The rules meant that some renewable energy companies were paid more to switch off their turbines than they would have received from ordinary operations
Official figures disclosed that 17 operators were paid almost £7 million for shutting down their farms on almost 40 occasions between January and mid-September. Continuing to make payments at that rate would lead to householders paying out £9.9 million in 2011 for operators to disconnect their turbines from the National Grid.
The scale of the payments triggered a review of the rules on so-called constraint payments. The payments are made when too much electricity floods the grid, with the network unable to absorb any excess power generated. The money is ultimately added on to household bills and paid for by consumers.
Last year, only £176,788 of such payments were made, but changes in the way the National Grid, which supplies energy to retail companies, “balances” the electricity network have meant a huge expansion in their use.
The rules meant that some renewable energy companies were paid more to switch off their turbines than they would have received from ordinary operations.
In September, it was disclosed that £1.2 million would go to a Norwegian company that owned 60 turbines in the Scottish Borders, thanks to a period of unusually high wind during the spring. Because of the rising cost, the National Grid “balancing” system could now be overhauled to reduce the use of constraint payments.
Constraint payments have added to political and public hostility to onshore wind farms.
A growing number of Conservative MPs are opposed to Coalition plans to increase the number of wind turbines. Ministers say Britain needs more “renewable” energy generation to reduce the dependence on gas imported from Russia and the Middle East.
Chris Heaton Harris, a Conservative MP, said the unpopularity of wind farms was eroding support for all sorts of renewable power. “I know from my mailbag and from the number of emails I receive every day on the matter that people are turning against renewables of just about every type because wind turbines are, among other things, so badly sold,” he said.
“Onshore wind generation requires a 100 per cent back-up of carbon-burning technology or nuclear energy, should the wind not blow, and in addition to the devastation of the visual environment there are the problems of noise and flicker. They are the wrong renewables choice.”
The turbine industry says that constraint payments are a sign of problems with the National Grid, and not the turbines themselves. Charles Hendry, an energy minister, confirmed the latest payments, and said the system the National Grid used to calculate the fees was being reviewed.
“Reducing or increasing the output of generators is a normal part of National Grid’s role to balance supply and demand, and it will pick the most cost-effective way to deliver what is required,” he said.
“However, the recent requirement to use wind farms to manage the system has raised questions as to whether the current market-wide balancing arrangements for wind are appropriate.
“National Grid has launched a consultation to seek views on the issues involved.”
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Monday, December 26, 2011
Wolfe Island, Transformed by Wind Power
Click here to listen to the audio download of the news item...
Most experts agree we need to move toward renewable energy to save the planet. Giant wind farms are already up and running across America - from the high deserts of California to the North Country's Tug Hill Plateau. And from coast to coast, communities have been divided over wind power development. Supporters around the nation imagine wind providing clean energy--and green jobs--for generations to come. But wind farms have a downside. In 2009, dozens of wind towers were installed on Wolfe Island on the Canadian side of the border, just where Lake Ontario feeds into the St. Lawrence River.
The turbines rise like thirty story buildings.... transforming the landscape and sharply dividing a once sleepy farming community. This audio collage, produced by Chris Trimmer and Aleksandra Bragoszewska of Kingston, Ontario for Front and Center captures the low roar of the turbines and the dissonance they've spread in the community.
Most experts agree we need to move toward renewable energy to save the planet. Giant wind farms are already up and running across America - from the high deserts of California to the North Country's Tug Hill Plateau. And from coast to coast, communities have been divided over wind power development. Supporters around the nation imagine wind providing clean energy--and green jobs--for generations to come. But wind farms have a downside. In 2009, dozens of wind towers were installed on Wolfe Island on the Canadian side of the border, just where Lake Ontario feeds into the St. Lawrence River.
The turbines rise like thirty story buildings.... transforming the landscape and sharply dividing a once sleepy farming community. This audio collage, produced by Chris Trimmer and Aleksandra Bragoszewska of Kingston, Ontario for Front and Center captures the low roar of the turbines and the dissonance they've spread in the community.
Friday, December 23, 2011
French scientist creates Wind Turbine Syndrome
The following video is worth watching. (Ignore the annoying 15 sec. ad at the beginning.) It gives you an appreciation for why people get seriously sick when they’re around wind turbines.
The video is a dramatization of work done in France in the 1960s by an electrical engineer named Vladimir Gavreau, who stumbled upon “infrasound” in his laboratory, and, once he recognized its formidable properties for causing debilitating illness, began developing an “infrasound” weapon for military use. (It’s unclear how far Gavreau’s “weapon” progressed, in terms of further development and use. Yes, it’s well known that infrasound is used as a weapon; what’s unclear to me is how much of the current technology was pioneered by Gavreau.)
Be that as it may, notice the symptoms experienced by Gavreau and his assistants. Their symptoms are the result of vestibular dys-regulation (saccule and utricle: inner ear organs of balance, motion, and position “sense” sending misinformation to the brain)—described perfectly, half a century later, by Dr. Pierpont in her book, “Wind Turbine Syndrome.”
“Luckily,” wrote Gavreau in his journal, “we were able to turn it off quickly. All of us were sick for hours. Everything in us was vibrating: stomach, heart, lungs. All the people in the other laboratories were sick, too. They were very angry with us.”
Gerry Vassilatos, a high school science teacher and writer of popular science, describes Gavreau’s experience as follows. While I can’t vouch for the point-by-point accuracy of his narrative, Vassilatos does accurately convey that Gavreau and his team blundered upon infrasound, which they then worked to adapt to military purposes.
Basically, Gavreau and his team fortuitously discovered a Wind Turbine Syndrome Machine which they tried to harness as a weapon. Except for one insurmountable problem: They couldn’t control its deadly emissions.
This puts Gavreau about 40 years ahead of the wind developers, with their Industrial Wind Turbine (IWT) Machine—1600 feet from your front door, dear reader. Like Gavreau, they, too, can’t control its deadly emissions. Unlike Gavreau, they are dishonest about that inconvenient truth.
The central research theme of Dr. Vladimir Gavreau was the development of remote controlled automatons and robotic devices. To this end he assembled a group of scientists in 1957. The group, including Marcel Miane, Henri Saul, and Raymond Comdat, successfully developed a great variety of robotic devices for industrial and military purposes. In the course of developing mobile robots for use in battlefields and industrial fields, Dr. Gavreau and his staff made a strange and astounding observation which not only interrupted their work, but became their major research theme.
Housed in a large concrete building, the entire group periodically experienced a disconcerting nausea, which flooded the research facility. Day after day, for weeks at a time, the symptoms plagued the researchers.
Called to inspect the situation, industrial examiners also fell victim to the malady. It was thought that the condition was caused by pathogens, a “building sickness.” No such agencies were ever biologically detected. Yet the condition prevailed. Research schedules now seriously interrupted, a complete examination of the building was called.
The researchers noticed that the mysterious nauseations ceased when certain laboratory windows were blocked. It was then assumed that “chemical gas emissions” of some kind were responsible for the malady, and so a thorough search of the building was undertaken.
While no noxious fumes could be detected by any technical means, the source was finally traced by building engineers to an improperly installed motor-driven ventilator.
The engineers at first thought that this motor might be emitting noxious fumes, possibly evaporated oils and lubricants. But no evaporated products were ever detected.
It was found that the loosely poised low speed motor, poised in its cavernous duct of several stories, was developing “nauseating vibrations.”
The mystery magnified for Dr. Gavreau and his team, when they tried to measure the sound intensity and pitch. Failing to register any acoustic readings at all, the team doubted the assessment of the building engineers. Nevertheless, closing the windows blocked the sense of nausea.
In a step of brilliant scientific reasoning, Gavreau and his colleagues realized that the sound with which they were dealing was so low in pitch that it could not register on any available microphonic detector. The data was costly to the crew.
They could not pursue the “search” for long time periods. During the very course of tracking the sound down, an accidental direct exposure rendered them all extremely ill for hours. When finally measured, it was found that a low intensity pitch of a fundamental 7 cycles per second was being produced. Furthermore, this infrasonic pitch was not one of great intensity either.
It became obvious that the slow vibrating motor was activating an infrasonic resonant mode in the large concrete duct. Operating as the vibrating “tongue” of an immense “organ pipe,” the rattling motor produced nauseating infrasound. Coupled with the rest of the concrete building, a cavernous industrial enclosure, the vibrating air column formed a bizarre infrasonic “amplifier.”
