined by the Project Technical Advisory Committee, which is comprised of the following membership: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York State Audubon Society, Curry and Kerlinger (responsible for implementing the design and execution of the study), Environmental Design & Research (responsible for environmental studies to support permitting for Maple Ridge Wind Farm), PPM Energy and Horizon Wind Energy. Dr. James Gibbs of State University of New York Environmental Science and Forestry was the consultant for statistical review.
The 2006 study protocol was as follows:
50 turbines and two meteorological towers were included in the survey. (Ten turbines and one meteorological tower were checked daily, 10 turbines and one meteorological tower were checked every third day and 30 turbines are checked weekly.)
Turbines were selected randomly, but included all representative habitat types for the project.
Grass and other vegetation beneath the turbines were cut or cleared regularly to make it easy for searchers to find dead bats. Searcher efficiency and scavenging rate studies were also performed.
Any carcasses found were collected and frozen for identification by experts. Bat carcasses were subject to genetic testing for species identification, radioisotope testing for determining areas of origin and mercury testing to determine bioaccumulation of pollution from fossil-burning power plants.
“The information we collect at Maple Ridge will be used to help make wind farms in New York State and across the country safer for birds and bats and help us better assess sites for new wind projects,” said Horizon Wind Energy development director Patrick Doyle.
In addition, the Maple Ridge Wind Farm is working closely with the New York State Energy Research and Development, Authority (NYSERDA) to facilitate NYSERDA-funded advanced radar analysis of bird and bat migration at Maple Ridge, planned for the migrations seasons of 2007 and 2008.
“On top of this extensive monitoring, the Maple Ridge Wind Farm is working with the Bat Wind Energy Cooperative and researchers from Bat Conservation International to see if we can field test experimental bat deterrent devices at Maple Ridge during the summer of 2007,” said Andy Linehan, PPM Energy’s director of wind permitting.
Final bird and bat mortality figures from the study have been posted on the Maple Ridge Wind Farm Web site www.mapleridgewind.com.
In addition to the post-construction studies described above, Maple Ridge also conducted a summer bat study, a fall migration radar and night vision study, Phase I Avian Risk Assessment, and a Breeding Bird Survey before the project was approved for construction. Additionally, Maple Ridge contributed significant funding to state agency efforts for a Spring Indiana Bat dispersal study and has completed one year of the on-site study of grassland birds and their habitat.
LOWVILLE, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--In order to demonstrate their commitment to the environment, the Maple Ridge Wind Farm and its owners, PPM Energy and Horizon Wind Energy are conducting the most extensive post-construction avian and bat mortality studies ever performed at an eastern United States wind project.
The project today released the “Annual Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Post-construction Bird and Bat Fatality Study — 2006” prepared by the consulting firm Curry and Kerlinger (May, 2007). The study concluded that “bird and bat fatalities found at the Maple Ridge turbines were within the range of fatalities found during late summer and fall migration at turbines in the United States.”
Because the project itself was not operational until mid-2006, the report did not cover portions of the spring bird migration, and thus definitive estimates of bird mortality are not yet available. However, the bird carcasses that were found during the study included no species listed in state or federal endangered species lists, and only one raptor, an American kestrel. The study found that “as with most turbine facilities across the United States, the number of fatalities of night migrants was fairly low at the Maple Ridge facility....the numbers were especially small in comparison with fatality rates of these birds at tall, guyed communication towers in the Midwestern and eastern United States, where fatalities sometimes involve hundreds or even thousands of birds in a single night or migration season.”
For bats, the June to November study covered an estimate 90 percent of the period during which bats are at risk and resulted in an estimated 9.2 to 14.9 bats per megawatt per season. Although higher than predicted in pre-project studies this rate is, according to the study, lower than rates reported from Appalachian Ridges. The mix of species identified included a similar mix of species found during other wind project mortality surveys, with the largest number of incidents among hoary bats, with smaller numbers of silver-haired, little brown, red and other relatively common bat species. No bat species listed in state or federal endangered species lists were found.
A multi-agency public/private team conducted the first year of a four-year study using methodology defined by the Project Technical Advisory Committee, which is comprised of the following membership: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York State Audubon Society, Curry and Kerlinger (responsible for implementing the design and execution of the study), Environmental Design & Research (responsible for environmental studies to support permitting for Maple Ridge Wind Farm), PPM Energy and Horizon Wind Energy. Dr. James Gibbs of State University of New York Environmental Science and Forestry was the consultant for statistical review.
The 2006 study protocol was as follows:
50 turbines and two meteorological towers were included in the survey. (Ten turbines and one meteorological tower were checked daily, 10 turbines and one meteorological tower were checked every third day and 30 turbines are checked weekly.)
Turbines were selected randomly, but included all representative habitat types for the project.
Grass and other vegetation beneath the turbines were cut or cleared regularly to make it easy for searchers to find dead bats. Searcher efficiency and scavenging rate studies were also performed.
Any carcasses found were collected and frozen for identification by experts. Bat carcasses were subject to genetic testing for species identification, radioisotope testing for determining areas of origin and mercury testing to determine bioaccumulation of pollution from fossil-burning power plants.
“The information we collect at Maple Ridge will be used to help make wind farms in New York State and across the country safer for birds and bats and help us better assess sites for new wind projects,” said Horizon Wind Energy development director Patrick Doyle.
In addition, the Maple Ridge Wind Farm is working closely with the New York State Energy Research and Development, Authority (NYSERDA) to facilitate NYSERDA-funded advanced radar analysis of bird and bat migration at Maple Ridge, planned for the migrations seasons of 2007 and 2008.
“On top of this extensive monitoring, the Maple Ridge Wind Farm is working with the Bat Wind Energy Cooperative and researchers from Bat Conservation International to see if we can field test experimental bat deterrent devices at Maple Ridge during the summer of 2007,” said Andy Linehan, PPM Energy’s director of wind permitting.
