Wind Farm Site Considered 10 Miles From Queens Shore

Has the economic or political climate changed for wind power on Long Island? The Long Island Power Authority hopes so.

A year after the authority withdrew its proposal to build an $800 million offshore wind farm near Jones Beach, it said Tuesday that it would look into building a potentially larger wind farm 10 miles off the south shore of Queens.

The authority will work with Con Edison, which has never before proposed a wind-power project, to study the economic feasibility over the next few months. If they decide it makes sense to build an offshore wind farm, the utilities would ask builders for proposals, the authority said. The project would take several years to plan, finance and complete.

“If this is doable, we and Con Edison can share the cost and the power,” said Kevin S. Law, the authority’s chief executive, who also serves on Gov. David A. Paterson’s renewable energy task force. “If we could make this big enough, we could send power east and west.”

The bulk of the wind turbines in New York have been installed upstate, and many have received state and federal subsidies. Because of congestion in the state’s electrical grid, it is economically impractical to transport much of that power south to New York City and Long Island.

Building wind turbines on Long Island is another option, but there is little suitable open space. Long Island Sound was considered, but it was deemed not windy enough, Mr. Law said.

The power authority’s announcement, which was first reported by Newsday, comes a month after Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said the city would ask industry experts to submit ideas for putting turbines off New York’s shores and atop its skyscrapers.

Industry experts say offshore wind farms are rare in North America because of the difficulty of finding suitable locations, the cost of running transmission lines to shore, and the thicket of environmental regulations. Shipping lanes also need to be considered, as well as a shortage of equipment available to plant turbines in deep water.

Nearby residents often object to offshore turbines because of aesthetic concerns, as was the case with the Jones Beach proposal, which also exceeded initial cost estimates.

Still, Governor Paterson said in a statement on Tuesday that a big offshore wind farm would create new jobs and more renewable energy at a time of rising fuel prices.

Speaking later Tuesday, he suggested that the project could be eligible for state subsidies.

Wayland-Cohocton Central School District September 22, 2008

Charles Brewer a member of the Wayland-Cohocton School Board refusing to review this crucial evidence that the PILOT for the the Cohocton portion of the First Wind project is not filed with the Steuben County clerk. At stake is over $265,000.00 in revenue that the developer will not pay. Why does the School Board and administration allow First Wind to avoid their tax responsibility. Regular taxpayers are being defrauded.

Wayland-Cohocton Central School District September 22, 2008 Letter by James Hall

September 22, 2008

WCCS Board Members
Superintendent of Schools
Wayland-Cohocton Central School
2350 Rte 63 N
Wayland NY 14572

Dear Board Members and Mr. Wetherbee,

On April 23, 2008 (letter included), your board was warned that the taxpayers of the Wayland-Cohocton Central School District were being short changed by the PILOT for the First Wind/UPC Wind Project.

Today you are presented with an 18-page copy of the Cohocton Assessor roll dated and sworn on June 28, 2008. Also enclosed is a five page search index of entries from the Steuben County Clerk dated September 16, 2008.

A careful review of these documents clearly indicates that the PILOT for the Cohocton portion for the industrial wind project (AKA Canandaigua Power Partners) has not been completed or filed with the County Clerk. Only that entity known as the Dutch Hill Project (Canandaigua Power Partners II) is on record.

There are 15 industrial turbines in the Dutch Hill section. The Cohocton section has 35 industrial turbines. Three of these 35 turbines reside within the Naples Central School District. Therefore, there are 32 industrial turbines within your WCCS District. In addition, there are several tax accounts for infrastructure such as transmission facilities.

The Cohocton Assessors value EACH industrial turbine at $500,000.00 based upon a 20% of value. This amount will increase to $2,500,000 for EACH turbine upon commissioning. Each turbine has its own separate tax account. Currently the amount of taxable assessed value on the Cohocton portion, for the 2008-2009 taxable cycles, of the project is over $16,000,000.00.

This board refused to litigate the PILOT. Now that proof exists that the PILOT has never been completed and filed, as the law requires, it is the duty of the WCCS Board to collect the full amount of property taxes. All taxpayers in your district deserve equal treatment. Your legal liability and malfeasance for a refusal to bill and collect school taxes on each of these accounts are obvious.