Knowledge of this infrasonic configuration also explained why shutting the windows was mildly effective in “blocking the malady.” The windows altered the total resonant profile of the building, shifting the infrasonic pitch and intensity.
Since this time, others have noted the personally damaging effects of such infrasonic generation in office buildings and industrial facilities. The nauseating effects of exposure to a low intensity natural or manmade infrasonic source is now well appreciated.
Dr. Gavreau and his research team now carefully investigated the effects of their “infrasonic organ” at various intensity levels and pitch. Changing the spring tension on shock mounts, which held the fan motor, it was possible to change the pitch. Various infrasonic resonances were established throughout the large research building. Shutting the windows blocked most of the symptoms. When the window was again opened, however weak as the source was made, the team felt the nauseating effects once again.
In the business of military research, Dr. Gavreau believed he had discovered a new and previously “unknown weapon” in these infrasounds. Aware of the natural explosives by which infrasonics are generated, Dr. Gavreau began to speculate on the application of infrasonics as a defense initiative. The haphazard explosive effects of natural infrasound in thunderclaps were quite effective in demonstrating what an artificial “thunder-maker” could do. But, how could a thunderclap be artificially generated in a compact system? These thoughts stimulated theoretical discussions on the possibility of producing coherent infrasound: an infrasonic “laser.”
The first devices Dr. Gavreau implemented were designed to imitate the “accident” which first made his research group aware of infrasonics. They designed real organ pipes of exceedingly great width and length. The first of these was six feet in diameter and seventy-five feet long. These designs were tested outdoors, securely propped against protective sound-absorbent walls. The investigators stood at a great distance. Two forms of these infrasonic organ pipes were built. The first utilized a drive piston, which pulsed the pipe output. The second utilized compressed air in a more conventional manner.
The main resonant frequency of these pipes occurred in the “range of death,” found to lie between three and seven cycles per second. These sounds could not be humanly heard, a distinct advantage for a defense system. The effects were felt, however. The symptoms come on rapidly and unexpectedly, though the pipes were operating for a few seconds. Their pressure waves impacted against the entire body in a terrible and inescapable grip. The grip was a pressure which came in on one from all sides simultaneously, an envelope of death.
Next came the pain, dull infrasonic pressure against the eyes and ears. Then came a frightening manifestation on the material supports of the device itself. With sustained operation of the pipe, a sudden rumble rocked the area, nearly destroying the test building. Every pillar and joint of the massive structure bolted and moved. One of the technicians managed to ignore the pain enough to shut down the power supply.
Dr. Gavreau and his associates were dangerously ill for nearly a day after these preliminary tests. These maladies were sustained for hours after the device was turned off. Infrasonic assaults on the body are the more lethal because they come with dreadful silence. The eyesight of Dr. Gavreau and his fellow workers were affected for days. More dangerously were their internal organs affected: the heart, lungs, stomach, intestinal cavity were filled with continual painful spasms for an equal time period.
The video is a dramatization of work done in France in the 1960s by an electrical engineer named Vladimir Gavreau, who stumbled upon “infrasound” in his laboratory, and, once he recognized its formidable properties for causing debilitating illness, began developing an “infrasound” weapon for military use. (It’s unclear how far Gavreau’s “weapon” progressed, in terms of further development and use. Yes, it’s well known that infrasound is used as a weapon; what’s unclear to me is how much of the current technology was pioneered by Gavreau.)
Be that as it may, notice the symptoms experienced by Gavreau and his assistants. Their symptoms are the result of vestibular dys-regulation (saccule and utricle: inner ear organs of balance, motion, and position “sense” sending misinformation to the brain)—described perfectly, half a century later, by Dr. Pierpont in her book, “Wind Turbine Syndrome.”
“Luckily,” wrote Gavreau in his journal, “we were able to turn it off quickly. All of us were sick for hours. Everything in us was vibrating: stomach, heart, lungs. All the people in the other laboratories were sick, too. They were very angry with us.”
Gerry Vassilatos, a high school science teacher and writer of popular science, describes Gavreau’s experience as follows. While I can’t vouch for the point-by-point accuracy of his narrative, Vassilatos does accurately convey that Gavreau and his team blundered upon infrasound, which they then worked to adapt to military purposes.
Basically, Gavreau and his team fortuitously discovered a Wind Turbine Syndrome Machine which they tried to harness as a weapon. Except for one insurmountable problem: They couldn’t control its deadly emissions.
This puts Gavreau about 40 years ahead of the wind developers, with their Industrial Wind Turbine (IWT) Machine—1600 feet from your front door, dear reader. Like Gavreau, they, too, can’t control its deadly emissions. Unlike Gavreau, they are dishonest about that inconvenient truth.
The central research theme of Dr. Vladimir Gavreau was the development of remote controlled automatons and robotic devices. To this end he assembled a group of scientists in 1957. The group, including Marcel Miane, Henri Saul, and Raymond Comdat, successfully developed a great variety of robotic devices for industrial and military purposes. In the course of developing mobile robots for use in battlefields and industrial fields, Dr. Gavreau and his staff made a strange and astounding observation which not only interrupted their work, but became their major research theme.
Housed in a large concrete building, the entire group periodically experienced a disconcerting nausea, which flooded the research facility. Day after day, for weeks at a time, the symptoms plagued the researchers.
Called to inspect the situation, industrial examiners also fell victim to the malady. It was thought that the condition was caused by pathogens, a “building sickness.” No such agencies were ever biologically detected. Yet the condition prevailed. Research schedules now seriously interrupted, a complete examination of the building was called.
The researchers noticed that the mysterious nauseations ceased when certain laboratory windows were blocked. It was then assumed that “chemical gas emissions” of some kind were responsible for the malady, and so a thorough search of the building was undertaken.
While no noxious fumes could be detected by any technical means, the source was finally traced by building engineers to an improperly installed motor-driven ventilator.
The engineers at first thought that this motor might be emitting noxious fumes, possibly evaporated oils and lubricants. But no evaporated products were ever detected.
It was found that the loosely poised low speed motor, poised in its cavernous duct of several stories, was developing “nauseating vibrations.”
The mystery magnified for Dr. Gavreau and his team, when they tried to measure the sound intensity and pitch. Failing to register any acoustic readings at all, the team doubted the assessment of the building engineers. Nevertheless, closing the windows blocked the sense of nausea.
In a step of brilliant scientific reasoning, Gavreau and his colleagues realized that the sound with which they were dealing was so low in pitch that it could not register on any available microphonic detector. The data was costly to the crew.
They could not pursue the “search” for long time periods. During the very course of tracking the sound down, an accidental direct exposure rendered them all extremely ill for hours. When finally measured, it was found that a low intensity pitch of a fundamental 7 cycles per second was being produced. Furthermore, this infrasonic pitch was not one of great intensity either.
It became obvious that the slow vibrating motor was activating an infrasonic resonant mode in the large concrete duct. Operating as the vibrating “tongue” of an immense “organ pipe,” the rattling motor produced nauseating infrasound. Coupled with the rest of the concrete building, a cavernous industrial enclosure, the vibrating air column formed a bizarre infrasonic “amplifier.”
Knowledge of this infrasonic configuration also explained why shutting the windows was mildly effective in “blocking the malady.” The windows altered the total resonant profile of the building, shifting the infrasonic pitch and intensity.
Since this time, others have noted the personally damaging effects of such infrasonic generation in office buildings and industrial facilities. The nauseating effects of exposure to a low intensity natural or manmade infrasonic source is now well appreciated.
Dr. Gavreau and his research team now carefully investigated the effects of their “infrasonic organ” at various intensity levels and pitch. Changing the spring tension on shock mounts, which held the fan motor, it was possible to change the pitch. Various infrasonic resonances were established throughout the large research building. Shutting the windows blocked most of the symptoms. When the window was again opened, however weak as the source was made, the team felt the nauseating effects once again.
In the business of military research, Dr. Gavreau believed he had discovered a new and previously “unknown weapon” in these infrasounds. Aware of the natural explosives by which infrasonics are generated, Dr. Gavreau began to speculate on the application of infrasonics as a defense initiative. The haphazard explosive effects of natural infrasound in thunderclaps were quite effective in demonstrating what an artificial “thunder-maker” could do. But, how could a thunderclap be artificially generated in a compact system? These thoughts stimulated theoretical discussions on the possibility of producing coherent infrasound: an infrasonic “laser.”
