Dr. Randy George of Marion Station presented the following remarks Feb. 11 to the County Ethics Commission as it begins to review financial disclosure forms submitted by the County Commissioners.
* * *
“I’m have been very troubled by what’s going on with regards to this wind ordinance. The underlying reason, I think, why you’re here today is that wind ordinance.
“The drafting of an ordinance was commissioned by the County Commissioners to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and I think this whole discussion centers around the prestige of office, around the use of that. And that’s the underlying theme that I hear through it all.
“You are at some disadvantage, because you were not, like many of us, sitting through these long Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. Maybe that’s an advantage. But we do have, and the county does have audio/visual records of every bit of it, it’s out there.
“When Pioneer Green, we all know who that is, came into the county, it had very clear requirements. It was never vague about those requirements for what it had to have in order to be here. It needed to plant a series of turbines in an agricultural-residential area, because we are closely tied geographically to each other that didn’t leave a lot of area. People live quite close to each other even though it’s an agricultural region.
“Pioneer Green wanted to place these turbines 700 feet away from people. They finally conceded that it would be a 1,000 feet, otherwise they would have to walk. The height had to be a certain height, and if it were to be restricted, they would have to walk. If the sound was allowed to be too loud, they would have to walk, they required it to be in the range of airports and train sound levels permitted by the state of Maryland, otherwise they would not stay.
More
1,183 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 1183 Newer› Newest»@5:17 So glad you mentioned that piece of misinformation. That lie has been going around the anti wind circles for awhile now. This study addresses it. It examines not just property values but also frequency of sales. It found no statistical change in either values or frequency of home sales due to turbines. You mention McCann if I remember correctly he examined 100 home sales in his study, this study examined over 122000 home sales. You are welcome to your opinion and your Florida swamp land but there have been over a million home sales analyzed that show no loss of property value from turbines.
You take peoples concern about health and safety and turn it into jealousy, shows how concern you are about us citizens. You must have a problem your the only one jealous.
Here is a good comparison of the damage to wildlife from various forms of electrical generation. Anti wind people like to slam turbines by comparing them to nothing but everyone wants the lights to come on. Penn Future: Wind and Wildlife, Overview of different forms of energy generation and effects on birds and wildlife
Journals and Institutes develop prestige by not selling results but rather by collecting reliable data. Pioneer could not generate enough revenue to pay the Jacobs France Institute to jeopardize its reputation. The real estate studies were peer-reviewed so they went through a review process to check their methods and figures and then a journal saw enough promise and relevance to publish the article. I think your definition of credibility revolves around the article agreeing with your viewpoint rather than its content.
6:06 When the opposition keeps coming back to how a business is going to make money and how the landowners are going to make money it reeks of jealousy not concerns. On the contrary I am quite content and if one of my neighbors makes money on the deal I am happy for them rather than concerned over how much they made.
@ 6:01 Instead of spending your time gripping and spouting off with your uninformed opinions why not take a few minutes to actually read a few of these studies that you complain about? Don't be so lazy! This study has been mentioned several times and its done in Massachusetts hardly wide open country.Palombo, C.; Hoen, B. (2014). Relationship between Wind Turbines and Residential Property Values in Massachusetts. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
@6:06 I have great appreciation for people's fears and concerns. I am a landowner with a lease and I think everyone in my neighborhood knows it. I have always been willing to have a cordial conversation with anyone regarding turbines and would do my best to address any concerns. I have spoken to all my next door neighbors regarding the turbines and they are fine with them. I an fortunate as most have had first hand experience with turbines thus were not taken in by the fear mongering. I have spent many hours researching this issue and talking to people near turbines before I agreed to sign a lease. I do not however have any respect or tolerance for people that refuse to even look at studies on this issue because they contradict their uninformed opinion. It is very hard to get the opposition to cite a study however whenever they do I read them. That I feel is just being a responsible landowner. I have found very serious and obvious flaws in every one of them. In my opinion it is very irresponsible to try and put limitations on what your neighbor wants to do with their land over an issue that you refuse to educate yourself about.