In light of the NYS Attorney General’s investigation into First Wind and the Town of Cohocton government, it behooves the WCCS District to act and tax these accounts per the value established by the Cohocton Assessors. NYS Department of Education oversight has provisions in the law to enforce equable taxation compliance.

With no legal PILOT for the Cohocton portion, SCIDA and First Wind are defrauding taxpayers in your district. Your board is urged to make corrections of this injustice.

Cordially,

James Hall for CWW

RENEWABLES DIVE IN THE WAKE OF LEHMAN BROTHERS, AS AN EBBING TIDE LOWERS ALL BOATS

It has been a rough week in the markets, and things only got worse in the wake of investment bank Lehman Brothers' bankruptcy.

While a rapidly ebbing tide lowers all boats, the fall for clean energy shares has been steeper than in the broader market, with the WilderHill New Energy Global Innovation index of clean energy shares - or NEX for short - plunging some 7.5% over the past week compared with the approximately 5% drop in the Dow Jones Industrial Average by late Monday. The pain was felt broadly across the clean energy sector with solar, wind, and biofuel firms all taking a hit. Evergreen Solar suffered the largest loss on Monday, on a percentage basis. The Massachusetts-based solar PV equipment maker saw its shares fall USD 1.79, or 28.4%, to end the day at USD 4.51. Chinese firm JA Solar was off USD 2.42, or 18.5% to end at USD 10.68. California-based SunPower's stock dropped USD 10.19, or 12.3%, to close at USD 72.50.

It is worth taking a look at the renewables companies in which Lehman played a direct role. Lehman is by no measure the biggest player on the renewables block, but it is the third most active arranger in the US tax equity market - behind JP Morgan and General Electric Energy Financial Services - and has participated in a handful of clean energy equity deals. US-based wind developer First Wind, for one, will have to lean more heavily on other tax equity investors following Lehman's collapse.

First Wind said in a July 2008 regulatory filing that it had signed an agreement with Lehman for USD 208m in tax equity financing for its Steel Wind I, Cohocton I and Prattsburgh I projects. The company did not immediately respond to New Energy Finance's questions about its financing plans now that Lehman is out of the picture.

Lehman also held a 9.7% stake in Clipper Windpower as of the company's 2007 annual report, and a 6.8% stake in geothermal developer Ormat Technologies as of 16 May 2008.

Lehman was also listed as one of four underwriters for wind project developer Noble Environmental Power's planned USD 375m initial public offering. The company did not immediately respond to questions about whether other underwriters Citi, JP Morgan and Credit Suisse would now pick up Lehman's slack under the offering.

NEF_Week_in_Review_2008-09-16.pdf

Environmentalists holding U.S. back

To those with an open mind on wind power, I suggest a ride down Interstate 390 between Cohocton and Avoca. On the horizon are endless windmill generators that scar thousands of acres and ruin what was an outstanding natural vista. Exit at Cohocton and drive into the hills in the vicinity of these monstrosities. They are huge and grotesque. In a rural sense, they are in people's backyards. By contrast, a single nuclear plant would occupy 1 percent of the acreage and generate more power on a consistent basis. What happens to wind power when the wind dies? Conventional power is still needed for backup.

I cannot believe that environmentalists are sincere when they are willing to mar our scenic and inhabited landscape while opposing drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge — a totally barren, flat and unoccupied space of a mere 2,000 acres out of 19 million acres in the Alaskan preserve. This leads me to conclude that the alternate energy movement is not about energy, but about forcing on us government control of our national productivity.

—ARNOLD PETRALIA

Greece, NY

Bipartisan Senate Bill To Extend Renewable Tax Credits

After much arm wrestling, the Senate came to an agreement on energy tax breaks which are set to expire later this year. Both Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), of the Senate Finance Committee, made the announcement on Tuesday.

The tax package will provide $17 billion in renewable energy tax breaks. It will also adjust the alternative minimum tax, extend tax credits for children and create several business tax cuts. It will also set aside $7 billion in tax relief for those affected by recent floods and hurricanes. The bill extends the solar and wind investment tax credit for eight years, and the production tax credit for biomass and hydropower for up to two years.

The definition of a system that would qualify for the credit has also been updated. They now include small wind investment and geothermal heat pumps.

“This month, the Senate can act to create jobs, break America’s dependence on foreign oil, support working families, and help businesses thrive,” said Baucus in a statement [PDF]. “This agreement will lead America toward clean, homegrown energy and the good-paying jobs that come with it.”