The first devices Dr. Gavreau implemented were designed to imitate the “accident” which first made his research group aware of infrasonics. They designed real organ pipes of exceedingly great width and length. The first of these was six feet in diameter and seventy-five feet long. These designs were tested outdoors, securely propped against protective sound-absorbent walls. The investigators stood at a great distance. Two forms of these infrasonic organ pipes were built. The first utilized a drive piston, which pulsed the pipe output. The second utilized compressed air in a more conventional manner.
The main resonant frequency of these pipes occurred in the “range of death,” found to lie between three and seven cycles per second. These sounds could not be humanly heard, a distinct advantage for a defense system. The effects were felt, however. The symptoms come on rapidly and unexpectedly, though the pipes were operating for a few seconds. Their pressure waves impacted against the entire body in a terrible and inescapable grip. The grip was a pressure which came in on one from all sides simultaneously, an envelope of death.
Next came the pain, dull infrasonic pressure against the eyes and ears. Then came a frightening manifestation on the material supports of the device itself. With sustained operation of the pipe, a sudden rumble rocked the area, nearly destroying the test building. Every pillar and joint of the massive structure bolted and moved. One of the technicians managed to ignore the pain enough to shut down the power supply.
Dr. Gavreau and his associates were dangerously ill for nearly a day after these preliminary tests. These maladies were sustained for hours after the device was turned off. Infrasonic assaults on the body are the more lethal because they come with dreadful silence. The eyesight of Dr. Gavreau and his fellow workers were affected for days. More dangerously were their internal organs affected: the heart, lungs, stomach, intestinal cavity were filled with continual painful spasms for an equal time period.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Orangeville Clear Skies group disappointed by wind farm OK
Last week’s approval of the Stony Creek Wind Farm comes as a disappointment to its opposition.
“This was a rare opportunity for a very competent government agency to get to the bottom of what skeptics of industrial wind power have saying for some time, that wind farms are unlikely to ever make a significant contribution to New York’s electricity needs,” said Attorney Gary Abraham, who represents Clear Skies Over Orangeville. “That was CSOO’s position in the PSC proceeding.”
The state Public Service Commission on Friday gave the go-ahead for the wind farm that will house up to 59 electricity-producing wind turbines, as long as it receives an independent certification the turbines will function as intended.
The authorization also allows Stony Creek LLC to begin site development for a two-acre substation and connect into a 230-kilovolt transmission line owned by New York State Electric & Gas.
“CSOO is of course disappointed with PSC’s decision,” Abraham said. “Particularly troubling is the agency’s decision to waive a ‘deliverability study’ requirement it imposed on large wind farms like this one in 2009.”
“The requirement was developed to address the likelihood, as PSC found in 2009, that new wind farms in either of the two concentrated areas of wind farm development in New York would not be able to deliver their electricity, either because transmission line limits could not handle the surge of several wind farms at one time, or because a new wind farm would displace electricity generated by another wind farm, or by no-emissions hydropower plants.”
“The two areas of concentrated wind farm development are the north country and Wyoming County,” Abraham continued. “As a result of the requirement, all wind farm proposals available then or since reduced their design size to just under 80 MW, the threshold for the requirement to apply.
“All except one — Stony Creek in Orangeville,” he said. “The PSC has ruled that Stony Creek need not demonstrate its electricity would be actually deliverable.”
The PSC authorization order denied CSOO’s requests for additional information and ruled against the group’s arguments.
The order said CSOO was incorrect in claiming the project’s environmental impact statements and lead agency findings lacked sufficient information.
Stony Creek LLC provided additional information as supplements to its application, the PSC order reads. Those actions were taken at the state Department of Public Service’s request, and in response to parties and non-parties in the project.
“Additional information on the topics discussed by CSOO is therefore available for our consideration,” the order says. “Thus, contrary to Clear Skies’ claim in its response to the Nov. 4 notice, there is no need for hearings to complete the record on deliverability.”
The PSC also denied CSOO’s request for an evidentiary hearing.
The PSC said the CSOO request was based on the theory the project won’t be able to provide capacity or deliver energy into the electric system, as opposed to challenging facts provided by Stony Creek LLC.
“In as much as CSOO raises no issue of material fact, but only an issue of interpretation, its request does not warrant an evidentiary hearing,” the order reads.
Stony Creek LLC is a subsidiary of the Chicago-based Invenergy. Representatives said the company met all requirements.
“Invenergy submitted a deliverability study to the Public Service Commission on October 27, 2011,” said Eric Miller, director of business development for Invenergy. “The study confirms with certainty that energy from the Stony Creek Wind farm can and will be successfully delivered to the New York electric grid, and that remains the case even if all wind projects in Western New York are operating at 100 percent of capacity.”
Officials on Friday said they don’t have an updated construction schedule.
“This was a rare opportunity for a very competent government agency to get to the bottom of what skeptics of industrial wind power have saying for some time, that wind farms are unlikely to ever make a significant contribution to New York’s electricity needs,” said Attorney Gary Abraham, who represents Clear Skies Over Orangeville. “That was CSOO’s position in the PSC proceeding.”
The state Public Service Commission on Friday gave the go-ahead for the wind farm that will house up to 59 electricity-producing wind turbines, as long as it receives an independent certification the turbines will function as intended.
The authorization also allows Stony Creek LLC to begin site development for a two-acre substation and connect into a 230-kilovolt transmission line owned by New York State Electric & Gas.
“CSOO is of course disappointed with PSC’s decision,” Abraham said. “Particularly troubling is the agency’s decision to waive a ‘deliverability study’ requirement it imposed on large wind farms like this one in 2009.”
“The requirement was developed to address the likelihood, as PSC found in 2009, that new wind farms in either of the two concentrated areas of wind farm development in New York would not be able to deliver their electricity, either because transmission line limits could not handle the surge of several wind farms at one time, or because a new wind farm would displace electricity generated by another wind farm, or by no-emissions hydropower plants.”
“The two areas of concentrated wind farm development are the north country and Wyoming County,” Abraham continued. “As a result of the requirement, all wind farm proposals available then or since reduced their design size to just under 80 MW, the threshold for the requirement to apply.
“All except one — Stony Creek in Orangeville,” he said. “The PSC has ruled that Stony Creek need not demonstrate its electricity would be actually deliverable.”
The PSC authorization order denied CSOO’s requests for additional information and ruled against the group’s arguments.
The order said CSOO was incorrect in claiming the project’s environmental impact statements and lead agency findings lacked sufficient information.
Stony Creek LLC provided additional information as supplements to its application, the PSC order reads. Those actions were taken at the state Department of Public Service’s request, and in response to parties and non-parties in the project.
“Additional information on the topics discussed by CSOO is therefore available for our consideration,” the order says. “Thus, contrary to Clear Skies’ claim in its response to the Nov. 4 notice, there is no need for hearings to complete the record on deliverability.”
The PSC also denied CSOO’s request for an evidentiary hearing.
The PSC said the CSOO request was based on the theory the project won’t be able to provide capacity or deliver energy into the electric system, as opposed to challenging facts provided by Stony Creek LLC.
“In as much as CSOO raises no issue of material fact, but only an issue of interpretation, its request does not warrant an evidentiary hearing,” the order reads.
Stony Creek LLC is a subsidiary of the Chicago-based Invenergy. Representatives said the company met all requirements.
“Invenergy submitted a deliverability study to the Public Service Commission on October 27, 2011,” said Eric Miller, director of business development for Invenergy. “The study confirms with certainty that energy from the Stony Creek Wind farm can and will be successfully delivered to the New York electric grid, and that remains the case even if all wind projects in Western New York are operating at 100 percent of capacity.”
Officials on Friday said they don’t have an updated construction schedule.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Dear Santa: The Wind Industry Christmas Wish List
The wind industry has behaved nicely this year. Some gifts would be appreciated.
These Christmas wishes would make the wind industry’s future much merrier. There are eight, so they will also light up Hanukkah’s nights.
1.) Santa must convince this Scrooge-like Congress to open its cold, calculating heart to an extension of the wind industry’s production tax credit (PTC) until 2016, matching the duration of solar’s investment tax credit (ITC).
