Obama administration colluded with 'windmill welfare queens' to rebut European 'green job' studies

"Windmill welfare queens" -- the corporations who stand to benefit from carbon regulation, and who already benefit from massive subsidies -- are telling Americans that they can "have their cake and eat it too" when it comes to emissions controls and so-called "green jobs." A FOIA request now reveals that as the Obama administration scrambled to respond last year to strong evidence that "green jobs" are a massive an economic drain, costing 570,000 Euros apiece, Department of Energy officials relied heavily on Big Wind and its monied backers.

Writes Chris Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute:

As candidate and president, on eight separate occasions Barack Obama instructed Americans to “think about what’s happening in countries like Spain [and] Germany” if they wanted to know what successful “green jobs” policies look like, and if they wanted to know what we should expect here in the U.S. from his agenda.

Some European economists took a look. In March, a research team from Madrid’s King Juan Carlos University produced a detailed, substantive, heavily sourced, two-method paper: “Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy Sources.” The paper concluded that Spain’s “green jobs” program was an economic failure, in fact costing Spain many jobs.

...[T]he Spanish study embarrassed the White House, prompting substantial media attention and even questioning at a press conference, Obama swapped out Denmark for Spain for later references to an enacted “green jobs” program.

Soon, Denmark produced a study (“Wind Energy: The Case of Denmark“) through the think-tank CEPOS. This paper also revealed tremendous costs, and that Obama’s claim about Denmark’s “renewables” experience was also steeped in mythology.

...Back in the U.S., the American Wind Energy Association — the lobby for “Big Wind” in Washington, D.C., which includes a few Spanish wind giants — also attacked the publication of the Spanish paper. Soon, the Obama administration published a five-page talking points memo assailing the economic assessment — written by two young, non-economist, pro-wind activists from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in Boulder, Colorado...drafted in often personal terms.

It's well worth reading the whole thing to understand the relationship between the Left in government and the rent-seeking corporations who make their money not by producing anything, but by putting their hands in the next guy's pocket.

Prattsburgh sets special Ecogen info session

Prattsburgh, NY — A special meeting will be held at 7 p.m. Tuesday by the Prattsburgh town board to supply information on a current lawsuit between the town and developer Ecogen.

The two sides are at odds over a proposal by Ecogen to set up 16 turbines in the town.

Town Supervisor Al Wordingham said the town’s attorney in the lawsuit, Ed Hourihan, will attend the meeting to discuss the cost and the status of the lawsuit.

The matter is before the state Supreme Court Justice John Ark, who told the parties in September he was ready to rule, but urged them to reach an out-of-court settlement.

Ark also asked former Prattsburgh officials to explain their involvement with Ecogen last December.

Last week, Wordingham told the town board a face-to-face meeting was being arranged between a representative of Ecogen’s parent company, Pattern Energy, Prattsburgh, and Italy Town Supervisor Brad Jones.

The Town of Italy also is battling Ecogen in court over a proposed 18-turbine wind farm there.

First Wind Withdraws Registration Statement

First Wind Holdings Inc. today announced that pursuant to Rule 12d2-2(c) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 5840(j) of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”), it intends to withdraw its Class A common stock, par value $0.001 per share, from registration under section 12(b) of the Exchange Act, and in connection therewith intends to file an application on Form 25 with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Pursuant to the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and Nasdaq, these actions will also terminate First Wind’s previously approved listing on Nasdaq. First Wind is terminating its listing and withdrawing registration of its common stock because of unfavorable market conditions that would adversely affect the offering of the common stock.

Wind industry fears FERC slip-up on proposed grid rules

The American Wind Energy Association said late Friday that there could be a “mistake” in proposed new grid connection rules from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

The issue regarded reforms that FERC said on Friday would make it easier for renewable energy projects to connect to America’s electricity transmission networks (see this BrighterEnergy.org story).

But the wind industry trade association said it believed the proposed rule allows conventional power generators to remain “largely exempt” from integration costs they impose on the system from any unexpected or emergency shutdowns, while renewable energy generators would have to pay “more than their share”.

The AWEA said it was not clear whether the federal commissioners intended such a rule, and that FERC’s remarks on outlining the proposals had not indicated this was the aim.