In the past, how to fund these extensions has been quite messy. Republicans have squawked at anything where oil industry tax breaks were affected and Democrats have insisted that the source funding be specified. The compromise was to freeze tax breaks for oil and gas at the current rate, and to tighten the rules on taxes for the industry. This will effect income earned by the companies in overseas markets. The Oil Spill Liability Trust fun was also adjusted.

Hopefully the bill will pass when voted upon.

Iberdrola wants to invest right away

In an interview with the Times Union this afternoon, an Iberdrola SA official said the company is looking to start its $2 billion wind-energy investment plan in New York state right away.

“We have the money, and we have the turbines,’‘ said Pedro Azagra (left), Iberdrola’s director of corporate development.

State regulators made Iberdrola promise to spend at least $200 million over the next two years on wind projects in the state as part of its $4.5 billion acquisition of Energy East Corp., which has 1.7 million customer accounts in upstate New York.

After the state Public Service Commission approved the deal with conditions on Sept. 3, Iberdrola finalized the acquisition on Tuesday.

Iberdrola has plans for 1,000 megawatts of new wind turbines in New York, mostly in the central and western parts of the state.

Azagra, who was appointed to the Energy East board, says it’s still too early to tell what possible changes Iberdrola will make, although he noted that in previous mergers, the company has not changed utility names, nor made major management changes.

“Our culture as a company is to be very local,” Azagra said. “We have maintained the local name (in previous mergers.)”

Azagra also noted that as Wall Street crumbles under a global credit crisis, Iberdrola is ready to spend money in the United States. Although the company is already a huge renewable energy developer in the U.S., Energy East is the first utility that it has acquired here.

“We are not shutting down things,” Azagra said in a nod to Wall Street’s woes. “We are happy to invest.”

The Times Union also asked Azagra how he was feeling now that the merger is complete. The company first announced the Energy East deal in June 2007, and the PSC process took 12 months.

“The word is tired,” Azagra said. “But I think that is what we’re paid for. We’re very enthusiastic.”

Text of H.R. 6899: Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act

You are viewing the text of this bill when its status changed to “Engrossed in House”. This is the text of the bill as it was approved by the House, although some bills may be changed further either by the Senate or through a conference committee. This is the latest text of the bill currently available on this website. Use the View which version? panel on the right below to view previous versions of this bill as it made its way through the legislative process.

(Click to read the entire Bill)

Wind Fuels Gas

Following Russia's invasion of Georgia, a vital link between Europe and the energy resources of Central Asia, energy security is back at the top of Europe's agenda. For years now, many Europeans thought that a major part of their future energy security might come from wind turbines and solar panels. Industry, too, has suggested that this may be the case: At this summer's World Petroleum Congress in Madrid, most major oil and gas companies presented new plans for big renewable energy projects. But this renewables push, particularly when it comes to wind, is probably just a very clever short-term business strategy that will not improve Europe's geopolitical situation.

Wind turbines generate electricity very irregularly, because the wind itself is inconsistent. Therefore wind turbines always need backup power from fossil fuels to keep the electricity grid in balance. Gas turbines are the best way to do this. They are able to respond quickly and push power production when wind generators stop suddenly. They can be turned on and off almost instantly, whereas traditional coal-fired plants need to be maintained in a very inefficient standby mode if they are to respond to large fluctuations in power demand.

A proliferation of windmills, then, can become a windfall for gas sellers. Just look at the cases of Spain and Germany, Europe's leading producers of wind power.

By the end of 2007 Spain had 14,700 megawatts (MW) of installed wind capacity, according to Enagás, which manages the national gas network, producing 8.7% of the country's total power supplies. Most of these wind generators are located in scarcely populated areas, while the power consumption is concentrated in big cities with their many air-conditioned buildings. The peak load of the Spanish power grid is thus in the hot summer months—but this is precisely the time of year when there usually isn't much wind.

For this reason, more and more gas turbines are being installed near consumers in the suburbs of Spain's cities. Only last year, Spanish power providers added 6,400 MW of gas-turbine power capacity, taking the total installed capacity of gas turbines to 21,000 MW. Natural gas has become the main source of electricity generation in Spain, and according to Enagás, 99.8% of the gas used in Spain is imported. Most of this comes via pipeline from Algeria, but the import of liquid natural gas (LNG) by ships will increase.