Final bird and bat mortality figures from the study have been posted on the Maple Ridge Wind Farm Web site www.mapleridgewind.com.
In addition to the post-construction studies described above, Maple Ridge also conducted a summer bat study, a fall migration radar and night vision study, Phase I Avian Risk Assessment, and a Breeding Bird Survey before the project was approved for construction. Additionally, Maple Ridge contributed significant funding to state agency efforts for a Spring Indiana Bat dispersal study and has completed one year of the on-site study of grassland birds and their habitat.
Wind Power Ethics Group can sue ZBA
CAPE VINCENT — A state Supreme Court judge has ruled the Wind Power Ethics Group and one of its members can challenge the town Zoning Board of Appeals' decision that a proposed wind turbine project is a utility subject only to a site plan review. …
Watertown Daily Times, Watertown, NY
Watertown Daily Times, Watertown, NY
SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA
JEROME E. BURCH, LEVI MILLER, FRANK FITZPATRICK,
CHARLES E. THOMAS, RICHARD FIEDLER, ROBERT F. HURLEY,
AND JOHN T. MITCHELL,
Plaintiffs Below, Appellants
v.
NEDPOWER MOUNT STORM, LLC AND SHELL WINDENERGY, INC.,
Defendants Below, Appellees
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, having found no basis in law for the circuit court’s ruling that
dismissed on the pleadings the appellants’ nuisance claim for an injunction, we reverse the April 7, 2006, order of the Circuit Court of Grant County, and we remand this case to the circuit court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
(Click to read pdf file of decision)
CHARLES E. THOMAS, RICHARD FIEDLER, ROBERT F. HURLEY,
AND JOHN T. MITCHELL,
Plaintiffs Below, Appellants
v.
NEDPOWER MOUNT STORM, LLC AND SHELL WINDENERGY, INC.,
Defendants Below, Appellees
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, having found no basis in law for the circuit court’s ruling that
dismissed on the pleadings the appellants’ nuisance claim for an injunction, we reverse the April 7, 2006, order of the Circuit Court of Grant County, and we remand this case to the circuit court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
(Click to read pdf file of decision)
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Say NO to New Federal Rules To Approve Massive Power Lines!
Federal Department of Energy Hearing on new Federal Eminent Domain Rules for Power Lines
Tuesday, June 12th - 1 pm to 7 pm
RIT Inn & Conference Center
5257 West Henrietta Road
West Henrietta, NY 14586
What You Can Do:
1. Speak at the U.S. Department of Energy Hearing - register now < http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/registration.shtml>
2. Send written comments now to the Dept. of Energy. Tell them to stop taking us backwards, to cancel the power line proposal,
and to work on smart energy solutions that will help us stop global warming. < http://nietc.anl.gov/involve/comments/index.cfm>
3. Spread the word! Tell everyone to attend the hearing and submit comments.
Power Line Corridors: What's at stake?
The energy industry wants massive new transmission lines to carry electricity from coal plants. Now the Bush Administration proposes bypassing local and state regulations to declare huge areas, including the entire state of New Jersey and most of New York and Pennsylvania, as "corridors," allowing power companies to take private land to build the power lines.
The "Corridor" designation would allow the federal government to override state and local government powers to review and permit transmission lines. The federal government would also be allowed to override state and local energy plans. Above all, backers of this provision believe that energy companies should be allowed to construct power lines and pipelines anywhere they see fit in order to increase their own profits, regardless of what's in the public interest.
More coal fired power plants in the Midwest and South will greatly increase air pollution in the northeast. More power plants will also create more greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Instead of building more power plants, the federal Department of Energy should be pushing aggressive energy efficiency and renewable energy programs that would make
new transmission lines unnecessary.
Come to the hearing and help us tell the Federal DOE:
* Withdraw the proposed rules to create "National Interest Electric Transmissions Corridors"
* Preserve state and local powers to review and permit transmission lines
* Repeal the federal legislation that gave the federal Department of Energy power of eminent domain over state and local government should be repealed - Section 1221 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
* Adopt aggressive energy efficiency and renewable energy programs to fight global warming, save money, create jobs and eliminate the need for new power plants
More details:
* Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope's blog on the politics of the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors - 'Mindlesser and Mindlesser’: http://www.sierraclub.org/carlpope/2007/05/mindlesser-and-mindlesser.asp
* U.S. Department of Energy's website for the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors and Congestion Study www.nietc.anl.gov/congestionstudy/index.cfm
* Map depiction of "Draft Mid-Atlantic National Corridor," www.nietc.anl.gov/documents/docs/DraftMidAtlanticCorridor.pdf
Contact Information: For more info contact Bob Muldoon at 212/791-3600, x32 or email Bob.Muldoon@sierraclub.org
Tuesday, June 12th - 1 pm to 7 pm
RIT Inn & Conference Center
5257 West Henrietta Road
West Henrietta, NY 14586
What You Can Do:
1. Speak at the U.S. Department of Energy Hearing - register now < http://www.energetics.com/NIETCpublicmeetings/registration.shtml>
2. Send written comments now to the Dept. of Energy. Tell them to stop taking us backwards, to cancel the power line proposal,
and to work on smart energy solutions that will help us stop global warming. < http://nietc.anl.gov/involve/comments/index.cfm>
3. Spread the word! Tell everyone to attend the hearing and submit comments.
Power Line Corridors: What's at stake?
The energy industry wants massive new transmission lines to carry electricity from coal plants. Now the Bush Administration proposes bypassing local and state regulations to declare huge areas, including the entire state of New Jersey and most of New York and Pennsylvania, as "corridors," allowing power companies to take private land to build the power lines.
