Dec. 2001 Enron files for bankruptcy protection following the massive fraud that led to its collapse.
Jan. 2002 Enron announces in Master Agreement that UBS Warburg will purchase its North American wholesale natural gas and power trading for a 1/3 of share of the businesses future profits.
Feb. 2002 Enron announces plan to restructure Board of Directors as part of Chapter 11 reorganization process, whereby existing board members are mandated to resign within 30 days.
March 2003 Enron agrees to retain its three pipeline companies, Transwestern Pipeline Company, Citrus Corp., and Northern Plains Natural Gas Company, as subsidiaries of new company temporarily called PipeCo.
May 2003 Enron agrees to retain most overseas power plants, pipelines and utility businesses as subsidiaries of new company temporarily called InternationalCo.
June 2003 Enron announces formal organization of PipeCo as CrossCountry Energy LLC, and InternationalCo as Prisma Energy International Inc.
July 2003 Enron files bankruptcy reorganization plan.
Jan. 2004 Bankruptcy court approves Enron's disclosure statement related to the bankruptcy plan of reorganization.
June 2004 Enron announces sale of CrossCountry Energy LLC to CCE Holdings Inc. for $2.35 billion.
Nov. 2004 Enron announces new Board of Directors, including appointment of John J. Ray III as Chairman.
Dec. 2004 GE Commercial Finance and Southern Union finalize purchase of CrossCountry Energy for $2.45 billion.
July 2005 Enron settles Royal Bank of Scotland MegaClaims litigation for $20 million; bank subordinates or disallows $343 million in claims. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
July 2005 Royal Bank of Canada agrees to pay $49 million to settle MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Aug. 2005 Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce agrees to pay $274 million; bank subordinates or disallows $53 million in claims in connection with MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Aug. 2005 Toronto-Dominion Bank agrees to pay $130 million; bank subordinates or disallows $55 million in claims in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Aug. 2005 JPMorgan Chase agrees to pay $982 million; subordinates or disallows $83 million in claims in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Jan. 2006 Enron announces the appointment of John. J. Ray III as President, and the Board, through the establishment of a wholly-owned company, becomes plan administrator.
April 2006 Enron makes $4.67 billion distribution to creditors consisting of more than $4.1 billion in cash and shares of Portland General Electric ("PGE") Company stock valued at $568 million. PGE becomes independent, publicly-traded utility after Enron completes initial distribution of PGE stock to creditors.
May 2006 Credit Suisse agrees to pay $94 million; subordinates or disallows $361 million in claims in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
June 2006 Law firm Vinson & Elkins LLP agrees to pay $30 million to settle a claim that the company committed legal malpractice by failing to respond to red flags about Enron's accounting practices.
July 2006 Merrill Lynch agrees to pay $29.5 million; subordinates or disallows $73 million in claims in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Sept. 2006 Enron finalizes $2.9 billion sale of Prisma Energy International to Ashmore Energy International Ltd.
Oct. 2006 Fleet Bank agrees to pay $10.4 million; subordinates or disallows $634 thousand in claims in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Oct. 2006 Distributions worth approximately $3.4 billion are made to creditors consisting of more than $3.3 billion in cash, plus shares of Portland General Electric Company stock valued at $34.4 million.
Nov. 2006 Barclays agrees to pay $144 million in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.
Jan. 2007 Houston-based law firm Andrews & Kurth agrees to pay $18.5 million to settle potential malpractice claims stemming from legal advice on various transactions.
March 2007 Enron changes corporate name to Enron Creditors Recovery Corporation ("ECRC") to reflect primary goal of monetizing assets and prosecuting litigation for the benefit of creditors.
April 2007 Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. settles its Equity Transaction litigation for $69.9 million. For more information on the Equity Transaction litigation, please click here.
April 2007 Distributions of approximately $1.8 billion were made to creditors consisting of cash of almost $1.7 billion and shares of Portland General Electric Company stock valued at approximately $171 million.
June 2007 UBS AG agrees to pay $115 million in connection to the Equity Transaction litigation. For more information on the Equity Transaction litigation, please click here.
June 2007 Credit Suisse settles its case with Enron Creditors Recovery Corp with respect to the Equity Transaction litigation for $61.5 million. For more information on the Equity Transaction litigation, please click here.