Wind’s tax credit will expire at the end of 2012. It returns 2.3 cents for every kilowatt-hour of electricity produced in the project’s first 10 years. It has been up for extension eight times. The three times it was delayed, installations dropped 73 percent, 77 percent, and 93 percent, respectively. A just-released study showed a failure to extend could cost nearly 40,000 jobs and almost 10 billion dollars. If the credit is extended through 2016, the struggling U.S. economy would receive a wind industry that is bigger by $1 billion, as well as 25,000 new jobs.
2.) Santa could also renew the ITC Treasury Cash Grant options and renew the manufacturing tax credit for wind.
The ITC allows investors a 30 percent tax credit at the end of the first year of a project’s life instead of the PTC. The Cash Grant allows developers to take the 30 percent ITC as an upfront cash rebate. The manufacturing tax credits support the renewables’ supply chains.
Congress' resistance to extending these programs raises taxes on renewables developers and manufacturers, otherwise known as job creators.
3.) New transmission would be a wonderful gift. Wind is curtailed when there is more electricity being supplied than there are lines to carry it. Wind and the other renewables would profit greatly with more wires from resource-rich remote regions to populated areas where people are hungry for electricity.
4.) Wind needs better PR. Opponents of wind have seen it grow to 35 percent of new U.S. electricity generation, while coal’s share fell to 44 percent. Wind’s opponents want their market share back.
That likely explains why the media has recently been filled with claims that wind increases greenhouse gas emissions, that it drives up power prices, and that it is a serious threat to avian life.
“Silence is taken as ‘pour it on,’” a political consultant recently noted. “If you don’t respond to what people say, it becomes true.” Santa could help wind’s supporters spread the good word.
5.) If Santa brings grid operators up-to-date technologies and flexibility services with their new transmission, wind and the other renewables can do without scaled up energy storage for another two decades. Still, without adequate transmission, storage is the best alternative.
Experiments in energy storage are ongoing. Pumped hydro has proven itself. Compressed air energy storage (CAES) shows signs of being economic, if not always practical. And battery storage is being used for grid management. If Santa could leave cost-effective 20-megawatt battery packs under the trees of wire-limited grid operators, they could put more wind to work.
6.) Offshore wind. Europe has over 40 offshore wind farms with an installed capacity of 2,396 megawatts and 16 more projects, totaling an additional 3,972 megawatts, under construction. China has 102 megawatts of offshore wind in operation and some 2,300 megawatts in construction. But despite the Obama administration’s best efforts to facilitate and streamline, the U.S. has zero megawatts installed or under construction.
Santa could deliver passage of the specially structured ITC now before Congress that addresses offshore wind’s double whammy of high cost and protracted development. Bills have bipartisan support in both houses.
7.) An equitable intellectual property environment. Uneasy trade relations with China exploded this year. Sino-Wind troubles surround the legal battle between AMSC, a U.S. advanced technologies provider, and Sinovel, China’s leading turbine manufacturer.
The confession and conviction of a former employee of AMSC subsidiary WindTec for intellectual property (IP) theft and collusion with Sinovel make it hard not to believe in the Chinese company’s guilt. Evidence allegedly shows Sinovel requested the stolen IP, received it, had a $1.5-million-plus contract with the employee, and has been using the stolen software.
What the wind industry needs from Santa is, first, an equitable settlement between AMSC and Sinovel and, second, contractual certainty with which the industry can go back to work in the world’s biggest wind market.
Wind companies in China and around the world will profit enormously from this gift, but it could cost Sinovel a trillion-dollar settlement, so this will be a tough one. If Santa fails, the Chinese courts will take over.
8.) A consensus on dealing with greenhouse gases. This is the toughest one. Timely, scaled implementation of renewables requires a price on greenhouse gas emissions. Europeans widely accept the idea of climate change, are working on pricing emissions, and are rapidly building renewables. U.S. political opinion is less aligned. The wind industry needs a U.S. policy which addresses greenhouse gases and climate change.
Happy holidays.
These Christmas wishes would make the wind industry’s future much merrier. There are eight, so they will also light up Hanukkah’s nights.
1.) Santa must convince this Scrooge-like Congress to open its cold, calculating heart to an extension of the wind industry’s production tax credit (PTC) until 2016, matching the duration of solar’s investment tax credit (ITC).
Wind’s tax credit will expire at the end of 2012. It returns 2.3 cents for every kilowatt-hour of electricity produced in the project’s first 10 years. It has been up for extension eight times. The three times it was delayed, installations dropped 73 percent, 77 percent, and 93 percent, respectively. A just-released study showed a failure to extend could cost nearly 40,000 jobs and almost 10 billion dollars. If the credit is extended through 2016, the struggling U.S. economy would receive a wind industry that is bigger by $1 billion, as well as 25,000 new jobs.
2.) Santa could also renew the ITC Treasury Cash Grant options and renew the manufacturing tax credit for wind.
The ITC allows investors a 30 percent tax credit at the end of the first year of a project’s life instead of the PTC. The Cash Grant allows developers to take the 30 percent ITC as an upfront cash rebate. The manufacturing tax credits support the renewables’ supply chains.
Congress' resistance to extending these programs raises taxes on renewables developers and manufacturers, otherwise known as job creators.
3.) New transmission would be a wonderful gift. Wind is curtailed when there is more electricity being supplied than there are lines to carry it. Wind and the other renewables would profit greatly with more wires from resource-rich remote regions to populated areas where people are hungry for electricity.
4.) Wind needs better PR. Opponents of wind have seen it grow to 35 percent of new U.S. electricity generation, while coal’s share fell to 44 percent. Wind’s opponents want their market share back.
That likely explains why the media has recently been filled with claims that wind increases greenhouse gas emissions, that it drives up power prices, and that it is a serious threat to avian life.
“Silence is taken as ‘pour it on,’” a political consultant recently noted. “If you don’t respond to what people say, it becomes true.” Santa could help wind’s supporters spread the good word.
5.) If Santa brings grid operators up-to-date technologies and flexibility services with their new transmission, wind and the other renewables can do without scaled up energy storage for another two decades. Still, without adequate transmission, storage is the best alternative.
Experiments in energy storage are ongoing. Pumped hydro has proven itself. Compressed air energy storage (CAES) shows signs of being economic, if not always practical. And battery storage is being used for grid management. If Santa could leave cost-effective 20-megawatt battery packs under the trees of wire-limited grid operators, they could put more wind to work.
6.) Offshore wind. Europe has over 40 offshore wind farms with an installed capacity of 2,396 megawatts and 16 more projects, totaling an additional 3,972 megawatts, under construction. China has 102 megawatts of offshore wind in operation and some 2,300 megawatts in construction. But despite the Obama administration’s best efforts to facilitate and streamline, the U.S. has zero megawatts installed or under construction.
Santa could deliver passage of the specially structured ITC now before Congress that addresses offshore wind’s double whammy of high cost and protracted development. Bills have bipartisan support in both houses.
7.) An equitable intellectual property environment. Uneasy trade relations with China exploded this year. Sino-Wind troubles surround the legal battle between AMSC, a U.S. advanced technologies provider, and Sinovel, China’s leading turbine manufacturer.
The confession and conviction of a former employee of AMSC subsidiary WindTec for intellectual property (IP) theft and collusion with Sinovel make it hard not to believe in the Chinese company’s guilt. Evidence allegedly shows Sinovel requested the stolen IP, received it, had a $1.5-million-plus contract with the employee, and has been using the stolen software.
What the wind industry needs from Santa is, first, an equitable settlement between AMSC and Sinovel and, second, contractual certainty with which the industry can go back to work in the world’s biggest wind market.
Wind companies in China and around the world will profit enormously from this gift, but it could cost Sinovel a trillion-dollar settlement, so this will be a tough one. If Santa fails, the Chinese courts will take over.
8.) A consensus on dealing with greenhouse gases. This is the toughest one. Timely, scaled implementation of renewables requires a price on greenhouse gas emissions. Europeans widely accept the idea of climate change, are working on pricing emissions, and are rapidly building renewables. U.S. political opinion is less aligned. The wind industry needs a U.S. policy which addresses greenhouse gases and climate change.
Happy holidays.