In Germany, more than 20,000 wind turbines with a total capacity of 21,400 MW are now "embellishing" landscapes. Wind power's share of total electricity generation has risen in line with that of natural gas since 1990. Germany's gas consumption for power generation more than doubled between 1990 and 2007, and now represents 11.7% of the country's total power generation. The country imported 83% of its natural gas supplies.

Today part of the wind power backup in Germany is still done by old coal-fired plants. But the Greens and even parts of the governing Christian and Social Democratic parties are fervently opposed to the construction of new coal plants. So many old power stations will probably be replaced by gas turbines. The green opponents of new coal-fired plants are nowadays the most dependable allies of the big gas companies such as Gazprom, Shell or BP.

Most European countries force consumers to subsidize electricity from wind power. This makes "renewables" a very safe investment compared with other energy businesses, where swings in commodity prices can be large. As Europe's big integrated oil and gas companies—such as Shell, BP and Total—invest more and more in LNG, they are also lobbying hard for a world-wide carbon-emissions trading system that would further increase the advantage of gas over coal.

In the U.S. the same thing is happening. The problem for the natural gas industry in the U.S. is that gas is still relatively inexpensive compared with market prices elsewhere in the world. There are no facilities for LNG export. This may explain why Shell, BP, Chevron and T. Boone Pickens are investing in wind power. It's a clever strategy to add value to their gas assets by boosting demand.

These gas players can afford to lose money on wind power in the short term to reap huge profits in the long term. In fact, this was the strategy first implemented by Ken Lay of Enron in 1990s. Enron was the power and gas company that started the first large-scale manufacturing of wind power in the U.S. It also brought up the ideas for a cap-and-trade system, to increase the competitive edge of gas over coal.

Wind power is clearly not reducing the dependence on imported fuel, contrary to the frequent claims of its proponents. In fact the experience from Germany and Spain shows that it is increasing the dependence of imported natural gas. And that's not energy security.

NYS ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO ADOPT RULES FOR COUNTRY’S 1ST PLAN TO CUT CLIMATE POLLUTION

Environmental & Energy Groups Assert that Regional Climate Plan Will Not Burden New York Consumers

(Albany, NY) The New York State Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA) is expected to vote to adopt regulations to implement the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) in New York State today. The RGGI is the 10-state plan to reduce the power plant pollution that is changing our climate.

The adoption of these regulations sets the stage for New York to participate in the nation’s first auction of carbon dioxide (CO2) permits as part of a cap-and-trade system that will hold the allowed level of CO2 emissions constant through 2014, and then gradually reduce those levels. Along with New York, RGGI states include Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Vermont. The first auction of CO2 emissions allowances is scheduled for September 25th, and will include six of the 10 RGGI states. The remaining states—including New York—are on track to participate beginning with the second round on December 19th.

Environmental and energy groups have closely followed the progress of RGGI regulations and celebrated the State Environmental Board approval of Department of Environmental Conservation regulations for the plan in August. While the same groups applaud NYSERDA’s action today, the groups call into question claims by power producers that the regional climate plan will increase New Yorkers’ utility bills.

“Rising energy costs are a critical issue for all New Yorkers. In the long-run the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative will save consumers money and reduce the pollution that is changing our climate,” said Jackson Morris, Environmental Advocates of New York. “Statements by opponents to the regional climate plan about high costs are speculative and not based on sound analysis or research.”

NYSERDA to adopt regulations to cut climate pollution

According to research, for a typical New York residential customer, the projected increase translates into a retail bill increase of .78 cents. For commercial and industrial customers, the projected retail cost increase ranges from .9 to 1.7 percent in 2015, respectively.

“With the adoption of these regulations, we look forward to seeing New York begin auctioning pollution credits in December," said Laura Haight, senior environmental associate with NYPIRG. “This money should be strategically invested to benefit consumers and our environment. One of the biggest bangs for the buck is energy efficiency programs, such as home weatherization retrofits. This will save homeowners on their utility bills, reduce energy use, and create jobs in the private sector.”

The modest bill impacts and other figures put forth during the multi-year stakeholder process are based on extensive/sophisticated modeling conducted by numerous researchers and agencies, including NYSERDA, New York Department of Public Service, and others.