The "Corridor" designation would allow the federal government to override state and local government powers to review and permit transmission lines. The federal government would also be allowed to override state and local energy plans. Above all, backers of this provision believe that energy companies should be allowed to construct power lines and pipelines anywhere they see fit in order to increase their own profits, regardless of what's in the public interest.
More coal fired power plants in the Midwest and South will greatly increase air pollution in the northeast. More power plants will also create more greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Instead of building more power plants, the federal Department of Energy should be pushing aggressive energy efficiency and renewable energy programs that would make
new transmission lines unnecessary.
Come to the hearing and help us tell the Federal DOE:
* Withdraw the proposed rules to create "National Interest Electric Transmissions Corridors"
* Preserve state and local powers to review and permit transmission lines
* Repeal the federal legislation that gave the federal Department of Energy power of eminent domain over state and local government should be repealed - Section 1221 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
* Adopt aggressive energy efficiency and renewable energy programs to fight global warming, save money, create jobs and eliminate the need for new power plants
More details:
* Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope's blog on the politics of the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors - 'Mindlesser and Mindlesser’: http://www.sierraclub.org/carlpope/2007/05/mindlesser-and-mindlesser.asp
* U.S. Department of Energy's website for the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors and Congestion Study www.nietc.anl.gov/congestionstudy/index.cfm
* Map depiction of "Draft Mid-Atlantic National Corridor," www.nietc.anl.gov/documents/docs/DraftMidAtlanticCorridor.pdf
Contact Information: For more info contact Bob Muldoon at 212/791-3600, x32 or email Bob.Muldoon@sierraclub.org
Public Service Commission Evidentiary Hearing June 6, 2007
Yesterday 6/6/07 an Evidentiary Hearing was conducted by a Department of Public Service (DPS) Law Judge in Bath. The hearing was held because Cohocton Wind Watch and Advocates for Prattsburgh, two groups advocating for the proper siting of industrial wind turbines to protect the health and safety of residents of the State of New York, had objected to the request by UPC Wind for a certificate of necessity from the PSC. Earlier a Commissioner had denied UPC’s request for expedited review and ordered the hearing.
Testimony was submitted by UPC employees and consultants as well as Cohocton Wind Watch and Advocates for Prattsburgh. The Town of Naples and NYSEG were also involved as intervenors in the hearing.
The two central issues of the hearing were the Clipper Liberty 2.5MW turbines and their certification and reliability to provide safe energy as well as the design and layout of the substations for the Cohocton Wind project and the 115kv transmission lines.
Under oath it was stated repeatedly that the project is still in the design stage. There are many issues still not resolved with components of the project. Largely permission from landowners for the overhead transmission lines is causing problems with the layout. There may also be a problem with turbine leases not being obtained and filed in a legal manner. UPC was lacking many of the documents that the PSC staff had requested from them. At one point the issue of a report possibly being too costly to provide was discussed by Mr. Swartley. The company also claims not to have the results of geological tests conducted at the turbine sites available at this time. Wind data as well as turbine reliability information is confidential according to testimony.
The hearing seems to have raised more questions than answers. Since the project is not yet finalized it would seem many more site plan reviews and public hearings may yet to be conducted.
Testimony was submitted by UPC employees and consultants as well as Cohocton Wind Watch and Advocates for Prattsburgh. The Town of Naples and NYSEG were also involved as intervenors in the hearing.
The two central issues of the hearing were the Clipper Liberty 2.5MW turbines and their certification and reliability to provide safe energy as well as the design and layout of the substations for the Cohocton Wind project and the 115kv transmission lines.
Under oath it was stated repeatedly that the project is still in the design stage. There are many issues still not resolved with components of the project. Largely permission from landowners for the overhead transmission lines is causing problems with the layout. There may also be a problem with turbine leases not being obtained and filed in a legal manner. UPC was lacking many of the documents that the PSC staff had requested from them. At one point the issue of a report possibly being too costly to provide was discussed by Mr. Swartley. The company also claims not to have the results of geological tests conducted at the turbine sites available at this time. Wind data as well as turbine reliability information is confidential according to testimony.
The hearing seems to have raised more questions than answers. Since the project is not yet finalized it would seem many more site plan reviews and public hearings may yet to be conducted.
The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis by Mike Whitney
ALL:
The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis by Mike Whitney
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=22355
This article is not on WIND but underscores the nature of the global monitory scam that drive the global warming hysteria in order to achieve this conclusion: “Maybe this will finally convince the dozy American public that the corporatists who run Washington are a disloyal gaggle of traitorous swine. “Globalization” is public relations swindle designed to steal jobs, plunder the economy, and shift wealth to ruling elites."
In order to understand the reality of DC politics in Committee chairman backs off rules for wind turbines
http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/E7273DB4-B683-4438-B1ED-C7BB4B7E1AE2/
one needs to link the global warming mantra as the excuse for further economic globalization of the world economy.
“Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., had put into an energy bill a requirement that the Interior Department regulate the siting and operation of energy wind turbines to ensure the safety of wildlife.
His action unleashed intense lobbying by the wind industry and renewable energy advocates, who argued that such restrictions would stop wind farm development at a time when wind is viewed as the most viable renewable alternative to fossil fuels and nuclear power for producing electricity.”
From - The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis:
“The name of the game now is to keep the stock market flying-high for as long as possible while the transfer of wealth continues unabated. That means the hucksters on Wall Street will have to devise even better scams for expanding debt---increasing margin limits, escalating derivatives trading, loosening accounting standards, inflating the booming hedge fund industry, and---the new darling of Wall Street---increasing the mega-mergers, the biggest swindle of all.”
The point in The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis article is that the debt far surpasses the economic means of repayment. WIND projects are a prime example of this principle. Only a hyper inflation increase in electric rates could offer any prospects of paying for industrial wind projects. The wealth transfer to developers, underwritten by public subsidy and paid for by taxpayers and consumers is part of the global scheme to impoverish ordinary people.