July 2007 ECRC announces it will receive $149 million from 72 of its lenders, including Lehman Commercial Paper Inc. and numerous other customers of Lehman.
Oct. 2007 Distributions of approximately $1.7 billion were made to creditors consisting of $1.67 billion in cash and Portland General Electric Company Common Stock equivalents (in the form of cash) of approximately $74.8 million.
October 2007 Bear Stearns settles its Equity Transaction litigation with Enron Creditors Recovery Corp. for $1 million and the waiver of other claims. This settlement ends the Equity Transactions litigation. For more information on the equity transaction litigation, please click here.
December 2007 Deutsche Bank AG agrees to pay $25 million; subordinates or disallows $416 million in claims in connection with the MegaClaims litigation. For more information on the MegaClaims litigation, please click here.*
April 2008 Citigroup trial set to begin in the MegaClaims litigation.
*Deutsche Bank settlement remains subject to court approval.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Wind whispers of Enron
The electricity market in Texas, according to Bradley, shows how the thinking works. Enron, of course, was interested in the trading opportunities. But deregulation came with side effects.
While claiming to be deregulated — though many proponents now prefer the euphemism "restructured" — the market remains partially regulated, creating a huge profit-making opportunity for generators while leaving consumers with higher bills and more risk.
"It's a market, but it's a government-created market," Bradley said. "It's something very different than deregulation."
Similarly, Bradley said Enron was a major backer of the state's 1999 mandate calling for the development of renewable energy sources, including wind generation. The mandate also appealed to environmental groups, of course.
Sitting idle
We like the idea of wind power because it seems natural and clean. Windmills, after all, are part of our pastoral vision of Americana — power, nostalgia and patriotism rolled into one. What's not to like?
Only the economics. Wind power, despite the government's best efforts to create a market, continues to be dogged by the same problems it always has: high costs, limited reliability and bad location.
No wind, after all, blows forever, and when it does, it's not blowing where people need power.
Even now, West Texas wind farms sit idle, awaiting new power lines to take high-priced power to the people.
"Wind technologies actually predate fossil fuels and have been experimental and uncompetitive in electricity generation for over a century," Bradley said.
Deregulation has already given many Texas consumers — especially those in the Houston area — some of the nation's highest electric rates. Now, we could wind up footing the estimated $6.4 billion bill for transmission lines to bring wind-generated power eastward.
When it gets here, its higher costs will flow right down the transmission lines and shock our pocketbooks, which already are singed by spiraling prices from conventional generation.
Proponents of wind power argue that fuel cost savings and other benefits will outweigh the higher costs in a few years, but their studies seem a little too rosy and their promises have a foreboding ring.
It sounds too much like the failed promises of lower bills used to hoodwink us on deregulation.
(Click to read entire article)
While claiming to be deregulated — though many proponents now prefer the euphemism "restructured" — the market remains partially regulated, creating a huge profit-making opportunity for generators while leaving consumers with higher bills and more risk.
"It's a market, but it's a government-created market," Bradley said. "It's something very different than deregulation."
Similarly, Bradley said Enron was a major backer of the state's 1999 mandate calling for the development of renewable energy sources, including wind generation. The mandate also appealed to environmental groups, of course.
Sitting idle
We like the idea of wind power because it seems natural and clean. Windmills, after all, are part of our pastoral vision of Americana — power, nostalgia and patriotism rolled into one. What's not to like?
Only the economics. Wind power, despite the government's best efforts to create a market, continues to be dogged by the same problems it always has: high costs, limited reliability and bad location.
No wind, after all, blows forever, and when it does, it's not blowing where people need power.
Even now, West Texas wind farms sit idle, awaiting new power lines to take high-priced power to the people.
"Wind technologies actually predate fossil fuels and have been experimental and uncompetitive in electricity generation for over a century," Bradley said.
Deregulation has already given many Texas consumers — especially those in the Houston area — some of the nation's highest electric rates. Now, we could wind up footing the estimated $6.4 billion bill for transmission lines to bring wind-generated power eastward.
When it gets here, its higher costs will flow right down the transmission lines and shock our pocketbooks, which already are singed by spiraling prices from conventional generation.
Proponents of wind power argue that fuel cost savings and other benefits will outweigh the higher costs in a few years, but their studies seem a little too rosy and their promises have a foreboding ring.