The trade association said on Friday: “We hope this was a mistake. Mistakes like this can be fixed before proposed rules turn into final rules. AWEA will provide FERC an alternative method that treats all generators fairly which we hope will be included in any final rule.”
Forced outages

Under the proposed rules, AWEA said conventional power generators do not have to pay for the back-up resources that grid operators require when conventional power plants shut down unexpectedly. These costs add up to billions each year, the wind industry group explained, but are not met by the generators that cause them.

However, variable energy producers like wind farms and solar power plants would have to pay for these back-up electricity supplies, even when outages are caused by large fossil fuel plants or nuclear generators, the wind industry fears.

AWEA also accused FERC of overstating costs of connecting up and managing renewable energy supplies on the grid in its proposals, calculating the variability of clean energy projects in isolation of other energy sources transmitting power through the grid.

Explaining the problem, the association said: “A comparable policy would be requiring a new house joining the grid to pay for an expensive battery that must be activated every time the residents turn a light or appliance on or off, while all of the existing grid users enjoy the benefit of having their changes in electricity use netted out against the changes of the other users of the grid.”

Noting the FERC’s intention to help reduce the discrimination faced by new renewable energy generators on the grid, the AWEA said it was “gravely concerned” that the proposals as currently drafter would “exacerbate” the discrimination.

FERC’s proposals are currently open for public comment for a two-month period.

The Problem with Spain’s Green Jobs Model

On at least eight occasions, President Obama has stated we should follow Spain’s example, massively subsidizing wind, solar, and other expensive types of electricity production. But if that’s really the model on which the president is basing U.S. policy, we may be in for a longer, deeper and more severe recession than previously thought.

Because the president emphasized Spain, we thought it was important to take a closer look at the Spanish experience. We commissioned a study on Spain and the results were astounding. What was meant to be a green energy revolution in Spain turned out to be an economic disaster. The video below explains why.


The Obama Administration is trying to implement the same types of programs that have failed in Spain. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today visited Baltimore, Maryland, to announce a new, streamlined process for issuing offshore wind permits. The announcement comes fresh off the heels of a visit to Louisiana, where he discussed, but did nothing to change, the Obama Administration’s stalled permitting process for offshore oil and gas production.

As the video and study show, Spain’s green jobs model doesn’t work. So why is the Obama Administration trying to emulate it?

Take back your legal rights to protect your community against turbines!

Are you fighting an industrial wind turbine project and finding, to your horror, that you’re getting nowhere with state & federal regulatory agencies?

•State Department of Environmental Conservation (aka Ministry of the Environment)
•State Department of Health
•State Attorney General’s Office
•Army Corps of Engineers
•and so forth
Are you discovering that Big Wind operates in collusion with the state and federal government, and there is no way to legally prevent these corporate knaves from getting their permits to destroy your community?

In sum, have your community rights been usurped by state or provincial law (witness the Green Energy Act in Ontario, Canada, and equivalent legislation in Wisconsin and Maine, and pending legislation in Massachusetts)?

If the answer’s “yes,” you’d better watch this video. It describes the exciting, grassroots work of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF). The video is about pesticide use in Santa Cruz, California, but you can just as well plug in “wind turbines” for “pesticides.”


Now, read this. It’s a letter from the CELDF, describing their services. (In this instance, it’s about hydrofracking in the “Marcellus Shale sacrifice zone.”)

Now ask yourself, Why can’t this approach be used against “wind farms”? Would the CELDF give advice, or, better yet, legal representation in your campaign? If they’re already stretched too thin, why can’t another group of attorneys and campaigners be formed to defend communities explicitly against turbines—using the same legal principles invoked by the CELDF?

Please forward to friends throughout the Marcellus Shale sacrifice zone:

The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) is pleased to offer free assistance to you to get a local law banning fracking adopted in your municipality. Join Pittsburgh, and take a stand for Community Rights! [The City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, recently banned hydrofracking for natural gas.]

Please send an e-mail to me, including your name, phone number, address, and e-mail in the body, and the name of your municipality and county in the subject line to: BenPrice@celdf.org

We’ll prepare and send you the ordinance and petitions, outline steps and strategies, conduct conference calls with your core group of neighbors, and work with you throughout the process as closely as possible. Only costs: please reimburse mileage if we travel to your community to do presentations, etc. Free legal services to assist in the defense of the ordinance if there is litigation against the municipality, after the ordinance is adopted.