When combating destructive Wind Projects, raise the link to the hucksters on Wall Street that are devising even better scams for expanding debt . . .
James Hall
The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis by Mike Whitney
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=22355
This article is not on WIND but underscores the nature of the global monitory scam that drive the global warming hysteria in order to achieve this conclusion: “Maybe this will finally convince the dozy American public that the corporatists who run Washington are a disloyal gaggle of traitorous swine. “Globalization” is public relations swindle designed to steal jobs, plunder the economy, and shift wealth to ruling elites."
In order to understand the reality of DC politics in Committee chairman backs off rules for wind turbines
http://clipmarks.com/clipmark/E7273DB4-B683-4438-B1ED-C7BB4B7E1AE2/
one needs to link the global warming mantra as the excuse for further economic globalization of the world economy.
“Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., had put into an energy bill a requirement that the Interior Department regulate the siting and operation of energy wind turbines to ensure the safety of wildlife.
His action unleashed intense lobbying by the wind industry and renewable energy advocates, who argued that such restrictions would stop wind farm development at a time when wind is viewed as the most viable renewable alternative to fossil fuels and nuclear power for producing electricity.”
From - The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis:
“The name of the game now is to keep the stock market flying-high for as long as possible while the transfer of wealth continues unabated. That means the hucksters on Wall Street will have to devise even better scams for expanding debt---increasing margin limits, escalating derivatives trading, loosening accounting standards, inflating the booming hedge fund industry, and---the new darling of Wall Street---increasing the mega-mergers, the biggest swindle of all.”
The point in The Impending Global Liquidity Crisis article is that the debt far surpasses the economic means of repayment. WIND projects are a prime example of this principle. Only a hyper inflation increase in electric rates could offer any prospects of paying for industrial wind projects. The wealth transfer to developers, underwritten by public subsidy and paid for by taxpayers and consumers is part of the global scheme to impoverish ordinary people.
When combating destructive Wind Projects, raise the link to the hucksters on Wall Street that are devising even better scams for expanding debt . . .
James Hall
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Study Shows Windmills Kill Hundreds Of Birds & Bats
The final results of a study on the Maple Ridge Wind Farm's impact on wildlife will be released this Friday. Initial reports show the turbines on the Tug Hill Plateau are killing hundreds of birds and bats.
A consultants' report for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy identified 123 birds, mostly night migrants, and 326 bats found dead over the course of five months beneath 50 wind turbines on the plateau.
"With any tall construction, there has always been a collision impact with birds and bats, but it is still important to study it further," said biologist Aaftab Jain.
About two-thirds of the dead birds found from July through November were songbirds, and 82 percent were night migrants, the report said.
Almost one-third of the windmills have flashing red aviation warning beacons.
The study, prepared by consultants Curry & Kerlinger, said there was no clear evidence the lights attracted birds and bats.
The report said the turbines are less deadly to wildlife than taller communications towers, and flashing beacons are less attractive than steady burning lights.
Scientists said bats are colliding with turbines for reasons nobody can explain.
"There may be some bat deterrent devices that could help here. We're certainly looking into the possibility of testing some of those devices," said Patrick Doyle of Horizon Energy.
The ongoing study at the largest wind farm in New York state is required to assess its environmental impact. The initial results were distributed to state and federal wildlife and energy officials.
The Adirondack Council repeated concerns that wind farms have been proposed in a virtual ring around the 6 million-acre Adirondack Park. The group says the threat to migratory birds needs to be better studied before towers are built.
A National Research Council panel reported to Congress this month that wind farms could generate up to 7 percent of U.S. electricity in 15 years.
But it said too little is yet known about the risk to birds and bats.
At Maple Ridge, the wind turbines have 262-foot towers, three 134-foot blades that turn between 12 and 20 rpm (more than 130 mph at their tips), and a generator in the base, according to the company.
They have a maximum height of 400 feet, are painted white and each can produce up to 1.65 megawatts of electricity. On an annual basis, they operate at about 30 percent of capacity.
Share your thoughts. Send us an E-mail by clicking here. So we can verify that you're the one who actually sent the E-mail, please leave us a valid phone number and name. We may use a portion of your comments on Your Turn With Diane Rutherford seen on 7 News At 6 every Monday. If you don't want us to use your name on the air, tell us and we won't. Anonymous comments and emails without phone numbers will not be used.
A consultants' report for PPM Energy and Horizon Energy identified 123 birds, mostly night migrants, and 326 bats found dead over the course of five months beneath 50 wind turbines on the plateau.
"With any tall construction, there has always been a collision impact with birds and bats, but it is still important to study it further," said biologist Aaftab Jain.
About two-thirds of the dead birds found from July through November were songbirds, and 82 percent were night migrants, the report said.
Almost one-third of the windmills have flashing red aviation warning beacons.
The study, prepared by consultants Curry & Kerlinger, said there was no clear evidence the lights attracted birds and bats.
The report said the turbines are less deadly to wildlife than taller communications towers, and flashing beacons are less attractive than steady burning lights.
Scientists said bats are colliding with turbines for reasons nobody can explain.
"There may be some bat deterrent devices that could help here. We're certainly looking into the possibility of testing some of those devices," said Patrick Doyle of Horizon Energy.
The ongoing study at the largest wind farm in New York state is required to assess its environmental impact. The initial results were distributed to state and federal wildlife and energy officials.
The Adirondack Council repeated concerns that wind farms have been proposed in a virtual ring around the 6 million-acre Adirondack Park. The group says the threat to migratory birds needs to be better studied before towers are built.
A National Research Council panel reported to Congress this month that wind farms could generate up to 7 percent of U.S. electricity in 15 years.
But it said too little is yet known about the risk to birds and bats.