It sounds too much like the failed promises of lower bills used to hoodwink us on deregulation.
(Click to read entire article)
Whoa ! Blow Me Away!
The Wind Turbine That Could Have Blown Me Over ….Or Not ! Talk about topics full of hot air. With the introduction of wind turbines in Upstate NY, especially the Finger Lakes area, the division has started with those for and of course those against. In the past I have taken a back seat to these discussions, not clearly understanding the controversy. As I receive more information from different sides of the coin, I get a better understanding of of the issue at hand.
The Cohocton Wind Watch Group closely monitors the situation in Cohocton as well as in neighboring communities. If you visit their website you can see video of the installation of a wind turbine at various stages. This watch group has their own website and legal action campaign and are against the installation of any turbines in the area. Their concerns are:
decrease in property value
excessive noise
unusable property
damaged views of the landscape
There is also a group in Penn Yan, NY called the Progressives that contains members that are definitely against the installation of these wind catchers. Some of the members are afraid that the area will no longer maintain its natural beauty.
I always associated wind turbines with ecological groups, so it was very confusing to me to find out that it was these exact groups of people that are actually against the turbines.
During a visit to Costa Rica a few years ago, I took many pictures of the wind turbines especially when the sun was setting. I found a certain beauty in them rising from the hill tops against a rainbow of colors in the sky. Talking to many of the locals, I found they were proud of the way their country supplied energy. Along with the wind turbines, Costa Rica also harnesses hydro electric power.
So using wind turbines made sense to me, but I realized I had never seen any in the United States. It was only three years ago that I had never seen a turbine and now throughout the Finger Lakes I either hear controversy about them or can actually see them on the hills in Steuben County. On my way to a Resort Property business trip in Albany last month, I also noticed some of the turbines in the distance from the New York Thruway.
The Cohocton Wind Watch Group closely monitors the situation in Cohocton as well as in neighboring communities. If you visit their website you can see video of the installation of a wind turbine at various stages. This watch group has their own website and legal action campaign and are against the installation of any turbines in the area. Their concerns are:
decrease in property value
excessive noise
unusable property
damaged views of the landscape
There is also a group in Penn Yan, NY called the Progressives that contains members that are definitely against the installation of these wind catchers. Some of the members are afraid that the area will no longer maintain its natural beauty.
I always associated wind turbines with ecological groups, so it was very confusing to me to find out that it was these exact groups of people that are actually against the turbines.
During a visit to Costa Rica a few years ago, I took many pictures of the wind turbines especially when the sun was setting. I found a certain beauty in them rising from the hill tops against a rainbow of colors in the sky. Talking to many of the locals, I found they were proud of the way their country supplied energy. Along with the wind turbines, Costa Rica also harnesses hydro electric power.
So using wind turbines made sense to me, but I realized I had never seen any in the United States. It was only three years ago that I had never seen a turbine and now throughout the Finger Lakes I either hear controversy about them or can actually see them on the hills in Steuben County. On my way to a Resort Property business trip in Albany last month, I also noticed some of the turbines in the distance from the New York Thruway.
Spanish Fly: Iberdrola’s $8 Billion U.S. Bet
Spain’s Iberdrola Renovables, the world’s biggest clean-energy utility, said Sunday it will invest $8 billion in renewable energy (wind power, basically) in the U.S. over the next two years. That’s more than the company originally planned to invest in the U.S.
How to read this? For starters, it’s another sign the U.S. wind power market is going great guns regardless of what Congress does for clean-energy tax credits. As we noted last week, the Department of Energy figures wind power could provide 20% of U.S. electricity by 2030—with or without subsidies. And T. Boone Pickens put the first $2 billion down on his $10 billion bet on the world’s biggest wind farm in Texas last week, without waiting for the tax credits to be renewed.
It’s also a sign of how attractive the U.S. is for European clean-energy companies in particular. They have all the tailwinds: size, experience, a strong currency that make U.S. deals look cheap, and hardware. The big players like Iberdrola have already sourced their wind turbines for the next few years, removing one of the industry’s biggest headaches; Iberdrola just took advantage of the strong euro to sign a big deal with General Electric to snag all the turbines it will need for the next two years.