Check out our website: Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund
And here’s the CELDF facebook page: CELDF—Facebook
Pennsylvania Community Rights Network facebook page: PCRN—Facebook
Northwestern chapter of PCRN Blog: NWPACRN
Sincerely,

Ben Price

Projects Director
CELDF
717-254-3233
BenPrice@celdf.org

Prattsburgh, Italy heads to meet with energy reps

A face-to-face talk is in the works between the towns of Prattsburgh and Italy and an energy company seeking to build an electricity-generating wind farm.

Prattsburgh Town Supervisor Al Wordingham said Monday John Calloway, of Pattern Energy, will meet with representatives from the two towns to discuss their differences.

Pattern Energy is the parent company of Ecogen, a wind farm developer planning to set up 16 turbines in Prattsburgh and 18 turbines in the town of Italy. The three sides have been locked in legal disputes for nearly a year, with a state Supreme Court justice recently urging them to find an out-of-court compromise.

Wordingham told the town board he tried to contact Calloway three times after their initial 30-40 minute phone call on Oct. 20. However, Calloway had been out of the country and finally reached Wordingham Monday morning.

“He told me he had some internal issues to resolve, and then we could meet,” Wordingham said. “And he said ‘When we get together, no lawyers.’”

Wordingham said the details of the meeting have not been worked out, although he offered to meet Calloway at one the firm’s existing wind farms.

Calloway also offered to meet with Italy Town Supervisor Brad Jones, Wordingham said.
“It’s a good start,” Wordingham said. “I feel good about this.”

The current issue between Prattsburgh and Ecogen stems from a town election last year, during which pro-wind town Supervisor Harold McConnell and town Councilwoman Sharon Quigley were ousted by sizeable margins.

Days after the election, Ecogen filed a lawsuit against the town, insisting all details be cleared up before the end of the year. The lame-duck board swiftly reached a 3-2 agreement with Ecogen in December, which was rescinded by the new town board in January.

Ecogen then filed its second lawsuit, charging the new town board did not have the authority to overturn the December action. The board opted to fight the lawsuit, saying the earlier agreement violated a number of laws, including home rule.

Ecogen also sued Italy, after the town denied the developer the permits to proceed with the turbines. Italy also piled up significant legal debts, prompting their attorneys to step down recently from the case.

Concern about future legal costs for all sides led state Supreme Court Justice John Ark to recommend last September the parties work out a solution before he publicly announces his decision.

Since then, both towns have told Ark they would support alternate sites originally proposed by Ecogen.

Ecogen response, on Oct. 13, maintained the Prattsburgh agreement in December is binding and any compromise would kill the project. But Ecogen said it would look for other ways to increase annual payments to Italy and offered to pay the town’s legal fees.

The developer’s statement to the court was made a week before Calloway and Wordingham talked for the first time.

Italy Town Supervisor Brad Jones said he would be glad to meet with Wordingham and Calloway. He added Ecogen’s financial offers are not enticing.

“For one thing, we’ve paid our (legal) bill,” he said. “I’d say they’ve been hard line with us throughout.”

Italy recently passed their 2011 budget, which includes a near-flat increase in the tax levy and a drop in the tax rate. The town also has increased its legal fund account, which will go toward paying their previous attorneys and securing a new one, Jones said.

“We’re in good shape,” Jones said.

Problems at wind farms 'unusual,' state official says

More than a week after Iberdrola Renewables opted to shut down assembly of the first wind farm in Herkimer County, construction has resumed, but little is known about how the project veered off course.

What is certain, one state official said, is the recent turn of events at Hardscrabble Wind Farm is hardly the norm.

Iberdrola halted turbine construction earlier this month to complete additional testing after it discovered concrete used in the foundations of some of the turbines did not meet company standards.

Jim Denn, a spokesman for the state Public Service Commission, said it’s rare to find problems with the construction of one turbine, let alone a group of them.

“There are hundreds of wind turbines that exist in New York state that are operating safely and that have been constructed appropriately,” Denn said. “It is certainly unusual if a particular turbine has a problem with the foundation at any point.”

By the time construction ceased, 25 of the 37 turbines slated to dot the Fairfield and Norway landscape were fully constructed.