At Maple Ridge, the wind turbines have 262-foot towers, three 134-foot blades that turn between 12 and 20 rpm (more than 130 mph at their tips), and a generator in the base, according to the company.
They have a maximum height of 400 feet, are painted white and each can produce up to 1.65 megawatts of electricity. On an annual basis, they operate at about 30 percent of capacity.
Share your thoughts. Send us an E-mail by clicking here. So we can verify that you're the one who actually sent the E-mail, please leave us a valid phone number and name. We may use a portion of your comments on Your Turn With Diane Rutherford seen on 7 News At 6 every Monday. If you don't want us to use your name on the air, tell us and we won't. Anonymous comments and emails without phone numbers will not be used.
White-tailed eagle studies at Smøla
One year has gone by since the 9th white-tailed eagle was found at the Smola windfarm, litterally chopped by the turbines - see picture : http://www.ivt. ntnu.no/bat/ mb/vindkraft/ 2006/30aug2006. htm
Around August 2005, we were also told that seven more eagles had crashed into the low voltage power lines that feed the fishermen's houses. Officially, the windfarm power line never killed any.
Then, from August 2005 and May 2006, respectively, the power lines and the turbines became eagle-friendly. That, or the eagles were taught avoidance behaviour by a canny professor who speaks their language. Or, more simply, it was decided to withhold disclosure of eagle mortality. This way, more windfarms may be built where eagles fly, in Scotland for instance.
The fact that the RSPB is conducting a study on the Smola eagles probably has nothing to do with it.
We don't know either if more eagle carcasses have been found at the Hitra windfarm. One had been found in august 2006, and we were told a complete search would be made. But here again, silence seems to be the policy.
Whether RSPB or Norwegian ornithologists are involved, or both, if the wind industry wanted the world to forget about eagle mortality at Norwegian windfarms, they seem to have found the right partners.
(Click to read report)
Around August 2005, we were also told that seven more eagles had crashed into the low voltage power lines that feed the fishermen's houses. Officially, the windfarm power line never killed any.
Then, from August 2005 and May 2006, respectively, the power lines and the turbines became eagle-friendly. That, or the eagles were taught avoidance behaviour by a canny professor who speaks their language. Or, more simply, it was decided to withhold disclosure of eagle mortality. This way, more windfarms may be built where eagles fly, in Scotland for instance.
The fact that the RSPB is conducting a study on the Smola eagles probably has nothing to do with it.
We don't know either if more eagle carcasses have been found at the Hitra windfarm. One had been found in august 2006, and we were told a complete search would be made. But here again, silence seems to be the policy.
Whether RSPB or Norwegian ornithologists are involved, or both, if the wind industry wanted the world to forget about eagle mortality at Norwegian windfarms, they seem to have found the right partners.
(Click to read report)
Monday, June 04, 2007
State may take windmill review from locals
Draft legislation in Albany would make the state the chief reviewer of wind turbine projects throughout New York, wresting that control away from local communities, a preservation advocate said Wednesday in Albion.
"This represents a fundamental shift from home rule (where local communities decide)," said Daniel Mackay, public policy director for the Preservation League of New York State. "This will expedite windmill siting."
Mackay urged about 40 people at a forum on wind turbines to contact their state legislators and urge them to kill the draft legislation before it is proposed in the Legislature.
He worries upstate New York will be asked to "sacrifice" for the entire state by hosting hundreds, maybe even thousands, of the wind turbines that top 400 feet high. He said upstate is loaded with historic landmarks and parks that should be protected from the turbines.
"We all want the goal of renewable energy in New York State,but we have to do it right." Mackay told a group at the Pullman Memorial Universalist Church.
The Public Service Commission was the state's central reviewer of wind turbine projects until 2003, when the role was returned to local communities. But before 2003, there were only a few wind turbine projects in the state, including a small wind farm in Wethersfield in Wyoming County.
Since 2003, wind energy development has been pushed in many rural communities throughout the state. Wind energy companies have complained to the state that local communities are not consistent with how they want to site the turbines, Mackay said.
He believes local leaders are within their rights to have differing approaches to siting the towers, including the setback distances from property lines and residences. He doesn't think a state-wide policy is the best approach, given unique characteristics in communites.
He also worried the turbines could be declared public utilities, which would give wind energy companies eminent domain powers, under which they could claim private land for their projects.
Mackay urged the communities to document valuable viewsheds and historic resources in their communities. They could build a case that turbines and wind farms should not encroach on historic resources.
Andrea Rebeck, a Barre resident and historic preservation architect, doesn't want turbines near the Erie Canal. She asked Mackay if there is an effort to have the canal corridor declared off limits to the turbines.
Thus far, Mackay said there isn't a push to protect the canal corridor from the structures.
Rebeck said the "space-age" intrusions" (wind turbines) will destroy the ambiance along the canal and hurt efforts to promote "heritage tourism" at the historic waterway.
Airtricity is considering a wind farm in Gaines and Albion, with many of the turbines eyed just north of the canal.
Mackay urged the group to keep pressing for information from wind companies and municipal leaders.
"It's about asking questions," he said. "We don't have all the answers yet."
And those asking questions shouldn't be treated with scorn, he said.
"People have a right to protect their community," he said. "People's backyards are important to them."
"This represents a fundamental shift from home rule (where local communities decide)," said Daniel Mackay, public policy director for the Preservation League of New York State. "This will expedite windmill siting."
Mackay urged about 40 people at a forum on wind turbines to contact their state legislators and urge them to kill the draft legislation before it is proposed in the Legislature.
He worries upstate New York will be asked to "sacrifice" for the entire state by hosting hundreds, maybe even thousands, of the wind turbines that top 400 feet high. He said upstate is loaded with historic landmarks and parks that should be protected from the turbines.
"We all want the goal of renewable energy in New York State,but we have to do it right." Mackay told a group at the Pullman Memorial Universalist Church.