How big is Iberdrola’s bet? The old rule of thumb (1 million euros buys the hardware and pays to install a megawatt of wind power) no longer applies for sure given price inflation in steel, components, and other things that make up turbines. But Iberdrola’s latest U.S. push is clearly in the same league as Mr. Pickens’ 4-gigawatt Pampa Wind Project, the biggest to date in the U.S., and on paper the same size as four smallish nuclear plants.
Of course, there could be another reading to Iberdrola’s sudden rush of enthusiasm. The Spanish company has spent a year trying to win regulatory approval for its 4.6 billion euro purchase of Energy East, a utility operating in the U.S. northeast. So far, the hurdle is New York regulators, worried Iberdrola will dominate the market. Iberdrola, which argues that it is crucial for the future of New York’s clean-energy development, is pressing for a decision by the end of this month.
Perhaps Iberdrola’s big announcement is an $8 billion shot across the bow to preserve the Energy East deal — another offensive in the company’s bid to make itself too big to ignore.
How to read this? For starters, it’s another sign the U.S. wind power market is going great guns regardless of what Congress does for clean-energy tax credits. As we noted last week, the Department of Energy figures wind power could provide 20% of U.S. electricity by 2030—with or without subsidies. And T. Boone Pickens put the first $2 billion down on his $10 billion bet on the world’s biggest wind farm in Texas last week, without waiting for the tax credits to be renewed.
It’s also a sign of how attractive the U.S. is for European clean-energy companies in particular. They have all the tailwinds: size, experience, a strong currency that make U.S. deals look cheap, and hardware. The big players like Iberdrola have already sourced their wind turbines for the next few years, removing one of the industry’s biggest headaches; Iberdrola just took advantage of the strong euro to sign a big deal with General Electric to snag all the turbines it will need for the next two years.
How big is Iberdrola’s bet? The old rule of thumb (1 million euros buys the hardware and pays to install a megawatt of wind power) no longer applies for sure given price inflation in steel, components, and other things that make up turbines. But Iberdrola’s latest U.S. push is clearly in the same league as Mr. Pickens’ 4-gigawatt Pampa Wind Project, the biggest to date in the U.S., and on paper the same size as four smallish nuclear plants.
Of course, there could be another reading to Iberdrola’s sudden rush of enthusiasm. The Spanish company has spent a year trying to win regulatory approval for its 4.6 billion euro purchase of Energy East, a utility operating in the U.S. northeast. So far, the hurdle is New York regulators, worried Iberdrola will dominate the market. Iberdrola, which argues that it is crucial for the future of New York’s clean-energy development, is pressing for a decision by the end of this month.
Perhaps Iberdrola’s big announcement is an $8 billion shot across the bow to preserve the Energy East deal — another offensive in the company’s bid to make itself too big to ignore.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Wind company promises NY $2 billion in development
ALBANY, N.Y. - A company based in Spain is promising to invest $2 billion in wind energy in New York over the next five years if regulators approve its purchase of Energy East Corp.
The global company, Iberdrola SA, is trying to buy Energy East for $4.6 billion. The deal would affect 3 million customers from upstate New York to Maine and would put Rochester Electric and Gas Corp. and New York State Electric & Gas Corp. under foreign ownership.
Company officials are in Albany seeking regulatory approval. Although New York officials support significant expansion into renewable energy to reduce costs and create jobs, the deal is questioned by state Public Service Commission staff regulators who are concerned about whether it will best serve the public in cost and competitiveness.
The global company, Iberdrola SA, is trying to buy Energy East for $4.6 billion. The deal would affect 3 million customers from upstate New York to Maine and would put Rochester Electric and Gas Corp. and New York State Electric & Gas Corp. under foreign ownership.
Company officials are in Albany seeking regulatory approval. Although New York officials support significant expansion into renewable energy to reduce costs and create jobs, the deal is questioned by state Public Service Commission staff regulators who are concerned about whether it will best serve the public in cost and competitiveness.