@5:17 My bad! when I posted my response at 6:05 I forgot to include the study. However it has been mentioned several times on this thread. Palombo, C.; Hoen, B. (2014). Relationship between Wind Turbines and Residential Property Values in Massachusetts. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Like I've said before, I seriously doubt that SFS even looks at this site. Anti wind folks on here are locals that do not want the windmills in there back yard. We work and do not have time to waste reading studies. Seriously, can't people make up their minds any more unless someone else does a study and tells them what they should or should not want in their life. We just want piece and quite and that is simply not possible with this windmill project.
@8:44 No one gets a turbine unless you sign a lease so you don't have to worry about one in your backyard. You can form your opinions anyway you want. If you want them to be ignorant and uninformed that's fine. However when you feel the need to tell your neighbor what they should or should not be allowed to do with their land you need to educate yourself first.
The list below is for 5:33.
1) Nissenbaum, M.A., Aramini, J. J., Hanning, C. 2012. Effects of industrial wind turbine noise on sleep and health. Noise & Health, 14:237—243.
2) Shepherd, D., McBride, D., Welch, D. Dirks, K.N., & Hill, E.M. 2011. Evaluating the impact of wind turbine noise on health-related quality of life. Noise & Health, 13:333—339.
3) Moller & Pedersen. 2004. Hearing at low and infrasonic frequencies. Noise & Health. 6:37—57.
4) Bian & Watts. 2008. Effects of low-frequency biasing on spontaneous otoacoustic emissions: amplitude modulation. J. Acoustical Society of America. 123:887—898.
5) Leventhall, H.G. 2004. Low frequency noise and annoyance, Noise & Health. 6:59—72.
6) Alves-Pereira, M. & Branco, N.A.A.C. 2007. Vibroacoustic disease: biological effects of infrasound and low frequency noise explained by mechanotransduction and cellular signaling. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. 93:256-273.
7) Dommes, E., Bauchnect, H.C., Scholz, G., Rothmund, Y., Hensel, J. & Klingebiel, R. 2009. Auditory cortex stimulation by low frequency tones – an fMRI study. Brain Research. 1304:129—137.
8) Farboud, A., Crunkhorn, R. & Trinidade, A. 2013. Wind turbine syndrome: Fact or fiction? Journal Laryngology & Otology. 2013:1—5.
9) Hanning, C.D. & Evans, A. 2012. Wind turbine noise seems to affect health adversely and an independent review of evidence is needed. British Medical Journal. 344:1527
10) Harrison, J.P. 2011. Wind turbine noise. Bulletin of Science, Techology & Society. 31:256—261.
And here are ten more, 5:33
11) Hensel, J. Scholz, G., Hurttig, U., Mrowinski, D., Janssen, T. 2007. Impact of infrasound on the human cochlea. Hearing Research. 233:67—76.
12) Janssen, S.A., Vos, H. Eisses, A.R. & Pedersen, E. 2011. A comparison between exposure-response relationships for wind turbine annoyance and annoyance due to other noise sources. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 130:3746—3753.
13) Krogh, C.M.E. Industrial wind turbine development and loss of social justice? Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 31:321—333.
14) Lee, S. Kim, K. Choi, W. & Lee, S. 2011. Annoyance caused by amplitude modulation of wind turbine noise. Noise Control Engineering. 59:38—46.
15) Pedersen, E. & Waye, K.P. 2004. Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise—a dose-response relationship. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 116:3460—3470.
16) Pedersen, E. & Waye, K.P. 2007. Wind turbine noise, annoyance and self-reported health and well-being in different living environments. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 64:480—486.
17) Pedersen, E. & Waye, K.P. 2008. Wind turbines—low level noise sources interfering with restoration? Environmental Research Letters. 3:1—5.