The Public Service Commission was the state's central reviewer of wind turbine projects until 2003, when the role was returned to local communities. But before 2003, there were only a few wind turbine projects in the state, including a small wind farm in Wethersfield in Wyoming County.
Since 2003, wind energy development has been pushed in many rural communities throughout the state. Wind energy companies have complained to the state that local communities are not consistent with how they want to site the turbines, Mackay said.
He believes local leaders are within their rights to have differing approaches to siting the towers, including the setback distances from property lines and residences. He doesn't think a state-wide policy is the best approach, given unique characteristics in communites.
He also worried the turbines could be declared public utilities, which would give wind energy companies eminent domain powers, under which they could claim private land for their projects.
Mackay urged the communities to document valuable viewsheds and historic resources in their communities. They could build a case that turbines and wind farms should not encroach on historic resources.
Andrea Rebeck, a Barre resident and historic preservation architect, doesn't want turbines near the Erie Canal. She asked Mackay if there is an effort to have the canal corridor declared off limits to the turbines.
Thus far, Mackay said there isn't a push to protect the canal corridor from the structures.
Rebeck said the "space-age" intrusions" (wind turbines) will destroy the ambiance along the canal and hurt efforts to promote "heritage tourism" at the historic waterway.
Airtricity is considering a wind farm in Gaines and Albion, with many of the turbines eyed just north of the canal.
Mackay urged the group to keep pressing for information from wind companies and municipal leaders.
"It's about asking questions," he said. "We don't have all the answers yet."
And those asking questions shouldn't be treated with scorn, he said.
"People have a right to protect their community," he said. "People's backyards are important to them."
All Power Plants Not Equal? by Danny Hakim
Gov. Eliot Spitzer and lawmakers have been negotiating for several weeks to revive a law that speeds approval of power plants by overriding local ordinances. This week, the issue will be the subject of one of three rare public conference committees held by the Democrat-led Assembly and the Republican-controlled Senate.
Finding homes for new power plants, as one might imagine, is controversial.
Last week, both the Senate and the Assembly passed legislation that would bring back the law, known as Article X, which expired in January 2003. Both the Assembly and the governor, below, want to allow only coal plants with low emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, though the specifics of their proposals differ. Neither would permit fast approval for nuclear plants under Article X, and they argue that the length of the federal review process makes speedy approval impossible anyway.
The industry favors the Senate’s version and had a hand in writing it. That bill would allow nuclear plants and a broader range of coal plants.
“There aren’t that many plants being built,” said Patrick J. Curran, executive director of the Energy Association of New York State, a consortium of power producers. “If you’re looking at demand and what’s expected to come online, the numbers don’t add up.”
Senator Jim Wright, an upstate Republican who sponsored the Senate bill, said the other proposals would not encourage the industry to build enough new plants. Further, he said, it would create too many emissions rules.
The other side of the aisle disagrees. “If we pass our bill, we would expect thousands of megawatts, or about 20 percent of today’s capacity, will be approved through the process within the first few years,” said Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer.
Jason K. Babbie, a policy analyst at the New York Public Interest Research Group, said, “The governor and the Assembly recognize this is an expedited process that overrides local law and is an incentive program, therefore we should be incentivizing those technologies that best serve New York residents and rate payers.”
The Senate bill, he said, allows for too many kinds of plants. “If you can generate power using hamsters,” he said, “it can be included.”
Finding homes for new power plants, as one might imagine, is controversial.
Last week, both the Senate and the Assembly passed legislation that would bring back the law, known as Article X, which expired in January 2003. Both the Assembly and the governor, below, want to allow only coal plants with low emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases, though the specifics of their proposals differ. Neither would permit fast approval for nuclear plants under Article X, and they argue that the length of the federal review process makes speedy approval impossible anyway.
The industry favors the Senate’s version and had a hand in writing it. That bill would allow nuclear plants and a broader range of coal plants.
“There aren’t that many plants being built,” said Patrick J. Curran, executive director of the Energy Association of New York State, a consortium of power producers. “If you’re looking at demand and what’s expected to come online, the numbers don’t add up.”
Senator Jim Wright, an upstate Republican who sponsored the Senate bill, said the other proposals would not encourage the industry to build enough new plants. Further, he said, it would create too many emissions rules.
The other side of the aisle disagrees. “If we pass our bill, we would expect thousands of megawatts, or about 20 percent of today’s capacity, will be approved through the process within the first few years,” said Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer.
Jason K. Babbie, a policy analyst at the New York Public Interest Research Group, said, “The governor and the Assembly recognize this is an expedited process that overrides local law and is an incentive program, therefore we should be incentivizing those technologies that best serve New York residents and rate payers.”
The Senate bill, he said, allows for too many kinds of plants. “If you can generate power using hamsters,” he said, “it can be included.”
Sunday, June 03, 2007
Fighting TRAIL power line
State Rep. Bill DeWeese is sponsoring a petition for residents who want to add their voice to the growing number of people opposed to the TrAIL power line. By signing the petition, you also will receive periodic updates about the plans.
Everyone must remain vigilant against the power line. Although a proposed route has been submitted to the state Public Utility Commission by the power company, it’s possible they could modify the route once the process works its way through the system. A rate increase for everyone in Southwestern Pennsylvania is sure to follow, because the power company will seek to recoup its expenses of building the new power line.
There are three ways that you can join the hundreds of people who already have signed the petition.
Visit his Web site www.pahouse.com/DeWeese to add your name. On the site, you also can learn more about what Bill DeWeese and other groups are doing to protest the TrAIL and keep our families safe.
If you would like to sign the petition in person, please stop by any of Bill DeWeese’s offices at your convenience.