State Energy Policy and Iberdrola Takeover of Energy East - Governor Paterson May 27, 2008 Letter by Andrea Rebeck
ANDREA REBECK
________________________________________
4652 Oak Orchard Road, Albion, NY 14411-9509
Telephone: 585-590-1199
rebeckarchitect@yahoo.com
May 27, 2008
Governor David A. Paterson
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
RE: State Energy Policy and Iberdrola Takeover of Energy East
Dear Governor Patterson:
You have inherited policies from two previous administrations, and your agencies are still tenaciously clinging to these policies and promoting them. Times have changed, however, and it is imperative that you reformulate at least one of those policies – the state energy policy.
As a Democrat in a heavily Republican district, I can tell you that trouble is brewing here around the most contentious issue to appear in upstate New York since the Abolition Movement. Wind turbine construction is seen as a huge threat to our economy and our way of life in upstate New York. Citizens are becoming aware of the scam that Iberdrola and other wind developers are perpetrating on us, and in this post-Enron era, the public has little patience for corporations that lie, cheat, and steal. This undoubtedly will become an election issue next fall, and political hopefuls are recognizing the importance of being on the right side of this issue. Politicians who encourage Iberdrola’s takeover of Energy East, who support Article X, who champion wind development as the solution to our energy crisis, will find themselves criticized, ridiculed, and heavily challenged come fall.
Please provide leadership to our party, and give these incumbents and challengers the support of a thoroughly enlightened, objective, and science-based energy policy. Clean house at NYSERDA, where too many officials have close ties to the industries they are supposed to be overseeing. Redirect DEC, OPRHP, and Ag & Markets to return to their mission of protecting the resources under their charge, rather than exploiting them for corporate profit. It is becoming painfully clear that the Pataki administration led us way off track in this regard. We are looking to Democrats to set things right. If they don’t, they stand little chance of beating back Republicans in the next gubernatorial race.
The party that shows the public that it is not in the pocket of foreign corporations, but instead is courageously standing up to their posturing and threats, will ultimately be the one that triumphs here. Please support the Public Service Commission in its efforts to save us from being exploited by a foreign corporation. Please give clear instructions to your agencies that they must safeguard the welfare of all the people of New York State, and not just a tiny fraction of wealthy businesses. Your leadership is key.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Andrea Rebeck, AIA
Columbia University ‘78
________________________________________
4652 Oak Orchard Road, Albion, NY 14411-9509
Telephone: 585-590-1199
rebeckarchitect@yahoo.com
May 27, 2008
Governor David A. Paterson
State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
RE: State Energy Policy and Iberdrola Takeover of Energy East
Dear Governor Patterson:
You have inherited policies from two previous administrations, and your agencies are still tenaciously clinging to these policies and promoting them. Times have changed, however, and it is imperative that you reformulate at least one of those policies – the state energy policy.
As a Democrat in a heavily Republican district, I can tell you that trouble is brewing here around the most contentious issue to appear in upstate New York since the Abolition Movement. Wind turbine construction is seen as a huge threat to our economy and our way of life in upstate New York. Citizens are becoming aware of the scam that Iberdrola and other wind developers are perpetrating on us, and in this post-Enron era, the public has little patience for corporations that lie, cheat, and steal. This undoubtedly will become an election issue next fall, and political hopefuls are recognizing the importance of being on the right side of this issue. Politicians who encourage Iberdrola’s takeover of Energy East, who support Article X, who champion wind development as the solution to our energy crisis, will find themselves criticized, ridiculed, and heavily challenged come fall.
Please provide leadership to our party, and give these incumbents and challengers the support of a thoroughly enlightened, objective, and science-based energy policy. Clean house at NYSERDA, where too many officials have close ties to the industries they are supposed to be overseeing. Redirect DEC, OPRHP, and Ag & Markets to return to their mission of protecting the resources under their charge, rather than exploiting them for corporate profit. It is becoming painfully clear that the Pataki administration led us way off track in this regard. We are looking to Democrats to set things right. If they don’t, they stand little chance of beating back Republicans in the next gubernatorial race.