18) Pedersen, E. 2010. Health aspects associated with wind turbine noise—Results from three field studies. Noise Control Engineering. 59:47—53.
19) Salt, A.N. & Hular, T.E. 2010. Responses of the ear to low frequency sounds, infrasound and wind turbines. Hearing Research 268:12—21.
20) Salt, A.N. & Kaltenbach, J.A. 2011. Infrasound from wind turbines could affect humans. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society. 31:296—302.
And about about 11 for this round, 5:33.
21) Salt, A.N. & Lichtenhan, J.T. 2014. How does wind turbine noise affect people? Acoustics Today. 10:20—28.
22) Salt, A.N., Lichtenhan, J.T., Gill, R.M., & Hartsock, J.J. 2013. Large endolymphatic potentials from low-frequency and infrasonic tones in the guinea pig. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 133:1561—1571.
23) Schomer, P.D. 2013. Comments on recently published article, “Concerns about infrasound from wind turbines.” Acoustics Today. 9:7—9.
24) Shepherd, D., McBride, D., Welch, D. Dirks, K. & Hill, E.M. 2011. Evaluating the impact of wind turbine noise on health-related quality of life. Noise & Health. 13:333—339.
25) Waye, K.P. & Öhrström, E. 2002. Psycho-acoustic characters of relevance for annoyance of wind turbine noise. Journal of Sound and Vibration. 250:65—73.
26) Waye, K.P., Clow, A., Edwards, S., Hucklebridge, F., & Rylander, R. Effects of low frequency noise on cortisol response to awakening and subjective sleep quality. Life Sciences. 72:863—875.
27) Hansen, K., Henrys, N., Colin, H., Doolan, C., & Moreau, D. 2012. Wind farm noise- what is a reasonable limit in rural areas? Proceedings of Acoustics. 2012:1—8.
28) Kugler, K., Wiegrebe, L., Grothe, B., Kössl, M., Gürkov, R., Krause, E., & Drexl, M. 2014. Low-frequency sound affects active micromechanics in the human inner ear. Royal Society Open Science. 1:140166.
29) Salt, A.N., DeMott, J.E. 1999. Longitudinal endolymph movements and endocochlear potential changes induced by stimulation at infrasonic frequencies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 106:847—856.
30) Wisz, C.J., Lehar, M., Hiel, H., Glowatzki, E. & Fuchs, P.A. 2012 Synaptic transfer from outer hair cells to type II afferent fibers in the rat cochlea. Journal of Neuroscience. 32:9528—9536.
31) Dallos, P. 1986. Neurobiology of cochlear inner and outer hair cells: intracellular recordings. Hearing Research. 22:185—198.
I couldn't tell if the last 11 went up so here they are again:
21) Salt, A.N. & Lichtenhan, J.T. 2014. How does wind turbine noise affect people? Acoustics Today. 10:20—28.
22) Salt, A.N., Lichtenhan, J.T., Gill, R.M., & Hartsock, J.J. 2013. Large endolymphatic potentials from low-frequency and infrasonic tones in the guinea pig. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 133:1561—1571.
23) Schomer, P.D. 2013. Comments on recently published article, “Concerns about infrasound from wind turbines.” Acoustics Today. 9:7—9.
24) Shepherd, D., McBride, D., Welch, D. Dirks, K. & Hill, E.M. 2011. Evaluating the impact of wind turbine noise on health-related quality of life. Noise & Health. 13:333—339.
25) Waye, K.P. & Öhrström, E. 2002. Psycho-acoustic characters of relevance for annoyance of wind turbine noise. Journal of Sound and Vibration. 250:65—73.
26) Waye, K.P., Clow, A., Edwards, S., Hucklebridge, F., & Rylander, R. Effects of low frequency noise on cortisol response to awakening and subjective sleep quality. Life Sciences. 72:863—875.