On Friday, the company formally announced that construction had commenced again on turbines where tests were completed and foundations meet or exceed the company’s standards. Further results still are pending, company officials said.

Rumors regarding the nature of the problem and where fault lies abound among residents, contractors and even some local officials.

Ibderdrola spokesman Paul Copleman would only respond to O-D inquiries through e-mailed responses. He declined to release the names of the project’s contractors and to speak about whether all current contractors would remain working on the project despite the glitch.

The problem, Coplemain said, involved the strength of the concrete foundations, which support the turbines. Data the company gathered during routine tests showed some foundations were weak, he said.

While the company opted to temporarily call it quits on construction, local officials have said they knew the gist of the problems long before construction stopped.

Copleman confirmed that fact last week, saying that Iberdrola first identified the specific problem in early November but only decided to cease construction Nov. 12 to pursue certain tests.

“We have aggressively addressed any concerns as soon as they were identified,” Copleman said. “Until all of the tests are concluded and the engineer reviews the data, we cannot confirm to what extent the issue exists.”

Regulations

The issues almost certainly would have been handled differently if the project was larger, state officials said.

The state Public Service Commission regulates wind energy projects of 80 megawatts or greater. The Hardscrabble project, however, falls just six megawatts shy of being restricted by state guidelines.

For those projects that are bound by state regulations, the state has the authority to step in and conduct an investigation when problems are discovered with wind farms. Those same wind farms meeting the 80 megawatt standard also must follow various state regulation and approval processes, said Denn, the commission spokesman.

For example, earlier this year, the state investigated a turbine collapse at Noble Environmental Power’s Altona Wind Park in Clinton County. The investigation revealed that during a power outage, the turbine spun out of control due to incorrect wiring.

As a result, the state ordered all wind power developers with projects of 80 megawatts or greater to certify that they have emergency systems that will shut down turbines during a power loss.

Asked why the threshold is set at 80 megawatts, Denn said the system simply is what it is.

“It’s 80 megawatts or above because that’s the law,” Denn said. “That’s like asking why do we travel at 55 miles per hour. We do because that’s the law.”

‘More diligent’

So where does regulation lie for projects such as Hardscrabble?

It’s entirely up to local officials, Denn said.

Fairfield Town Supervisor Richard Souza and Norway Town Supervisor Judy Gokey did not return calls last week.

Delaware Engineering, a firm specializing in environmental engineering, was jointly hired by the towns to oversee the projects. Engineer Stephanie Vetter, who is assigned to the project, would not comment on its recent problems and directed questions to town officials.

Norway resident Cheryl Crossett, who will have six turbines on her land when the project is complete, said she’s not worried about the project’s oversight.

Her husband, Scott Crossett, is a Norway Town Board member who recused himself from discussions about the project because it involved his land.

“I don’t have a concern for the wind towers themselves being that they’ve caught the problem and they’re in the process of rectifying it,” Cheryl Crossett said. “Now that they know what’s going on, I’m sure they’re going to be more diligent.”

HARDSCRABBLE PROJECT AT A GLANCE

Project scope: 74 megawatts. Only projects 80 megawatts or larger are overseen by the state Public Service Commission. The only oversight for the Hardscrabble project comes from the towns involved.

Turbine specifications: All turbines are 2.0 megawatt Gamesa turbines. They measure 322 feet to the center hub or 476 feet to the tip of the blade.

Foundation specifications: Each foundation was expected to use about 680 cubic yards of concrete, according to Iberdrola’s project plans.

EWN Special: "Winds of Change"

BUFFALO, NY (WKBW) - The New York Power Authority is looking to get into the wind energy business with a plan that would place hundreds of wind turbines on the waters of Lake Erie.

"Right now we've kind of rough estimated that we are looking for a project between, or projects between 150 and 500 megawatts. So there is a big spread," says Lou Paonessa from NYPA.

That could mean as many as 100 wind turbines rising from the waters of Lake Erie, set out a few miles from shore and standing up to 400 feet tall.

While the plan could take up to three or four years to come to pass, opponents are wasting no time voicing their opposition.

"This is being advanced by private interests under the guise of being green, but I don't think it's going to look very green to have a lake covered in windmills with flashing beacons at night," says John Reinhold, an advocate against the windmills.