The party that shows the public that it is not in the pocket of foreign corporations, but instead is courageously standing up to their posturing and threats, will ultimately be the one that triumphs here. Please support the Public Service Commission in its efforts to save us from being exploited by a foreign corporation. Please give clear instructions to your agencies that they must safeguard the welfare of all the people of New York State, and not just a tiny fraction of wealthy businesses. Your leadership is key.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Andrea Rebeck, AIA
Columbia University ‘78
Monday, June 02, 2008
DOE Announces Effort to Advance U.S. Wind Power Manufacturing Capacity
HOUSTON, TEXAS –The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Andy Karsner today announced a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between DOE and six leading wind industry turbine manufacturers: GE Energy, Siemens Power Generation, Vestas Wind Systems, Clipper Turbine Works, Suzlon Energy, and Gamesa Corporation. The two-year collaboration is designed to promote wind energy in the U.S. through advanced technology research and development, and siting strategies aimed to advance industrial wind power manufacturing capabilities.
“The MOU between DOE and the six major turbine manufacturers demonstrates the shared commitment of the federal government and the private sector to create the roadmap necessary to achieve 20 percent wind energy by 2030,” DOE Assistant Secretary Karsner said. “To dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance our energy security, clean power generation at the gigawatt-scale will be necessary to expand the domestic wind manufacturing base and streamline the permitting process.”
As part of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative announced in 2006, clean, secure and sustainable wind energy has the potential to play an increasingly important role in the Bush Administration’s long-term energy strategy to make investments today that fundamentally change the way we power U.S. homes and businesses and that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions growth by 2025.
Today’s agreement builds on the recently released DOE report 20 Percent Wind Energy in 2030 that examines the technical feasibility of harnessing wind power to provide up to 20 percent of the nation’s total electricity needs by 2030. Most notably, the report finds that by using wind power to meet 20 percent of our nation’s electricity needs, we can eliminate 7.6 cumulative gigatons of CO2 by 2030 and 825 million metric tons in 2030 and every year thereafter.
Under the MOU, DOE and the six turbine manufacturers will collaborate to gather and exchange information to define specific needs for achieving 20 percent wind energy by 2030. The MOU addresses the following areas:
* Turbine Reliability and Operability Research & Development to create more reliable components; improve turbine capacity factors; and reduce installation and operations and maintenance costs.
* Siting Strategies to address environmental and technical issues like radar interference in a standardized framework based on industry best practices.
* Standards Development for turbine certification and universal generator interconnection.
* Manufacturing advances in design, process automation and fabrication techniques to reduce product-to product variability and premature failure while increasing the domestic manufacturing base.
* Workforce development including the development, standardization and certification of wind energy curricula for mechanical and power systems engineers and community college training programs.
In 2007, U.S. cumulative wind energy capacity reached 16,818 megawatts (MW) – with more than 5,000 MW of wind installed in 2007. Wind contributed to more than 30 percent of the new U.S. electricity generation capacity in 2007, making it the second largest source of new power generation in the nation --- surpassed only by natural gas. The U.S. wind energy industry invested approximately $9 billion in new generating capacity in 2007, and has experienced a 30 percent annual growth rate in the last five years.
Read more about ‘20 Percent Wind Energy by 2030.’
Read more information about DOE’s Wind Program.
“The MOU between DOE and the six major turbine manufacturers demonstrates the shared commitment of the federal government and the private sector to create the roadmap necessary to achieve 20 percent wind energy by 2030,” DOE Assistant Secretary Karsner said. “To dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance our energy security, clean power generation at the gigawatt-scale will be necessary to expand the domestic wind manufacturing base and streamline the permitting process.”
As part of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative announced in 2006, clean, secure and sustainable wind energy has the potential to play an increasingly important role in the Bush Administration’s long-term energy strategy to make investments today that fundamentally change the way we power U.S. homes and businesses and that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions growth by 2025.
Today’s agreement builds on the recently released DOE report 20 Percent Wind Energy in 2030 that examines the technical feasibility of harnessing wind power to provide up to 20 percent of the nation’s total electricity needs by 2030. Most notably, the report finds that by using wind power to meet 20 percent of our nation’s electricity needs, we can eliminate 7.6 cumulative gigatons of CO2 by 2030 and 825 million metric tons in 2030 and every year thereafter.
Under the MOU, DOE and the six turbine manufacturers will collaborate to gather and exchange information to define specific needs for achieving 20 percent wind energy by 2030. The MOU addresses the following areas:
* Turbine Reliability and Operability Research & Development to create more reliable components; improve turbine capacity factors; and reduce installation and operations and maintenance costs.
* Siting Strategies to address environmental and technical issues like radar interference in a standardized framework based on industry best practices.