Sign the attached petition and drop it off at one of Bill DeWeese’s offices or mail it to his Harrisburg Office: 110 Main Capitol Building, House Box 202050, Harrisburg, PA 17120-2050
Everyone must remain vigilant against the power line. Although a proposed route has been submitted to the state Public Utility Commission by the power company, it’s possible they could modify the route once the process works its way through the system. A rate increase for everyone in Southwestern Pennsylvania is sure to follow, because the power company will seek to recoup its expenses of building the new power line.
There are three ways that you can join the hundreds of people who already have signed the petition.
Visit his Web site www.pahouse.com/DeWeese to add your name. On the site, you also can learn more about what Bill DeWeese and other groups are doing to protest the TrAIL and keep our families safe.
If you would like to sign the petition in person, please stop by any of Bill DeWeese’s offices at your convenience.
Sign the attached petition and drop it off at one of Bill DeWeese’s offices or mail it to his Harrisburg Office: 110 Main Capitol Building, House Box 202050, Harrisburg, PA 17120-2050
Idiot Wind by HENRY S. F. COOPER Jr.
MUCH of upstate New York, from north of Albany to Buffalo, from the Catskills to the Adirondacks, is in danger of being transformed beyond recognition by industrial wind parks. Some 50 of these wind parks are being planned and even built.
All of this is being done in the name of clean energy and saving the planet. But it isn't clear that wind power is such a panacea in the battle against global warming that developers of these wind parks should be allowed to run roughshod over some of our loveliest land. What we need are statewide siting guidelines that take other environmental factors, including visual impacts, into consideration.
One upstate project, 70 miles west of Albany, is the Jordanville Wind Power Project proposed by Community Energy, a subsidiary of the Spanish conglomerate Iberdrola. The project is not far from where I live in Cooperstown. About 70 turbines, as tall as 40-story buildings, are proposed near the top of a ridge where they will be visible far across the Mohawk Valley to the north and to the south down the length of Otsego Lake, the centerpiece of the Glimmerglass National Historic District. There are six national historic districts and sites eligible or listed, in the area, covering some 40,000 acres. One that is eligible but not listed is the Holy Trinity Monastery, the spiritual center of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. Another, Glimmerglass, includes the landscape that inspired the artists of the Hudson River School and novelists like James Fenimore Cooper (an ancestor of mine).
The effects nearer the turbines will be even more devastating. The towers loom all around; their blades, 150 feet long, cause the sunlight to flicker; the nacelles — the hub of the blades — make a high-pitched whine.
Real estate values, certainly for second and retirement homes, but also primary residences, would likely plummet, damaging the local tax base. The carnage among birds and bats is considerable.
The Jordanville project would be built on an unstable soluble layer of karst limestone riddled with cracks, fissures and caverns. It could affect local wells and fish hatcheries; springs in this area are the source not only of Otsego Lake but of the Susquehanna River, which starts there.
Of course, the sacrifice of much of upstate New York in the name of saving the planet would be admirable and noble if it was clear that wind power would play a major role in combating global warming. But a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences casts doubt on this theory.
Wind is an iffy resource. It blows hard enough to generate electricity about 30 percent of the time. When wind-power companies talk of a project supplying electricity to, say, 60,000 houses, which is what the Jordanville project claims, those homes are dark and powerless 70 percent of the time. Or they would be, if it wasn't for conventional power sources, which need to be kept on line to take over when the wind drops. Realistically, Jordanville will power about 18,000 houses or less. In the trade-offs between wind power and other environmental considerations, the less wind contributes to reducing global warming, the more important other environmental factors — including visual impact — become.
So why then are we destroying large tracts of upstate New York in the name of an uncertain energy source? In part, it is because the Spitzer administration, even more than the Pataki administration did, is increasing subsidies and tax credits for these alternative energy companies. Indeed most wind companies concede that if it weren't for government support, they wouldn't be in business.
The Spitzer administration has introduced wording to the Clean Economic Power Supply Act that would revamp utility siting law. Its Article X would speed approval for industrial wind parks, in particular by circumventing home rule and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the cornerstone of the state's environmental laws, which is responsible for determining whether local ordinances conform with state environmental law when a town or municipality accepts or rejects a project.
But what we need to do is strengthen the siting provisions in the Clean Economic Power Supply Act. Three bills that are before the State Senate would impose moratoriums on wind projects while siting guidelines are established and the effects of a project on neighboring areas are assessed. One of the bills would give New York's commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation a veto on approving turbine siting. All these bills are steps in the right direction; they have critical elements that are worth incorporating into the new Article X legislation, to assure burdened upstate towns that community character and historic and scenic resources will be protected.
Wind has a role to play, but perhaps not as strong a one as other clean energy sources, especially those like safer nuclear energy and cleaner coal, which provide not erratic but constant energy. We need to think carefully about where we place wind farms and whether the benefits outweigh the losses. But more important, we can't let wind power, and projects like the Jordanville one, distract our attention and financial resources from better solutions for saving our planet. Wind may be something of a red herring hidden inside a pork barrel.
All of this is being done in the name of clean energy and saving the planet. But it isn't clear that wind power is such a panacea in the battle against global warming that developers of these wind parks should be allowed to run roughshod over some of our loveliest land. What we need are statewide siting guidelines that take other environmental factors, including visual impacts, into consideration.
One upstate project, 70 miles west of Albany, is the Jordanville Wind Power Project proposed by Community Energy, a subsidiary of the Spanish conglomerate Iberdrola. The project is not far from where I live in Cooperstown. About 70 turbines, as tall as 40-story buildings, are proposed near the top of a ridge where they will be visible far across the Mohawk Valley to the north and to the south down the length of Otsego Lake, the centerpiece of the Glimmerglass National Historic District. There are six national historic districts and sites eligible or listed, in the area, covering some 40,000 acres. One that is eligible but not listed is the Holy Trinity Monastery, the spiritual center of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. Another, Glimmerglass, includes the landscape that inspired the artists of the Hudson River School and novelists like James Fenimore Cooper (an ancestor of mine).