Watch the video to see John Borsa's special report, "Winds of Change".

Bingham residents cancel meeting, discuss wind farm anyway

BINGHAM -- Officials canceled a public meeting about a wind development project Wednesday night, but that didn't stop some residents from airing their opinions in the parking lot.

Town officials are still wondering why 600 postcards they say were sent to the post office never made it to residents' mailboxes.

"Not a soul has gotten one," said Selectman Steven Steward. Rather than have just a handful of people attend, selectmen and wind farm development officials from First Wind agreed to postpone the meeting.

In an interview Thursday, Alec Jarvis, with First Wind, provided updated information about the project's potential distance from homes, its possible tax benefits and the company's perceived financial health.

Residents will learn more on Wednesday, Dec. 1, about the proposed project to construct about 10 turbines in Bingham, with a total of up to 50 stretching north through Brighton Plantation, Mayfield Township, Kingsbury Plantation and Blanchard Township.

The meeting on Dec. 1 will be from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. at Quimby Middle School.

First Wind, which also operates Stetson Wind in Washington County, has been gathering wind data for about nine months from the ridge in northeast Bingham. While details are emerging, a turbine would likely top Johnson Mountain, Jarvis said.

The land for the proposed site is owned by Plum Creek and E.D. Bessey & Son, which buys and sells log wood. Both companies are willing to lease their property.

Jarvis said only one home is less than two miles from the turbines' proposed site.

When asked why the company is looking to the Bingham area, he said the strong wind currents were "first and foremost" in the decision. The region also appears to have suitable locations below 2,700 feet for turbines. Development at higher elevations would harm a more-sensitive environment.

The area is relatively isolated, he added, and already has a network of logging roads, which would limit the number of new roads that would be built.

But some residents remain wary of the proposed change.

Standing in the parking lot outside the blackened windows of the Quimby Middle School gym on Wednesday night, six residents said the potential project would hurt their small community.

"If we start putting windmills on all our hills, it will ruin the quality of what we have. This valley is all we have left," said Evelyn Beane, of Bingham.

She is not opposed to wind power, she said, but turbines should be located off the coast, where wind is strong and the energy produced benefits Maine residents.

Margy Flynn, of Bingham described the proposed project as a "temporary fix" that would not sustain long-term jobs or economic benefits.

First Wind officials have said the project could produce six to 12 long-term, full-time jobs.

The project would essentially hand taxpayer money to the Boston-based company, said Roderick Belanger, of Moscow, referring to federal stimulus funds granted to the company.

"I think it's just a waste of taxpayer money," he said. "There's no benefit to the state of Maine or this community when it's all said and done."

The U.S. government has granted hundreds of millions of dollars to First Wind, according to an Oct. 25 article in Reuters. In July, the company received a $117 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy. Since Sept. 2009, it has received $254 million in grants from the U.S. Treasury.

The company's financial future may depend on continued government support, according to a Nov. 14 article in the Maine Sunday Telegram. One apparent hitch in the company's financial future happened in October when it failed to go public and sell stock to investors.

While opponents at the time said it was an example of the company's vulnerability, Jarvis said the company's health is not in jeopardy.

"It would have been an opportunity for an additional source of funding," he said. "It has not affected our development efforts in Bingham."

First Wind is mostly owned by private equity firm Madison Dearborn and hedge fund operator D.E. Shaw and has never been profitable, according to Reuters.

Jarvis said he encourages people to attend all informational meetings and take tours of the company's facilities. He emphasized the benefit of new legislation that mandates payment of $4,000 per turbine to go toward a host community benefit agreement.

The town may also form a tax-increment financing district to capture shifts in property value and then spend the money on economic development projects, he said. If the TIF district is not formed, he agreed taxes would most likely go down, but the resulting increased valuation would cause loss of education subsidy, he said.

In the meantime, the mailing misstep will remain a mystery. First Wind sent the notices from Portland to the town's post office on Nov. 4, to then be given to residents, Jarvis said. The company paid for the postage for the notices, which provided the date and time of Wednesday's meeting.

Cathy Atkins, the town's postmaster, said she doesn't remember ever receiving the postcards. While she's been on vacation recently, "I've had two people working for me, and they're very reliable," she said.