* Standards Development for turbine certification and universal generator interconnection.
* Manufacturing advances in design, process automation and fabrication techniques to reduce product-to product variability and premature failure while increasing the domestic manufacturing base.
* Workforce development including the development, standardization and certification of wind energy curricula for mechanical and power systems engineers and community college training programs.
In 2007, U.S. cumulative wind energy capacity reached 16,818 megawatts (MW) – with more than 5,000 MW of wind installed in 2007. Wind contributed to more than 30 percent of the new U.S. electricity generation capacity in 2007, making it the second largest source of new power generation in the nation --- surpassed only by natural gas. The U.S. wind energy industry invested approximately $9 billion in new generating capacity in 2007, and has experienced a 30 percent annual growth rate in the last five years.
Read more about ‘20 Percent Wind Energy by 2030.’
Read more information about DOE’s Wind Program.
EMINENT DOMAIN Threatened in Prattsburgh by Andy Minnig
Friends,
Several years ago the Advocates for Cherry Valley joined with the Advocates for Prattsburgh (Finger Lakes) and several other groups from the Central New York area in a visit to our legislators in Albany. Our purpose was to counter the influence of the energy lobby. Consequently we all learnt to monitor unfolding events in various communities across the state, as more and more have come to be assaulted by commercial wind prospectors.
Nevertheless, there have been many successes. Cherry Valley is one of them. Its progressive administration and forward-looking engagement with energy issues has gathered a great deal of attention in our region.
It is a testament to the best possibilities of home rule.
But now the town of Prattsburgh is faced with a dire threat. Its town board has signaled that it intends to bring a proposed commercial wind farm to completion through the exercise of eminent domain. It has chosen this as the means of bringing to heel several recalcitrant landowners.
This cynical misuse of home rule, especially in the face of some ethical questions over the role of the town supervisor, bodes ill for all of us.
Albany bureaucrats (including NYSERDA)have long been chaffing at the hostility of local communities to a lobby-drafted scheme that would shift control of all energy policy to the halls of the capitol.
Those halls are choked with servants of special privilege. They scurry to and fro, sharing wealth and power. They are the new fifth estate.
It is easy to imagine that, in consort with their friends in state government, they will seize on Prattsburgh's possible example as a precedent in furthering a course charted by their own private interest.
Our friends in Prattsburgh have hired an attorney. He is expensive. The Advocates for Cherry Valley have decided to send a donation of 250 dollars to their colleagues.
But it would be a wonderful gesture of solidarity if a number of us would also consider sending individual donations. No amount is too small to diminish its symbolic worth. All donations should be sent to Advocates for Prattsburgh, Box221, Prattsburgh, NY 14873.
Several years ago the Advocates for Cherry Valley joined with the Advocates for Prattsburgh (Finger Lakes) and several other groups from the Central New York area in a visit to our legislators in Albany. Our purpose was to counter the influence of the energy lobby. Consequently we all learnt to monitor unfolding events in various communities across the state, as more and more have come to be assaulted by commercial wind prospectors.
Nevertheless, there have been many successes. Cherry Valley is one of them. Its progressive administration and forward-looking engagement with energy issues has gathered a great deal of attention in our region.
It is a testament to the best possibilities of home rule.
But now the town of Prattsburgh is faced with a dire threat. Its town board has signaled that it intends to bring a proposed commercial wind farm to completion through the exercise of eminent domain. It has chosen this as the means of bringing to heel several recalcitrant landowners.
This cynical misuse of home rule, especially in the face of some ethical questions over the role of the town supervisor, bodes ill for all of us.
Albany bureaucrats (including NYSERDA)have long been chaffing at the hostility of local communities to a lobby-drafted scheme that would shift control of all energy policy to the halls of the capitol.
Those halls are choked with servants of special privilege. They scurry to and fro, sharing wealth and power. They are the new fifth estate.
It is easy to imagine that, in consort with their friends in state government, they will seize on Prattsburgh's possible example as a precedent in furthering a course charted by their own private interest.
Our friends in Prattsburgh have hired an attorney. He is expensive. The Advocates for Cherry Valley have decided to send a donation of 250 dollars to their colleagues.