Obama admin pushes renewable energy on 2 coasts
The Obama administration moved Tuesday to boost renewable energy on both coasts, approving onshore solar and wind farms in the West and pushing for offshore wind power in the Atlantic Ocean.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said his department has approved a 300-megawatt solar farm on public land in Arizona and a 200-megawatt wind farm in Southern California. The wind farm includes 186 megawatts that would be produced on federal lands.
The projects, southwest of Phoenix and east of San Diego, respectively, are the 24th and 25th renewable energy projects approved on public lands in the past two years, Salazar said, and demonstrate that the administration’s commitment to renewable energy is paying dividends.
“Together, these projects will produce the clean energy equivalent of nearly 18 coal-fired power plants, so what’s happening here is nothing short of a renewable energy revolution,” Salazar said.
The Sonoran Solar Energy Project in Arizona, being developed by Florida-based NextEra Energy Resources, will generate enough electricity to power about 90,000 homes. The Tule Wind Project in California, developed by Iberdrola Renewables, the U.S. division of a Spanish energy company, will be able to power about 65,000 homes.
While onshore projects flourish, the administration’s efforts on offshore wind have struggled. Not a single megawatt of wind power is produced offshore.
Last year, Salazar approved the Cape Wind project in Massachusetts after years of federal review, clearing the way for work to begin on the nation’s first offshore wind farm.
On Tuesday, Salazar said officials are moving forward on a massive transmission project that would carry electricity produced at offshore wind farms from Virginia to New Jersey. Internet giant Google and others have pledged up to $5 billion for a network of transmission lines for offshore wind farms.
Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is soliciting interest from developers and seeking public comments on the project, which would involve building high-voltage transmission lines along the Atlantic Coast. The line would enable up to 7,000 megawatts of wind turbine capacity to be delivered to the grid, Salazar said.
The announcement comes a week after New Jersey-based NRG Energy Inc. said it is putting on hold a project that would have created a wind farm off Delaware’s coast.
NRG said it is putting the project on hold because its Bluewater Wind subsidiary has been unable to find an investment partner. The proposed wind farm would have put 49 to 150 turbines about 13 miles off the Delaware coast.
The wind industry suffered another setback on Capitol Hill as Congress failed to extend a production tax credit, and a similar cash grant program for renewable energy, that supporters say has boosted the industry’s strong growth.
A study commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association, an industry group, said failure to extend the tax credit could mean the loss of as many as 37,000 U.S. jobs.
Salazar has urged Congress to extend the wind credit, which expires next year, calling it a lifeline for domestic producers that could save tens of thousands of jobs and bring financial certainty to the renewable industry.
Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, called extension of the cash grant program even more crucial. The so-called 1603 Treasury grant program, approved under the 2009 economic stimulus law, provides cash grants worth 30 percent of costs for renewable projects. The program expires on Dec. 31.
“To keep the industry growing and creating jobs in the U.S., we need Congress to extend the 1603 program,” Resch said, noting that the program has supported more than 22,000 renewable energy projects in 48 states. “The 1603 program has done more to expand the use of renewable energy than any other policy in U.S. history.”
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., has said he plans to take up tax incentives for renewable energy early next year.
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said his department has approved a 300-megawatt solar farm on public land in Arizona and a 200-megawatt wind farm in Southern California. The wind farm includes 186 megawatts that would be produced on federal lands.
The projects, southwest of Phoenix and east of San Diego, respectively, are the 24th and 25th renewable energy projects approved on public lands in the past two years, Salazar said, and demonstrate that the administration’s commitment to renewable energy is paying dividends.
“Together, these projects will produce the clean energy equivalent of nearly 18 coal-fired power plants, so what’s happening here is nothing short of a renewable energy revolution,” Salazar said.
The Sonoran Solar Energy Project in Arizona, being developed by Florida-based NextEra Energy Resources, will generate enough electricity to power about 90,000 homes. The Tule Wind Project in California, developed by Iberdrola Renewables, the U.S. division of a Spanish energy company, will be able to power about 65,000 homes.
While onshore projects flourish, the administration’s efforts on offshore wind have struggled. Not a single megawatt of wind power is produced offshore.
Last year, Salazar approved the Cape Wind project in Massachusetts after years of federal review, clearing the way for work to begin on the nation’s first offshore wind farm.
On Tuesday, Salazar said officials are moving forward on a massive transmission project that would carry electricity produced at offshore wind farms from Virginia to New Jersey. Internet giant Google and others have pledged up to $5 billion for a network of transmission lines for offshore wind farms.
Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is soliciting interest from developers and seeking public comments on the project, which would involve building high-voltage transmission lines along the Atlantic Coast. The line would enable up to 7,000 megawatts of wind turbine capacity to be delivered to the grid, Salazar said.
The announcement comes a week after New Jersey-based NRG Energy Inc. said it is putting on hold a project that would have created a wind farm off Delaware’s coast.
NRG said it is putting the project on hold because its Bluewater Wind subsidiary has been unable to find an investment partner. The proposed wind farm would have put 49 to 150 turbines about 13 miles off the Delaware coast.
The wind industry suffered another setback on Capitol Hill as Congress failed to extend a production tax credit, and a similar cash grant program for renewable energy, that supporters say has boosted the industry’s strong growth.
A study commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association, an industry group, said failure to extend the tax credit could mean the loss of as many as 37,000 U.S. jobs.
Salazar has urged Congress to extend the wind credit, which expires next year, calling it a lifeline for domestic producers that could save tens of thousands of jobs and bring financial certainty to the renewable industry.
Rhone Resch, president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, called extension of the cash grant program even more crucial. The so-called 1603 Treasury grant program, approved under the 2009 economic stimulus law, provides cash grants worth 30 percent of costs for renewable projects. The program expires on Dec. 31.
“To keep the industry growing and creating jobs in the U.S., we need Congress to extend the 1603 program,” Resch said, noting that the program has supported more than 22,000 renewable energy projects in 48 states. “The 1603 program has done more to expand the use of renewable energy than any other policy in U.S. history.”
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., has said he plans to take up tax incentives for renewable energy early next year.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Analysis: United Tech CEO sharpens portfolio-pruning shears
As United Technologies Corp (UTX.N) gets ready to close the biggest takeover in its history, Goodrich Corp (GR.N), CEO Louis Chenevert is scouring the diversified manufacturer's portfolio for businesses to sell.
Another analyst suggested that the company's Clipper Windpower unit, which United Tech bought out last year, could be a sale candidate. The company had taken a minority stake in the wind turbine manufacturer but wound up buying the Carpenteria, California-based company outright after Clipper faced a cash crunch and turned to United Tech for a loan.
"The Clipper Wind acquisition, that strikes me as a piece that is not necessarily core to United Technologies, that they should be able to part with pretty easily and just generate cash," said Morningstar's Holland.
Another analyst suggested that the company's Clipper Windpower unit, which United Tech bought out last year, could be a sale candidate. The company had taken a minority stake in the wind turbine manufacturer but wound up buying the Carpenteria, California-based company outright after Clipper faced a cash crunch and turned to United Tech for a loan.
"The Clipper Wind acquisition, that strikes me as a piece that is not necessarily core to United Technologies, that they should be able to part with pretty easily and just generate cash," said Morningstar's Holland.
First Wind Raises $210 Million for Wind Project in Washington State
Boston – First Wind, a Boston-based wind energy company, announced on Monday it has raised $210 million in financing for its wind project located in northern Whitman County, Wash.
As a result, First Wind said it will continue on schedule with construction of the project, which will be largest renewable energy facility in the county with the capacity to generate enough energy to power about 30,000 homes, equal to the total energy load of all of Whitman County, according to First Wind.
The project will feature 58 Vestas 1.8 MW wind turbines with a generating capacity of about 105 MW of electricity. Construction on the wind farm began in October.
KeyBank National Association served as the joint lead arranger and administrative agent, and Nordduetsche Landesbank Girozentrale, CoBank ACB, and Banco Santander served as joint lead arrangers.
First Wind has developed and operates 735 megawatts of generating capacity at 11 wind energy projects so far in New York, New England, Utah, Vermont and Hawaii.
As a result, First Wind said it will continue on schedule with construction of the project, which will be largest renewable energy facility in the county with the capacity to generate enough energy to power about 30,000 homes, equal to the total energy load of all of Whitman County, according to First Wind.