27) Hansen, K., Henrys, N., Colin, H., Doolan, C., & Moreau, D. 2012. Wind farm noise- what is a reasonable limit in rural areas? Proceedings of Acoustics. 2012:1—8.
28) Kugler, K., Wiegrebe, L., Grothe, B., Kössl, M., Gürkov, R., Krause, E., & Drexl, M. 2014. Low-frequency sound affects active micromechanics in the human inner ear. Royal Society Open Science. 1:140166.
29) Salt, A.N., DeMott, J.E. 1999. Longitudinal endolymph movements and endocochlear potential changes induced by stimulation at infrasonic frequencies. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 106:847—856.
30) Wisz, C.J., Lehar, M., Hiel, H., Glowatzki, E. & Fuchs, P.A. 2012 Synaptic transfer from outer hair cells to type II afferent fibers in the rat cochlea. Journal of Neuroscience. 32:9528—9536.
31) Dallos, P. 1986. Neurobiology of cochlear inner and outer hair cells: intracellular recordings. Hearing Research. 22:185—198.
Wrong again 9:13. In your back yard doesn't mean literally in your back yard as you well know.
I cannot tell anyone what they can do with their land but I can certainly try to persuade my elected officials to do just that. They are elected to serve all the people, not just a chosen few.
Frankly, most elected officials only care about getting reelected so if the majority of voters want something they usually get it. You need to educate yourself on how the real world operates and get out of the make believe world in which you seem to live. People have a right to like or dislike anything they please and a whole lot of people dislike windmills and you need to realize that fact and stop trying to convince us that we should be overjoyed because you want to build a bunch of ugly windmills in Somerset.
Thank you 10:16 for taking your time to provide this information. Most folks simply do not have the time to do this type of research.
Reuters reported earlier this month the collapse of the wind-power market in Australia, as is the case in Germany, Spain & Italy. The "Liberal" government in Australia is pulling the plug on state subsidies for the renewable energy industry. Without those subsidies, investor interest evaporates. An expected end to the wind Protection Tax Credit (PTC) on Dec. 31, 2012, dried up the investment pipeline so thoroughly that even though the PTC was retroactively reinstated just weeks after its expiration, only one wind turbine was installed in the USA in the first six months of 2013. What happened in Australia? The Labor Government in 2011 pushed through a scheme to restrict CO2 emissions. The approach resembled the "Cap & Trade" scheme pushed here in the US, which effectively hides costs to consumers. But over time, the program morphed into a more explicit carbon tax. As is almost always the case, the costs of CO2 restrictions and forced "renewables" were downplayed while the proposal was being considered. However, the laws of science and economics cannot be legislated out of existence, and the inevitable costs soon become apparent. The program led to significant increases in the price of electricity, and the voters in Australia were not pleased with having been duped. The Labor party ousted its own Prime Minister (Mr. Rudd) and was forced to campaign against its own tax. But as is the case with most taxes, they are rarely repealed and that one wasn't. Germany is cutting its green subsidies and building coal-fired power plants, to reduce its energy costs which are 3x the cost of US prices. Spain and Italy are cutting back on their renewable-energy policies that helped tip them into financial crisis as well. Texas has a number of failed wind farms including one involving T. Boone Pickens. He's now all about natural gas as I am as well. I believe I read in this blog earlier that Somerset County won't have to worry about the maintenance or the cost of constructing this wind farm because bonds will be issued. Well what investor in his or her right mind would invest in these junk bonds? MD is already looking at a possible downgrade of its credit. It's hard to believe we're even discussing this "venture" anyway since the last General Assembly voted on a bill last year with overwhelming bipartisan support to nix this project but we have our former "Dear Leader" governor O'Malley to thank. I sourced most of the above from a Washington Times article dated 2/24/15 written by David Kreutzer, Research Fellow in Energy Economics & Climate Change at the Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis.
8:44 and 9:13 really sum up this whole conflict! Ignorant uninformed people who feel they should be allowed to tell their neighbors what they can and can't do with the land they have bought and paid taxes on without having to offer any credible evidence of harm.