“RGGI is a crucial first step in combating climate change by helping to level the playing field between fossil fuels and renewable power,” said Carol E. Murphy, Executive Director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York. “By investing the funds generated by the allowance auctions in efficiency and clean energy technologies we can provide long term relief from volatile fuel prices and build a more secure domestic energy supply,” added Ms. Murphy.

For example, modeling conducted by the Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources shows that for the entire RGGI region doubling our investment in efficiency would result in recurring utility bill reductions from $66 to $109 per year. In general, these analyses found that economic effects of RGGI are small and positive.

“We need to preserve the strong link between how the proceeds from the RGGI auction are spent and the underlying causes of climate change,” said James Van Nostrand, Executive Director of the Pace Energy and Climate Center. “Using the proceeds for energy efficiency would preserve this link by reducing the need for electric generation, and would also provide long-term benefits for utility customers coping with the high costs of energy.”

The RGGI was designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from Northeast power plants. In addition to the direct cuts associated with implementing the program that begins in January 2009, auctioning emissions allowances under RGGI also provides revenue for programs that can further reduce pollution.

“In 1984, New York created the nation's first cap-and-trade program for air pollution, aimed at controlling the smokestack emissions that causes acid rain. Critics said we were crazy to put ourselves at a competitive disadvantage by imposing rules on ourselves that other states weren't willing impose,” said Brian L. Houseal, Executive Director of the Adirondack Council, a national leader in the fight against acid rain. “But the very next year, New England states began to impose similar rules. Five years later, Congress had amended the Clean Air Act to create a national program based on New York's model. That is exactly what we hope will happen with RGGI and climate change. We just hope it happens faster.”

NYSERDA to adopt regulations to cut climate pollution In the years ahead, strategic use of RGGI revenues can save New York consumers money by ramping up funding for programs such as the residential New York Energy Smart Loan Fund Program. Participants receive almost $500 in savings annually for 10 years, for a total of up to $4,650 in offset expenses on interest payments. Furthermore, a household would realize up to 40 percent reductions on their home heating and electric bills—savings that continue to accrue every month of every year into the foreseeable future.

New York State is currently finalizing regulations and auction mechanics and will be ready for the second auction in December.

RGGI_NYSERDA_Press_Release_final.pdf

Wind farm probe vital to rural towns

Nothing damages the public’s trust in government more than the possibility that elected and appointed officials are benefiting personally from government action.

That’s why New York state must aggressively pursue investigations across upstate New York into potentially improper dealings between wind-power companies and local officials. That’s why town leaders in Stueben County and elsewhere must avoid financial connections with such companies. And that’s why state agencies must step in and develop some guidelines for reviewing and approving such projects.

As the nation seeks alternative energy sources, wind power projects are flourishing. They help the nation reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

At the local level, however, the scope of such projects can be daunting. Rural towns are being asked to decide the fate of multi-million-dollar projects, a process that can include extensive environmental impact reviews.

Those environmental impacts can be significant: The massive Maple Ridge wind farm on the Tug Hill Plateau in Lewis County has pitted neighbor against neighbor, relative against relative, because of the size of the towers and the hum of the turbines.

That’s why the last element that should enter into the equation is potential financial benefit for local officials. Yet that’s precisely what may have happened in multiple upstate New York rural counties. The Franklin County district attorney received so many complaints about potentially unseemly financial perks for individual officials that he ultimately turned the whole matter over to the state Attorney General’s Office.

Among the allegations are those the anti-wind farm group, Cohocton Wind Watch, lodged against Prattsburgh Supervisor Harold McConnell, who voted for an eminent domain resolution put before the Prattsburgh Town Board in April. If carried out, the resolution would allow the town to seize privately owned property in order to bury transmission cables.

McConnell publicly admitted at the April 21 board meeting he set up an unpaid real estate transaction for UPC/First Wind last year. McConnell told the board he later received payment for the transaction after the town signed an agreement with UPC, adding he had been told by counsel the action would not prevent him from casting the deciding vote for eminent domain.

In the Herkimer County town of Stark, one Town Board member and three Zoning Board of Appeals members have signed lease agreements with a wind-power company. Such lease deals typically bring a landowner a few thousand dollars per year.