The project will feature 58 Vestas 1.8 MW wind turbines with a generating capacity of about 105 MW of electricity. Construction on the wind farm began in October.
KeyBank National Association served as the joint lead arranger and administrative agent, and Nordduetsche Landesbank Girozentrale, CoBank ACB, and Banco Santander served as joint lead arrangers.
First Wind has developed and operates 735 megawatts of generating capacity at 11 wind energy projects so far in New York, New England, Utah, Vermont and Hawaii.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Troupsburg passes law for wind turbine development
Troupsburg, N.Y. — With two wind companies examining whether turbines are feasible in Troupsburg, the town board approved a local law establishing limitations on the structures.
The board passed a local law that established height and sound limitations Wednesday night, as well as set-back distances from property lines and public roads.
Supervisor Fred Potter said the board studied laws from other towns, including Hornellsville and Jasper, and that no concerns or support regarding the law were offered from the public during the meeting.
The town initially drew interest from Seattle-based wind company Ridgeline Energy in April, and the company is conducting studies on whether wind in Troupsburg could sustain turbines. They’ve also started speaking with property owners to gauge interest from residents.
Potter said that Invenergy, the company conducting studies in Canisteo and Jasper, also approached the town regarding a potential project along the north border with Jasper.
The law passed Wednesday established a height limit of 500 feet for turbines. Potter said both Ridgeline Energy and Invenergy representatives supported this height.
Decibel maximum limits were set at 60 decibels 10 percent of the time, 50 decibels 90 percent of the time, with 70 decibels the maximum sound for turbines.
Turbines also have to be at least 600 feet away from property lines, 500 feet from the nearest road, and 1,000 feet from the nearest off-site residence. They also must be 100 feet from state-identified wetlands, said the supervisor.
The board passed a local law that established height and sound limitations Wednesday night, as well as set-back distances from property lines and public roads.
Supervisor Fred Potter said the board studied laws from other towns, including Hornellsville and Jasper, and that no concerns or support regarding the law were offered from the public during the meeting.
The town initially drew interest from Seattle-based wind company Ridgeline Energy in April, and the company is conducting studies on whether wind in Troupsburg could sustain turbines. They’ve also started speaking with property owners to gauge interest from residents.
Potter said that Invenergy, the company conducting studies in Canisteo and Jasper, also approached the town regarding a potential project along the north border with Jasper.
The law passed Wednesday established a height limit of 500 feet for turbines. Potter said both Ridgeline Energy and Invenergy representatives supported this height.
Decibel maximum limits were set at 60 decibels 10 percent of the time, 50 decibels 90 percent of the time, with 70 decibels the maximum sound for turbines.
Turbines also have to be at least 600 feet away from property lines, 500 feet from the nearest road, and 1,000 feet from the nearest off-site residence. They also must be 100 feet from state-identified wetlands, said the supervisor.
Acousticians confirm Wind Turbine Syndrome
“The idea that infrasound doesn’t or can’t affect the ear is just flat-out wrong.”
—Dr. Alec Salt, Dept of Otolaryngology,
Washington University School of Medicine
St. Louis, Missouri.
This study was commissioned through a private philanthropic grant created to determine why there were so many strong complaints about the loss of well-being and hardships experienced by people living near large industrial wind turbines operating in Falmouth, Massachusetts.
The purpose of this study was to investigate and confirm or deny the presence of infrasonic and low frequency noise emissions (ILFN) from the “WIND 1”, a municipally-owned Vestas V82 industrial wind turbine.
In March of 2011, after many months of vigorous neighborhood complaints and strong appeals to the town, selectmen voluntarily decided to curtail WIND 1 operations when hub height wind speed exceeded 10 m/s. This required that this study focus on noise emissions from the nearby “NOTUS” wind turbine, an identical make and model.
Acoustics
This study was conducted at a representative neighbor’s home in Falmouth and confirmed that there are dynamically modulated low frequency acoustic amplitudes and tones produced by the nearby wind turbine.
Dynamic amplitude modulations occurred at 1.4 second intervals that were consistent with the blades rotating past the wind turbine tower (the blade pass rate).
Dynamic amplitude modulations below 10 Hz were stronger indoors than outdoors. Modulations measured indoors were 0.2 Pascal peak to peak, consisting mostly of energy below 20 Hz. Two tones were detected from both the NOTUS and the WIND 1 turbines, at 22.9 Hz and 129 Hz, and are considered signatures of the wind turbines’ acoustic profile.
Outdoors, the A-weighted sound level decreased at a predictable rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance from the nearest turbine.
The linear unweighted sound level decreased according to cylindrical spreading at 3 dB per doubling of distance and was controlled by acoustic energy below 20 Hertz. A-weighting does not reveal this low-frequency information. Sound-level averaging with Leq for any time length hides the low-frequency dynamic amplitude modulations.
Health effects
The investigators were surprised to experience the same adverse health symptoms described by neighbors living at this house and near other large industrial wind turbine sites.
The onset of adverse health effects was swift, within twenty minutes, and persisted for some time after leaving the study area. The dBA and dBC levels and modulations did not correlate to the health effects experienced. However, the strength and modulation of the un-weighted and dBG-weighted levels increased indoors, consistent with worsened health effects experienced indoors.
The dBG weighted level appeared to be controlled by in-flow turbulence and exceeded physiological thresholds for response to low-frequency and infrasonic acoustic energy as theorized by Salt.
The wind turbine tone at 22.9 Hz was not audible, yet the modulated amplitudes regularly exceeded vestibular detection thresholds. The 22.9 Hz tone lies in the brain’s “high Beta” wave range (associated with alert state, anxiety, and “fight or flight” stress reactions). The brain’s frequency following response (FFR) could be involved in maintaining an alert state during sleeping hours, which could lead to health effects.
Sleep was disturbed during the study when the wind turbine operated with hub height wind speeds above 10 m/s.
It took about a week to recover from the adverse health effects experienced during the study, with lingering recurring nausea and vertigo for almost seven weeks for one of the investigators.
Further epidemiological and laboratory research needed
The research is more than just suggestive. Our experiencing of the adverse health effects reported by others confirms that industrial wind turbines can produce real discomfort and adverse health impacts. Further research could confirm that these ill effects are caused by pressure pulsations exceeding vestibular thresholds, unrelated to the audible frequency spectrum but are instead related to the response of the vestibular system to the low frequency noise emissions. The vestibular system appears to be stimulated by responding to these pressure pulsations rather than by motion or disease, especially at low ambient sound levels.
Dysfunctions in the vestibular system can cause disequilibrium, nausea, vertigo, anxiety, and panic attacks, which have been reported near a number of industrial wind turbine facilities. The study emphasizes the need for epidemiological and laboratory research conducted by medical health professionals and acousticians working together who are concerned with public health and well-being.
This study underscores the need for more effective and precautionary setback distances for industrial wind turbines.
It is especially important to include a margin of safety sufficient to prevent inaudible low-frequency wind turbine noise from being detected by the human vestibular system.
Acknowledgements
This study was initiated by the concerns of a private citizen, Bruce McPherson, who enjoyed the many quality of life benefits of living on Cape Cod. He was disappointed that there were no efforts being made by developers or government agencies to determine the real cause for the many complaints from Falmouth residents living near three new industrial wind turbines. He knew that neighbors were constantly complaining to town officials about receiving excessive noise, adverse health effects and the loss of well-being. Thanks are given by so many for the generosity of Mr. McPherson, who initiated and funded this independent investigation.
To the residents of Falmouth who welcomed us into their homes and lives, extended us their hospitality, told us their stories, and gave us their time and assistance, our deepest appreciation.
Sincere appreciation is given to Dr. Alec Salt, Dr. Timothy Hullar, Mr. Richard James, and Mr. Charles Ebbing for their insightful correspondence, professional reviews and comments.
—Dr. Alec Salt, Dept of Otolaryngology,
Washington University School of Medicine
St. Louis, Missouri.
This study was commissioned through a private philanthropic grant created to determine why there were so many strong complaints about the loss of well-being and hardships experienced by people living near large industrial wind turbines operating in Falmouth, Massachusetts.
The purpose of this study was to investigate and confirm or deny the presence of infrasonic and low frequency noise emissions (ILFN) from the “WIND 1”, a municipally-owned Vestas V82 industrial wind turbine.