The effects nearer the turbines will be even more devastating. The towers loom all around; their blades, 150 feet long, cause the sunlight to flicker; the nacelles — the hub of the blades — make a high-pitched whine.
Real estate values, certainly for second and retirement homes, but also primary residences, would likely plummet, damaging the local tax base. The carnage among birds and bats is considerable.
The Jordanville project would be built on an unstable soluble layer of karst limestone riddled with cracks, fissures and caverns. It could affect local wells and fish hatcheries; springs in this area are the source not only of Otsego Lake but of the Susquehanna River, which starts there.
Of course, the sacrifice of much of upstate New York in the name of saving the planet would be admirable and noble if it was clear that wind power would play a major role in combating global warming. But a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences casts doubt on this theory.
Wind is an iffy resource. It blows hard enough to generate electricity about 30 percent of the time. When wind-power companies talk of a project supplying electricity to, say, 60,000 houses, which is what the Jordanville project claims, those homes are dark and powerless 70 percent of the time. Or they would be, if it wasn't for conventional power sources, which need to be kept on line to take over when the wind drops. Realistically, Jordanville will power about 18,000 houses or less. In the trade-offs between wind power and other environmental considerations, the less wind contributes to reducing global warming, the more important other environmental factors — including visual impact — become.
So why then are we destroying large tracts of upstate New York in the name of an uncertain energy source? In part, it is because the Spitzer administration, even more than the Pataki administration did, is increasing subsidies and tax credits for these alternative energy companies. Indeed most wind companies concede that if it weren't for government support, they wouldn't be in business.
The Spitzer administration has introduced wording to the Clean Economic Power Supply Act that would revamp utility siting law. Its Article X would speed approval for industrial wind parks, in particular by circumventing home rule and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the cornerstone of the state's environmental laws, which is responsible for determining whether local ordinances conform with state environmental law when a town or municipality accepts or rejects a project.
But what we need to do is strengthen the siting provisions in the Clean Economic Power Supply Act. Three bills that are before the State Senate would impose moratoriums on wind projects while siting guidelines are established and the effects of a project on neighboring areas are assessed. One of the bills would give New York's commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation a veto on approving turbine siting. All these bills are steps in the right direction; they have critical elements that are worth incorporating into the new Article X legislation, to assure burdened upstate towns that community character and historic and scenic resources will be protected.
Wind has a role to play, but perhaps not as strong a one as other clean energy sources, especially those like safer nuclear energy and cleaner coal, which provide not erratic but constant energy. We need to think carefully about where we place wind farms and whether the benefits outweigh the losses. But more important, we can't let wind power, and projects like the Jordanville one, distract our attention and financial resources from better solutions for saving our planet. Wind may be something of a red herring hidden inside a pork barrel.
Naples Record Ad by Advocates for Prattsburgh
Developers are pushing people in Prattsburgh and Cohocton to sign Right-of-Way agreements for Transmission Lines and Easements to Widen the Roads. While this sounds simple, please BEWARE. The potential impact on you is far more than just a few feet of your property.
These Power Transmission Poles they want to run across YOUR PROPERTY will be 65 feet high, twice the height of typical power poles, with extended arms that may be double or quadruple what presently exist.
The developer says they need a 40 foot right-of-way with 50 feet on either side of the pole for "clearing" - potentially a 100 foot wide section of your property. Clearing away your trees, do you want the view from your house dominated by these massive, double-height quadruple-wide transmission poles?
People have been told "you might as well sign because all your neighbors have signed", even though many people have refused. People who have refused to sign have been surprised to see on wind project maps that power lines cross their land anyway - while the developer claims in public this is a done deal.
This is deception. Without your written approval, NYSEG cannot let the developers put these lines across YOUR PROPERTY.
And without your signature as the landowner, the road will not be widened. Do you want the hundreds of trucks going by your property to build the project that much closer to your house?
As if this weren't enough, these overhead high-power transmission lines will be carrying 34.5 kv - far higher power and voltage than distribution lines. Is this what you want?
Don't stand for it! Refuse to grant the developer UPC or NYSEG an expanded easement across your land for these large power transmission poles. They can't do this without your written approval. We urge you to stand up and protect your property rights.
PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY! NOW is the time to stand up for your rights.
ADVOCATES FOR PRATTSBURGH
PO Box 221, Prattsburgh, NY 14873 prattsburgh@prattsburgh.org
visit our website at: www.prattsburgh.org
These Power Transmission Poles they want to run across YOUR PROPERTY will be 65 feet high, twice the height of typical power poles, with extended arms that may be double or quadruple what presently exist.
The developer says they need a 40 foot right-of-way with 50 feet on either side of the pole for "clearing" - potentially a 100 foot wide section of your property. Clearing away your trees, do you want the view from your house dominated by these massive, double-height quadruple-wide transmission poles?
People have been told "you might as well sign because all your neighbors have signed", even though many people have refused. People who have refused to sign have been surprised to see on wind project maps that power lines cross their land anyway - while the developer claims in public this is a done deal.
This is deception. Without your written approval, NYSEG cannot let the developers put these lines across YOUR PROPERTY.
And without your signature as the landowner, the road will not be widened. Do you want the hundreds of trucks going by your property to build the project that much closer to your house?
As if this weren't enough, these overhead high-power transmission lines will be carrying 34.5 kv - far higher power and voltage than distribution lines. Is this what you want?
Don't stand for it! Refuse to grant the developer UPC or NYSEG an expanded easement across your land for these large power transmission poles. They can't do this without your written approval. We urge you to stand up and protect your property rights.
ADVOCATES FOR PRATTSBURGH
PO Box 221, Prattsburgh, NY 14873 prattsburgh@prattsburgh.org
visit our website at: www.prattsburgh.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)