Public servants fail the people when they make deals with companies or individuals seeking approval for private projects. Such dealings create conflicts of interest for those directly involved, and the appearance of a conflict of interest for the entire town government.

The state must investigate all such conflicts to see if wrongdoing occurred. Local officials must act in a manner beyond reproach by turning down all entreaties from private wind-turbine developers dangling lucrative lease deals in front of them. And the governor, state Legislature and attorney general must study this entire approval process so that localities have clear guidelines within which to operate.

Only then can rural residents feel assured that reviews of wind projects can occur without the taint of possible corruption.

Not in my valley, say Italy residents

Italy, N.Y.

Nearly 70 concerned residents and neighbors spoke out about potential rezoning for wind turbines in the Italy Valley at a public hearing Saturday. The discussion continued a forum that began at a meeting last week in which emotional residents protested the proposed changes, which would allow developer Ecogen LLC to move forward with plans for wind turbines in two areas in the southern portion of the town.

About two-thirds of the speakers on Saturday opposed wind development, said Town Board member Malcolm MacKenzie. Of those, many surmised that developers are not concerned about the best interest of the residents.

“This whole sordid affair is about one thing: Money,” said John Walsh, an Italy resident. Like several other speakers at the hearing, he mentioned the turbines recently installed in Cohocton, stressing what he considered their negative impact on hillside vistas.

Others said wind development is inevitable. The town’s best chance to reap economic benefits and secure control over that process, they said, is by approving an incentive zoning package.

The board is considering two amendments. If approved, the town would change the comprehensive plan and current zoning restrictions to allow for industrial wind turbines. Wind development has been on the table in Italy for seven years — since affiliates of Ecogen first expressed interest and began buying and leasing land for potential development.

Early on, the board opposed wind development and placed a moratorium on future projects. Ecogen sued, but the town won. However, the court advised the town to adopt an official stance on wind development, said MacKenzie. That led to a strong anti-turbine opinion in the town’s comprehensive plan. But Ecogen sued again, said MacKenzie.

The developer agreed to put that suit on hold, provided the town consider its options with regard to incentive zoning. An incentive zoning agreement would allow the turbines — Ecogen has previously stated its intent to install 20 in the town — provided Ecogen complies with agreed-upon cash rewards. Essentially, the developer would pay the town in order to go through with the project.

State law prohibits a public referendum on the rezoning, said Town Attorney Ed Brockman. The board ultimately decides whether to proceed with the wind project, but it will hold another public hearing before the town gives the developer final approval, Brockman said.

Many speakers appealed to the tranquility of the valley. Harvesting the wind that whips through the silent forests would ruin the solitude of the place, said resident Steven Brewer. And besides, said Walsh, turbines like the ones that sprouted up in Cohocton mar the landscapes residents love.

“To me, they have an evil persona,” Walsh said. “They’re ugly, disgusting pieces of steel. We don’t want them in the town of Italy.”

Jeff Hicks, an Italy Valley Road resident, agreed that they’re ugly. But he has resigned himself to their eventual construction.

“The fact is, they’re gonna be here,” he said.

State lawmakers will push the project through, Hicks said, so the town should focus on getting as much money out of it as it can. An incentive zoning package is the best way to do that, said Emerson Road resident Barb Christmas. That way, the town has the most leverage with the developers, she said.

The effect on tax rates and property values worried many residents. Would the towering turbines reduce the value of their homes? Would they bump already-high tax rates into the stratosphere? There were no answers on Saturday, but speakers like Ron Hawkins, an East Bloomfield resident and property owner in Italy, urged the residents to calm down. He has visited many towns with wind projects, he said, and has seen their impact lowering taxes and improving roads.

The board, like the residents, has struggled to appease aesthetic, economic and environmental concerns, said MacKenzie.

“We ourselves have had various changes of thought,” he said. “It’s not resolved yet.”

Gotham City Wind Turbine Madness by James Hall

Michael R. Bloomberg’s vision for a gleaming skyline of rotating industrial machines whipping around the heads of millions of inhabitants must seem as bizarre as the latest avant-garde street theater performance. Nevertheless, the Big Apple is used to being the forerunner of creative thinking and innovative development. The difference of inventive public policy and practical civic solutions can be as large as the financial accumulation of wealth in this metropolis.