Cape Vincent residents demand Edsall's ouster

CAPE VINCENT — Several town residents frustrated with Planning Board Chairman Richard J. Edsall demanded his resignation at a well-attended Town Council meeting Thursday night.

Hester M. Chase, founder of the St. Lawrence River Public Power Association and one of the nearly 200 people who attended the meeting at the Cape Vincent Recreation Park, said Mr. Edsall was not fit to represent the Planning Board because, among other reasons, he has financial contracts with BP Alternative Energy.

Supervisor Urban C. Hirschey and Councilman Brooks J. Bragdon tried to pass a motion to restrict Mr. Edsall from voting on wind issues that come before the Planning Board, but the other three council members voted against it.

Many others at the meeting agreed with Ms. Chase.

Read entire article

Petition for Public Hearing - Saddleback Ridge Wind project-Maine

Please click on the following link to sign a petition calling for the DEP to hold a public hearing on noise and scenic impacts for the Saddleback Ridge Wind project. The application was accepted for processing and the deadline for requesting a public hearing is December 6. This is the first application where interested parties have had the ability to submit credible, conflicting technical evidence within the 20 day period required by DEP rules. Rufus Brown has been engaged to draft the necessary documentation, drawing from his experience in the Record Hill Wind, Oakfield, and Spruce Mountain applications. The purpose of the petition is to demonstrate to DEP that there is widespread support for a hearing.
http://www.gopetition.com/petition/40741.html

“Wind Turbine Syndrome and the Brain” (Pierpont)

The following is the text of Pierpont’s keynote address before the “First International Symposium on the Global Wind Industry and Adverse Health Effects: Loss of Social Justice?” in Picton, Ontario, Canada, October 30, 2010. It is followed by a discussion of several other relevant talks at the symposium by Drs. Alec Salt, Michael Nissenbaum, Christopher Hanning, and Mr. Richard James.

(Click to read the entire article)

First Wind Marks the Start of Construction on Milford II Project

First Wind, an independent U.S.-based wind energy company, held a ceremony today to commemorate the start of construction of the 102 MW expansion of the company's Utah-based Milford Wind project. As part of the ceremony, local and community leaders joined First Wind at the project site in Milford, Utah to recognize the economic and environmental benefits of the project along with the significance of recent project milestones that include a long-term power purchase agreement (PPA) and construction financing, both of which were critical in spurring the current construction activity.

Milford Mayor Bryan Sherwood and Millard County Commission Chair Daron Smith joined with First Wind officials and others in signing their names to a turbine blade that will be erected on the wind project.

The Milford Wind Phase II Project will have the capacity to generate up to 102 MW of clean energy upon its completion, enough to power about 22,000 homes. Located in Millard and Beaver County, Utah, the construction associated with the installation of 68 additional 1.5 MW GE turbines for the second phase of the project began in July, with foundations being poured in October.

The construction will be a source of revenue and new jobs to the surrounding area. For example, the 204 MW Milford I project, which went online in November 2009, supported more than 300 development and construction jobs, and First Wind directly spent about $30 million with Utah-based businesses developing and building the first phase of the project and another $50 million in statewide spending on items such as wages, taxes and more.

"We are very pleased to accelerate our construction activities for the second phase of the Milford Wind project," said David Hastings, Vice President of Western Development for First Wind. "The expansion and continued success of Milford Wind is a testament to the project and the commitment of our stakeholders, the State of Utah, our host counties of Beaver and Millard, our PPA partners - SCPPA, LADWP and Glendale, our landowner group including the federal Bureau of Land Management, our contractor and subcontractors, and of course our lenders."

RMT, which led the construction for the Milford I project and is currently building First Wind's Kahuku project in Oahu, Hawaii and the Sheffield Wind project in Vermont, is again leading construction activities for the Milford II project.

"We are pleased to continue our partnership with First Wind to expand the Milford Wind project," said Frank Greb, Vice President and General Manager for RMT. "As with the first phase of the project, RMT will hire local workers and subcontractors whenever possible to ensure that the construction of this expansion maximizes the economic benefits for the surrounding community and Utah."