In March of 2011, after many months of vigorous neighborhood complaints and strong appeals to the town, selectmen voluntarily decided to curtail WIND 1 operations when hub height wind speed exceeded 10 m/s. This required that this study focus on noise emissions from the nearby “NOTUS” wind turbine, an identical make and model.
Acoustics
This study was conducted at a representative neighbor’s home in Falmouth and confirmed that there are dynamically modulated low frequency acoustic amplitudes and tones produced by the nearby wind turbine.
Dynamic amplitude modulations occurred at 1.4 second intervals that were consistent with the blades rotating past the wind turbine tower (the blade pass rate).
Dynamic amplitude modulations below 10 Hz were stronger indoors than outdoors. Modulations measured indoors were 0.2 Pascal peak to peak, consisting mostly of energy below 20 Hz. Two tones were detected from both the NOTUS and the WIND 1 turbines, at 22.9 Hz and 129 Hz, and are considered signatures of the wind turbines’ acoustic profile.
Outdoors, the A-weighted sound level decreased at a predictable rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance from the nearest turbine.
The linear unweighted sound level decreased according to cylindrical spreading at 3 dB per doubling of distance and was controlled by acoustic energy below 20 Hertz. A-weighting does not reveal this low-frequency information. Sound-level averaging with Leq for any time length hides the low-frequency dynamic amplitude modulations.
Health effects
The investigators were surprised to experience the same adverse health symptoms described by neighbors living at this house and near other large industrial wind turbine sites.
The onset of adverse health effects was swift, within twenty minutes, and persisted for some time after leaving the study area. The dBA and dBC levels and modulations did not correlate to the health effects experienced. However, the strength and modulation of the un-weighted and dBG-weighted levels increased indoors, consistent with worsened health effects experienced indoors.
The dBG weighted level appeared to be controlled by in-flow turbulence and exceeded physiological thresholds for response to low-frequency and infrasonic acoustic energy as theorized by Salt.
The wind turbine tone at 22.9 Hz was not audible, yet the modulated amplitudes regularly exceeded vestibular detection thresholds. The 22.9 Hz tone lies in the brain’s “high Beta” wave range (associated with alert state, anxiety, and “fight or flight” stress reactions). The brain’s frequency following response (FFR) could be involved in maintaining an alert state during sleeping hours, which could lead to health effects.
Sleep was disturbed during the study when the wind turbine operated with hub height wind speeds above 10 m/s.
It took about a week to recover from the adverse health effects experienced during the study, with lingering recurring nausea and vertigo for almost seven weeks for one of the investigators.
Further epidemiological and laboratory research needed
The research is more than just suggestive. Our experiencing of the adverse health effects reported by others confirms that industrial wind turbines can produce real discomfort and adverse health impacts. Further research could confirm that these ill effects are caused by pressure pulsations exceeding vestibular thresholds, unrelated to the audible frequency spectrum but are instead related to the response of the vestibular system to the low frequency noise emissions. The vestibular system appears to be stimulated by responding to these pressure pulsations rather than by motion or disease, especially at low ambient sound levels.
Dysfunctions in the vestibular system can cause disequilibrium, nausea, vertigo, anxiety, and panic attacks, which have been reported near a number of industrial wind turbine facilities. The study emphasizes the need for epidemiological and laboratory research conducted by medical health professionals and acousticians working together who are concerned with public health and well-being.
This study underscores the need for more effective and precautionary setback distances for industrial wind turbines.
It is especially important to include a margin of safety sufficient to prevent inaudible low-frequency wind turbine noise from being detected by the human vestibular system.
Acknowledgements
This study was initiated by the concerns of a private citizen, Bruce McPherson, who enjoyed the many quality of life benefits of living on Cape Cod. He was disappointed that there were no efforts being made by developers or government agencies to determine the real cause for the many complaints from Falmouth residents living near three new industrial wind turbines. He knew that neighbors were constantly complaining to town officials about receiving excessive noise, adverse health effects and the loss of well-being. Thanks are given by so many for the generosity of Mr. McPherson, who initiated and funded this independent investigation.
To the residents of Falmouth who welcomed us into their homes and lives, extended us their hospitality, told us their stories, and gave us their time and assistance, our deepest appreciation.
Sincere appreciation is given to Dr. Alec Salt, Dr. Timothy Hullar, Mr. Richard James, and Mr. Charles Ebbing for their insightful correspondence, professional reviews and comments.
Friday, December 16, 2011
STONY CREEK WIND FARM APPROVED
The PSC approved this (over 80 Mw) project yesterday (see below and the attached document). The developer, Invenergy, was in a big rush to get this done. They are going to begin doing some excavating immediately and will thereby qualify for the Treasury Section 1603 Direct Cash Grant. All they really need to do is move some dirt around before January 1 in order to qualify for this very lucrative grant – courtesy of your tax dollars.
It was no secret that this approval was coming. But when you look at the facts you can understand why it would have been a fairly easy project to site. If you were a wind developer you couldn't pick a better town to target than Orangeville, N Y in Wyoming County.
Consider some of the characteristics of Orangeville:
o It is a very rural community. Only 1200 people live there.
o There are only 35 people per square mile in Orangeville and there are only 602 residential housing units in the town
o It has some relatively high elevations. The highest point in the town is almost 2000 feet above sea level.
o Wyoming County is located one County inland from the Eastern shore of Lake Erie. The prevailing winds from Lake Erie blow directly across Orangeville.
o There is no incorporated village in the town -- just a couple of wide spots in some roads.
o There is no significant body of water in the town. Very small brooks and some man-made farm ponds are all the water there is.
o There are no campgrounds. There is no significant number of seasonal residents.
o There are only a handful of part-time residents and retirees. There are some owners of "gentlemen farms" who have retired to the town or who spend weekends there. But not very many.
o The per capita income in Orangeville is well below the national average.
o The nearest newspaper, The Hornell Evening News, is published in Steuben County.
But Orangeville does have a zoning law. The town enacted a zoning law in mid-2009 well before the local elections of November 2009. The town zoning law is rather extensive and includes many of the typical restrictions and prohibitions found in many municipal zoning laws in New York State – – including restrictions on “cabarets and adult entertainment.”
And Orangeville has a provision in their 2009 zoning law that is very receptive to Big Wind development. You can only conclude that the majority of the electorate in the town of Orangeburg is getting exactly what it has asked for. The voters of the town had an opportunity to elect town council members who would repeal the wind friendly provision in the town zoning law – but they did not. You can probably assume that this provision of the zoning law was provided to the town, word for word, by the developer. The provision reads as follows:
SECTION 1309 ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES
A. Goal - Allow development of alternative energy sources to take place within the Town but direct it to those areas that are most appropriate.
B. Policies
1. The availability of solar power, wind power, geothermal power and bioenergy has created a need for local governments to address these issues in their municipal planning. These natural resources create new kinds of working land uses which, if not properly planned for, renders a community with missed opportunities to direct changes according to a larger community vision, or in the very least, consider potentially viable options to fossil fuel.
2. Identify and inventory the Town’s natural resource capabilities and constraints to help in guiding local development, management and protection efforts. These resources represent a mix of working landscapes with economic, cultural or scenic benefits to the community.
3. Pinpoint the sites with the greatest potential for development with the lowest potential for adverse environmental or other impacts.
4. Analyze sites in the context of other natural and cultural resources, existing and adjacent land uses and other relevant factors. Planning should involve balancing a variety of needs and priorities, proposed future land uses and activities must be analyzed and evaluated for their respective advantages and drawbacks.
5. Eliminate or reduce dependency on fossil fuel and foreign energy.
The whole spirit of this section of the Orangeville zoning law is "Come on in, Big Wind! We love you…we are going to help you save the planet… and we are looking forward to our lease checks ASAP!” A small resistance group was formed called, "Clear Skies Over Orangeville." But that resistance group was not large enough. The majority should have the say in these things and the majority did in Orangeville.
You can feel sorry for those handful of retirees and weekenders who bought land in Orangeville hoping to truly get away from it all – and, among other things, enjoy a still and dark star filled night sky undiminished by the ground light of civilization. Trouble is – there just weren't enough of them to create a counterforce to the large landowners who control the local government and who have an entirely different idea of what the town should be about, and for whom.