The mayor is correct on one point on a principle of energy policy that is often lost. If you are going to utilize it, produce it, where you use it. The inherent problem with the alternative that Bloomberg offers is that the technology of industrial wind machines creates more problems than answers. This outdated and inefficient method of generating energy is vastly more expensive, fundamentally unreliable, and essentially worthless in producing meaningful electricity.

The myth that wind turbines are environmentally friendly is dispelled with every project that is built. Those who worship in the congregation of a “Green Doctrine” seldom display the intellectual integrity of their dogmas. Industrial scale wind generation is not benign nor is it green. Malone Town Board member and the Citizen Power Alliance physics consultant, Jack Sullivan, cites the following. “A recent calculation by scientists from the Pacific Research Institute, a West Coast think tank that supplies input to some of the leading newspapers and magazines in the country shows, wind turbines need to operate for 7 years at full capacity to avoid the carbon emissions produced in building them.”

The horrid experience with the Vesta turbines on the Tug Hill project illustrates the lack of dependable machinery. Less than a year in operation, the bulk of the blades needed to be replaced or repaired. The oil leaks issue continues and the chronic low frequency noise effects contribute to a state of severe danger. Does New York City really need a few hundred-skyscraper cranes just performing continuous maintenance?

Even more risky is the fact that the electric grid is unable to accommodate the input of intermittent wind generation. Shadow flicker from blades in the sky equates to a power grid failure with accompanying frequent brown and black outs. In addition, you get the privilege to pay even higher utility rates. What a deal!

Without rigorous scrutiny of the technology and its extending consequences, only naive emotionalism engenders irrational support for industrial wind. Conversely, not all is wasted in harnessing wind power. If the real environmental damage of a useful technology can be overcome, several innovate design and engineered small-scale wind generators offer promise. Wind Turbines Get Architectural Attitude provides an option. “Their design captures efficiency, as they can provide as much as a 30% increase on energy production. Helping obtain this level of efficiency is also the fact that they can rotate at low wind speeds – other smaller low-speed turbines are also in the works. The microturbines are about 200 lbs, 4 feet wide by 4 feet tall, and have a bird screen to protect the pigeons.”

A more creative approach is the Clean Technology Tower which builds on principles of biomimicry, and utilizes advanced technologies and climate-appropriate building systems to foster a symbiotic relationship with its local environment.

An announcement from MIT offers a solar solution and huge benefits for the New York City landscape. According to a news release from MIT, “the solar concentrator collects light at the edges, and dye molecules coated on the glass absorb sunlight and re-emits it at different wavelengths. The light is trapped within the glass and transported to solar cells along the edge, creating electricity and allowing light into the room as well.”

For real large-scale electric generation, wave energy converters may be the answer to coastal urban needs. The following technologies are well worth an examination: The Wave Dragon wave energy converter and the Wavereaper.

Using three blade wind turbines with a size that dwarfs the Stature of Liberty on top of existing buildings is as ridiculous as saying you can eliminate existing fossil fuel generation plants because you only need to use electricity when the wind blows. Even more absurd are developer claims that appreciable and cost effective electric is generated by most of their projects.

Nameplate is the rated capacity of a wind turbine. Production statistics are guarded like the Holy Grail for a very important reason. They are so low, 8 to 12% in most project locations in NYS that the data must remain proprietary. When wind trade groups like AWEA state that thousands of homes can be powered by a project they base their claim on nameplate, not actual useable electricity produced.

Federal REC (renewable energy certificates) credits are the brass ring for wind developers. REC’s are based upon nameplate capacity and not electric generated. Selling these credits is the underlying financial incentive for building bogus wind turbines under the umbrella of legitimate alternative energy projects. Bloomberg just wants to go with the flow. But his plan is walking the high wire without a net.

It is encouraging that the cool reception to the Bloomberg pipe dream demonstrates that pragmatic minds retain some common sense. Just the public safety issue alone should dissuade trite pandering. Energy generation proposals, require sound business models.

Now that the PSC approved the Iberdrola, a Spanish conglomerate and major wind developer, acquisition for Energy East, the prospects of an implosion of the electric grid increases. Bloomberg is an accomplished businessman. Ask him to investigate why industrial wind is in serious decline in Europe! The reason is clear. This method of electric generation is not dependable to service the demand. Being in favor of a failed technology, just to be Green, hurts other forms of alternative energy.

Demand that research funds and incentives be linked to results and not ludicrous promises from unscrupulous developers.