Power Purchase Agreement with SCPPA

Completed on October 18, 2010, the long-term power purchase agreement (PPA) to supply the cities of Los Angeles and Glendale with renewable energy represented a significant milestone for the Milford II project. Once completed, the second phase of the Milford Wind project will add to the already significant renewable energy that is being produced and delivered to Los Angeles, Burbank and Pasadena through the first phase of the project. The 102 MW expansion will utilize the 88-mile generator lead that was built from the Milford Wind project to the Intermountain Power Plant in Delta, which then connects the site to the electrical grid.

"This PPA for Milford II is significant as it builds on the successful long-term PPA we signed in 2007 for Milford I, which at its time was a landmark for a publicly owned utility," said Bill D. Carnahan, Executive Director of the Southern California Public Power Authority (SCPPA). "As with the Milford I PPA, SCPPA will contract with First Wind for the long-term agreement, prepay for the energy, and sign power sales agreements with the participants to sell them the output of the project to repay SCPPA's costs including the ongoing operating expenses."

Project Financing

In addition to the PPA, First Wind recently secured financing for the project. RBS Securities Inc. was lead arranger and bookrunner for this loan. The following banks acted as joint lead arrangers for the financing: Banco Espirito Santo S.A. New York Branch, Santander Investment Securities Inc., CoBank, ACB, and SG Americas Securities, LLC.

"The commitment from these banks is evidence of both the strength of this project and the promise of the wind industry," said Steve Schauer, Senior Vice President of Finance for First Wind. "We sincerely appreciate their commitment to both the Milford I and now the Milford II projects and to renewable energy. We look forward to building our relationship with each of them."

"RBS is very pleased to have played a leading role in First Wind's financing of the Milford II project," said Richard Randall, RBS Managing Director. "We applaud First Wind's dedication and the Joint Lead Arrangers' commitment in successfully closing this financing. The financing of the Milford II project, following the success of the first Milford project last year demonstrates the tremendous vision of the Milford Wind project and First Wind to bring low cost renewable power to southern California."

When completed, the combined phases of the Milford Wind project will have the capacity to generate enough to power the equivalent of more than 65,000 homes annually. With an aggregate of 306 MW of clean, wind energy between the two projects, the power produced by Milford Wind will be the equivalent of decreasing carbon dioxide emissions by over 310,000 tons annually, according to the Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database (E-GRID).

Another View: Wind protesters really prophets who warn of dire peril ahead

In response to the editorial "Anti-wind protests undercut their own case" (Nov. 10): There will come a time when perception becomes reality.

What once held promise as a cure for harmful emissions as an energy source that could reduce our dependency on foreign countries and fossil fuels will be recognized as a bad trade.

Wind energy is a low-value, high-cost, unreliable non-solution to our energy needs. Its massive environmental footprint is the antithesis of "tread lightly and leave a small footprint" Earth-friendliness.

The three dozen protesters who stood out in the biting rain and who were arrested will in time be vindicated in the eyes of the editors and others in the aftermath and awakening of the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the public and the environment.

This is, was and will always be about the money. Multinationals like G.E., Iberdrola, ShellWind, BP Wind, UPC Wind, First Wind, Second Wind, Italian Vento Power Corporation IVPC and others are not concerned about environmental or public benefits.

They are content to destroy our natural resources by policies that force us to pay for their environmental destruction and blight.

As stimulus funding has failed to produce industry-claimed green jobs, it will vanish. Wind developers will be seen as carpetbaggers, leaving behind a graveyard wake of 440-foot steel towers with fiberglass, concrete and transmission fluids.

Wind turbine oils and toxic neodymium will contaminate our aquifers. Our soil will be littered by 400-foot steel and fiberglass failing wind turbines, each with 8,000 parts, in place of scenic splendor that once defined the region.

The only thing standing between predatory wind multinationals and the integrity of the environment of Maine are the patriots willing to be arrested to defend our most precious assets, rights and the public trust.

They may be ridiculed by some now, but they have my enduring gratitude for their selflessness, wisdom, vision, patriotism and actions taken to defend public and environmental interests.

First, do no harm. Conservation measures should be exhausted before we permit the shift of our wealth in resource and monetary terms to multinationals in exchange for unreliable, cost-prohibitive, redundant, habitat-and-scenic-vista-damaging, bird-and-bat-killing, home-and-property-devaluating, quiet-enjoyment-destroying and community-dividing wind energy.