Towns along the St. Lawrence River and Eastern Lake Ontario are qualitatively different than Orangeville in many important respects. I believe those differences will save the River and Lake towns from a similar fate.
It was no secret that this approval was coming. But when you look at the facts you can understand why it would have been a fairly easy project to site. If you were a wind developer you couldn't pick a better town to target than Orangeville, N Y in Wyoming County.
Consider some of the characteristics of Orangeville:
o It is a very rural community. Only 1200 people live there.
o There are only 35 people per square mile in Orangeville and there are only 602 residential housing units in the town
o It has some relatively high elevations. The highest point in the town is almost 2000 feet above sea level.
o Wyoming County is located one County inland from the Eastern shore of Lake Erie. The prevailing winds from Lake Erie blow directly across Orangeville.
o There is no incorporated village in the town -- just a couple of wide spots in some roads.
o There is no significant body of water in the town. Very small brooks and some man-made farm ponds are all the water there is.
o There are no campgrounds. There is no significant number of seasonal residents.
o There are only a handful of part-time residents and retirees. There are some owners of "gentlemen farms" who have retired to the town or who spend weekends there. But not very many.
o The per capita income in Orangeville is well below the national average.
o The nearest newspaper, The Hornell Evening News, is published in Steuben County.
But Orangeville does have a zoning law. The town enacted a zoning law in mid-2009 well before the local elections of November 2009. The town zoning law is rather extensive and includes many of the typical restrictions and prohibitions found in many municipal zoning laws in New York State – – including restrictions on “cabarets and adult entertainment.”
And Orangeville has a provision in their 2009 zoning law that is very receptive to Big Wind development. You can only conclude that the majority of the electorate in the town of Orangeburg is getting exactly what it has asked for. The voters of the town had an opportunity to elect town council members who would repeal the wind friendly provision in the town zoning law – but they did not. You can probably assume that this provision of the zoning law was provided to the town, word for word, by the developer. The provision reads as follows:
SECTION 1309 ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES
A. Goal - Allow development of alternative energy sources to take place within the Town but direct it to those areas that are most appropriate.
B. Policies
1. The availability of solar power, wind power, geothermal power and bioenergy has created a need for local governments to address these issues in their municipal planning. These natural resources create new kinds of working land uses which, if not properly planned for, renders a community with missed opportunities to direct changes according to a larger community vision, or in the very least, consider potentially viable options to fossil fuel.
2. Identify and inventory the Town’s natural resource capabilities and constraints to help in guiding local development, management and protection efforts. These resources represent a mix of working landscapes with economic, cultural or scenic benefits to the community.
3. Pinpoint the sites with the greatest potential for development with the lowest potential for adverse environmental or other impacts.
4. Analyze sites in the context of other natural and cultural resources, existing and adjacent land uses and other relevant factors. Planning should involve balancing a variety of needs and priorities, proposed future land uses and activities must be analyzed and evaluated for their respective advantages and drawbacks.
5. Eliminate or reduce dependency on fossil fuel and foreign energy.
The whole spirit of this section of the Orangeville zoning law is "Come on in, Big Wind! We love you…we are going to help you save the planet… and we are looking forward to our lease checks ASAP!” A small resistance group was formed called, "Clear Skies Over Orangeville." But that resistance group was not large enough. The majority should have the say in these things and the majority did in Orangeville.
You can feel sorry for those handful of retirees and weekenders who bought land in Orangeville hoping to truly get away from it all – and, among other things, enjoy a still and dark star filled night sky undiminished by the ground light of civilization. Trouble is – there just weren't enough of them to create a counterforce to the large landowners who control the local government and who have an entirely different idea of what the town should be about, and for whom.
Towns along the St. Lawrence River and Eastern Lake Ontario are qualitatively different than Orangeville in many important respects. I believe those differences will save the River and Lake towns from a similar fate.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
First Wind Names Michele Beasley as Senior Vice President and General Counsel
First Wind, an independent U.S.-based wind energy company, today announced that Michele Beasley has joined the company as Senior Vice President and General Counsel. Ms. Beasley comes to First Wind with extensive experience in the development and financing of wind and other energy projects. In her role, she will oversee the company's legal affairs and manage its legal team.
"We are excited to have Michele join our executive management team, which will benefit from her talent and experience," said Michael Alvarez, President and CFO of First Wind. "Her expertise in the space is unparalleled and positions her perfectly to support our projects in operation and under development across the U.S. from the Northeast to the West and to Hawaii."
Ms. Beasley most recently served as Senior Counsel at Wells Fargo Bank in San Francisco and Boston, serving as senior legal counsel to the Securities Investment Group of its division of Wholesale Division, supporting a multi-billion high-yield investment portfolio and large street- and customer-facing sales and trading groups. She served on the Securities Investment Risk Management and Firewall Committees, and represented commercial real estate financing teams.
Prior to Wells Fargo, Ms. Beasley spent more than a decade working on all aspects of the development and financing of energy projects at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP and Chadbourne & Parke, including the structuring, negotiation, and documentation of equity investments, project contracts, and third-party limited- and non-recourse financing, and related real estate and governmental approvals work. She also served as staff counsel to the then-new Women's Rights Project of Human Rights Watch, under the Georgetown University Law Center's Women's Law and Public Policy Fellowship.
Ms. Beasley received her Bachelor of Arts from Smith College, and her Juris Doctor from Georgetown University Law Center. Ms. Beasley currently resides in Natick, MA.
"We are excited to have Michele join our executive management team, which will benefit from her talent and experience," said Michael Alvarez, President and CFO of First Wind. "Her expertise in the space is unparalleled and positions her perfectly to support our projects in operation and under development across the U.S. from the Northeast to the West and to Hawaii."
Ms. Beasley most recently served as Senior Counsel at Wells Fargo Bank in San Francisco and Boston, serving as senior legal counsel to the Securities Investment Group of its division of Wholesale Division, supporting a multi-billion high-yield investment portfolio and large street- and customer-facing sales and trading groups. She served on the Securities Investment Risk Management and Firewall Committees, and represented commercial real estate financing teams.
Prior to Wells Fargo, Ms. Beasley spent more than a decade working on all aspects of the development and financing of energy projects at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP and Chadbourne & Parke, including the structuring, negotiation, and documentation of equity investments, project contracts, and third-party limited- and non-recourse financing, and related real estate and governmental approvals work. She also served as staff counsel to the then-new Women's Rights Project of Human Rights Watch, under the Georgetown University Law Center's Women's Law and Public Policy Fellowship.
Ms. Beasley received her Bachelor of Arts from Smith College, and her Juris Doctor from Georgetown University Law Center. Ms. Beasley currently resides in Natick, MA.
What's Next for Wind Power
At first, many New Englanders seemed on board with this alternative energy source, but now some these projects are encountering stiff breezes. We’ll find out how Wind Power is playing at the local level in the Granite State and how recent debates have become more nuanced and less black-and-white than in the past.
Guests
•Edward Cherian - New England Development Director for Iberdrola Renewables, an international clean energy company that builds and operates wind farms, including one in Lempster, New Hampshire.
•Lisa Linowes - Executive Director of the Industrial Wind Action Group and publisher and editor of Windaction.org, which tracks industrial wind-energy projects across the country and often questions claims made by the industry.
We'll also hear from
•Brian Beihl: Antrim resident and activist skeptical of the Antrim Wind Project. He also founded the website www.antrimwind.org.
•Jack Kenworthy: CEO of Eolian Renewable Energy, based in Portsmouth, N.H. Eolian, in partnership with Westerly Wind, has been trying to develop a wind-energy site in Antrim, N.H.
Guests
•Edward Cherian - New England Development Director for Iberdrola Renewables, an international clean energy company that builds and operates wind farms, including one in Lempster, New Hampshire.
•Lisa Linowes - Executive Director of the Industrial Wind Action Group and publisher and editor of Windaction.org, which tracks industrial wind-energy projects across the country and often questions claims made by the industry.
We'll also hear from
•Brian Beihl: Antrim resident and activist skeptical of the Antrim Wind Project. He also founded the website www.antrimwind.org.
•Jack Kenworthy: CEO of Eolian Renewable Energy, based in Portsmouth, N.H. Eolian, in partnership with Westerly Wind, has been trying to develop a wind-energy site in Antrim, N.H.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)