But it would be a wonderful gesture of solidarity if a number of us would also consider sending individual donations. No amount is too small to diminish its symbolic worth. All donations should be sent to Advocates for Prattsburgh, Box221, Prattsburgh, NY 14873.
Blowing In The Wind
STOW — The answer to Pete Wiemer’s power problem is literally blowing in the wind.
As the result of a decision made Wednesday by the North Harmony Zoning Board of Appeals, Wiemer will soon have power at his Butts Road home — provided by a 155-foot wind turbine.
‘‘We don’t have a gas well, but we’d like our own source of energy,’’ Wiemer said after Wednesday’s meeting. ‘‘That’s why we pursued wind turbines.’’
First proposed in February, Wiemer’s request for a special permit has been discussed by both the Zoning Board and Planning Board in recent months — and meetings have included a public hearing and State Environmental Quality Review hearing.
After reviewing Wiemer’s proposal and finding that the project had little opposition and will have little impact on the area, Zoning Board members granted Wiemer a special permit for two 155-foot-tall wind turbines.
‘‘We’re happy,’’ Wiemer said after the Zoning Board rendered its decision. ‘‘This first wind turbine will be used to power the larger of the two homes. Eventually we plan on building a second turbine. The payback would be seen for 20 years, though we’ll build the second one within three years if we can afford it.’’
Helping pay for Wiemer’s Bergey wind turbines is grant money from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Wiemer’s wind turbines will be built by Sustainable Energy Developments Inc. of Ontario, N.Y. Representatives from the business were in attendance at Wednesday’s meeting to answer questions about installation, noise and other topics. According to one representative, turbines like the one to be built emit slightly more noise than the existing ambient noise in the area. However, he said one would hear the wind before hearing the wind turbine.
According to Meaghann Schulte of Sustainable Energy Developments, the company has more than 20 Bergey wind turbines currently up in New York state — with plans to construct 10 more this year.
‘‘In my opinion, this is going to be leading edge,’’ said Zoning Board Chairman James Levesque after the meeting. ‘‘Especially for a town like this. And resident by resident, you never know where it could head. Good luck with this.’’
As the result of a decision made Wednesday by the North Harmony Zoning Board of Appeals, Wiemer will soon have power at his Butts Road home — provided by a 155-foot wind turbine.
‘‘We don’t have a gas well, but we’d like our own source of energy,’’ Wiemer said after Wednesday’s meeting. ‘‘That’s why we pursued wind turbines.’’
First proposed in February, Wiemer’s request for a special permit has been discussed by both the Zoning Board and Planning Board in recent months — and meetings have included a public hearing and State Environmental Quality Review hearing.
After reviewing Wiemer’s proposal and finding that the project had little opposition and will have little impact on the area, Zoning Board members granted Wiemer a special permit for two 155-foot-tall wind turbines.
‘‘We’re happy,’’ Wiemer said after the Zoning Board rendered its decision. ‘‘This first wind turbine will be used to power the larger of the two homes. Eventually we plan on building a second turbine. The payback would be seen for 20 years, though we’ll build the second one within three years if we can afford it.’’
Helping pay for Wiemer’s Bergey wind turbines is grant money from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Wiemer’s wind turbines will be built by Sustainable Energy Developments Inc. of Ontario, N.Y. Representatives from the business were in attendance at Wednesday’s meeting to answer questions about installation, noise and other topics. According to one representative, turbines like the one to be built emit slightly more noise than the existing ambient noise in the area. However, he said one would hear the wind before hearing the wind turbine.
According to Meaghann Schulte of Sustainable Energy Developments, the company has more than 20 Bergey wind turbines currently up in New York state — with plans to construct 10 more this year.
‘‘In my opinion, this is going to be leading edge,’’ said Zoning Board Chairman James Levesque after the meeting. ‘‘Especially for a town like this. And resident by resident, you never know where it could head. Good luck with this.’’
Sunday, June 01, 2008
EMINENT DOMAIN: Do they have what it takes to take what you have? Ask the people in Prattsburgh
Last week in Prattsburgh New York, nearly 150 people attended the public hearing on a proposal for the town to seize the roadway owned by seven residents. The properties are needed for a 100-mile underground electrical cable system for the 36-turbine wind farm being developed by First Wind.
Don't believe it?
(Click to read entire article)
Don't believe it?
(Click to read entire article)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)