It's a done deal as Iberdrola accepts terms

ALBANY -- Iberdrola SA agreed Wednesday to conditions set by state regulators last week for its $4.5 billion acquisition of Energy East Corp.

Energy East has 1.7 million gas and electric accounts in upstate New York through its New York State Electric & Gas and Rochester Gas & Electric subsidiaries.

The Spanish utility is expected to close quickly on the deal, first announced more than a year ago.

Approval of the acquisition by the state Public Service Commission took nearly as long. The PSC's thorough and often tedious approval process, which is much like a trial, captivated energy investors around the world. The agency's four-member panel gave the deal unanimous approval Sept. 3, and issued an official order on the case Tuesday.

The deal also caught the attention of political leaders across New York, enticed by Iberdrola's plan to spend $2 billion on wind-farm projects in the state. Such an investment could help New York reach its ambitious renewable energy goals.

"Iberdrola is pleased to accept this opportunity to help the Empire State meet its energy, environmental and economic goals," Iberdrola Chairman Ignacio Galan said in a statement.

Wind energy has always been at the forefront of the case. The staff of the PSC had initially sought to ban the company from wind-farm ownership, citing a state policy that forbids utilities from owning electric generation.

State leaders had been pressuring the PSC to approve the deal without hindering Iberdrola's ability to own wind farms in New York. U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., even took the unusual step of meeting with PSC Chairman Garry Brown to let his views be known when it looked like the deal might be in jeopardy. Iberdrola is the world's largest wind energy developer.

"I pushed both sides from the extreme to the middle so that New Yorkers could reap the benefits of a fair deal that protects consumers and invests in much-needed alternative energy in the state," Schumer said in a statement.

Under the conditions of the PSC approval, Iberdrola must provide its customers with $275 million in benefits that will go to lower rates for gas and electric service. It also must spend at least $200 million on wind-farm projects in New York over the next two years.

The company has also agreed to a long list of service quality and financial stability standards the PSC typically pursues in merger cases.

An Iberdrola spokesman said he did not know when the deal would officially close, although it could happen as early as today based on past utility mergers.

When National Grid agreed to the PSC's conditions imposed as part of its $7.3 billion acquisition of KeySpan Corp. last year, the deal closed within a matter of hours.

The PSC is expected to issue soon a longer version of its order, explaining its decision in more detail, although a PSC spokeswoman said Iberdrola can close the deal before that is issued.

Officials sold out to foreign wind companies

New York state for years has had a failed energy policy. People have feared nuclear power and still do. They fear coal even though coal has clean-burning technology. We all want and need the power, but the state does not have the policy to keep up to the demand.

New Yorkers are now under siege in many communities across the land by renewable wind energy. We do need to generate electric power, and we just cannot wish away fossil fuels as some would like you to believe, namely Al Gore.

From the governor and legislators, to the Public Service Commission, they have sold out the citizens of this state. Our elected officials were sworn into office to protect the people of the state. Selling out to foreign wind companies like BP and Iberdrola and trying to make it look like what they are doing is for the people, is hogwash, to put it mildly.

The foreign wind companies along with state and local elected officials know very well that wind turbines and people cannot live on the same block. Big money and tax credits have become more important than ethics and living up to the oath they took when they came into office, which was to protect the citizens of this state. The people who live and work here want only to enjoy their families in the peace and quiet of their own homes.

Some of our public officials with wind money in their pockets need to be brought to task for siding with foreign wind companies over the citizens of this state.

At a recent open house sponsored by British Petroleum, the wind lobby group Citizens Campaign for the Environment spokesperson made many false statements for the voter-for-wind audience in attendance. The Web site www.votersforwind.com FAQ, speaks volumes of why there is a controversy on the facts about wind turbines. It is filled with many inaccurate and misleading statements.

It's true Northern New York does have wind, but unlike Kansas and North Dakota, we also have thousands of people who live in Cape Vincent, Clayton, Orleans, Brownville, Lyme and Henderson, inside what some people want you to believe is a wind overlay district.

The true wind company plan from the start was to divide the small towns and take the land for their use and to capitalize on the tax credits available from the U.S. taxpayer. Our public servants should be embarrassed and investigated for what they have done to small-town America here in Jefferson County, New York.

Diane Rutigliano

Three Mile Bay