Thank you so much Simona for your post! Supporters of the GB project have been asking SFS to cite their sources since this conflict began, maybe now we can have an intelligent discussion. I looked at the first study cited and my first concern is it only uses a questionnaire and does not look at physiological markers, this is not unusual but it definitely is not as accurate. This is the conclusion they came up with "This study supports the conclusions of previous studies, which demonstrate a relationship between proximity to IWTs and the general adverse effect of 'annoyance', [11],[12],[13] but differs in demonstrating clear dose-response relationships in important clinical indicators of health including sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, and mental health." So this study shows at worst "annoyance". Generally in this country, especially in agricultural areas, we don't put restrictions on property based on annoyance. I found a interesting comment under bias " Both Mars Hill and Vinalhaven residents gain financially from the wind projects, either through reduced electricity costs and / or increased tax revenues". This verifies what GB has been saying and proves SFS has been untruthful about wind energy raising electric rates! Again kudos for citing your studies this is how people should work out conflict!
Just read the second study Simona cited and this is the conclusion " No differences were found in terms of psychological and social HRQOL, or in self-rated health." Again they found evidence of annoyance but not to health. I think you people objecting need to think of the consequences of what you are demanding. You want limitations placed on property in agricultural areas based on annoyance not actual health problems. If this were in a development with a HOA that would be fine. I know the area in question is zoned ag/residential and there are areas with a number of homes however you need to realize people buy land in these areas to make money. The economy of not only our county but our whole country depends on people buying land to make money. If you start putting restrictions on annoyance what about the tree farmer is he going to be allowed to harvest his timber? What about any form of farming could it exist? Could anyone open any kind of business without someone objecting because some aspect of it annoyed them?
Thank you Mr.Hill for pointing out that the PTC has expired so while credits and subsidies still exist for all other forms of electrical generation if the GB project moves forward it will not even receive a tax credit and will be built,financed and maintained solely with private non government money. The only form of electrical generation that can make this claim!
This discussion seems a bit too technical for Mr.Hill. When it was earlier stated that the GB project was bonded it was responding to his concern that turbines would be abandoned. The proposed ordinance requires GB to place a sum of money to cover their removal in case of abandonment in escrow so the county is not at risk. It does not mean bonds will be sold to pay for the project. The GB project is 100% privately, non government funded.
Just looked at the third study Simona and while it seems to be a good reference it really doesn't seem to be a study. I didn't see any references to turbines at all. It did make the case that infrasound at some level could be harmful I don't think anyone disputes that. WHO has done research (along with others) that state the level of infrasound from turbines is much too low to cause health problems. This is well covered in the Mass. study already cited. Generally health problems from infrasound are attributed to sleep deprivation. To put things in perspective ocean waves put out much higher levels of infrasound than turbines but most people say the sound of ocean waves puts them to sleep. Infrasound can cause health problems if you get too much of it but the same can be said for water!
Just looked at the fourth study cited by Simona and I have to ask have you read these studies or have you just listed them hoping no one would actually read them? It a good reference on how the ear works and talks about how different people hear differently but for the issue at hand I couldn't see any relevance.
Just read the fifth study Simona posted and again it doesn't have any information specific to turbines. It does make two points that have relevance to the discussion. It states 2.5% of the population is very sensitive to low frequency sound. That's interesting but what do you do about it? Do you want to ban turbines because of that? Well then we also have to ban heating and AC units because they cause low frequency noise too. To put this in perspective the poultry farms in the county pose difficulties for people with asthma, approximately 8% of the population suffer from asthma, over 3 times the number sensitive to low frequency noise, so should we ban all poultry farms? What would that do for our economy? The study also makes the point that our usual measurement of sound db/a doesn't give us a good measure of low frequency sound. I have to agree with you on that but what do you want to do about it? All of our laws regarding noise are based on db/a so do we just make up something different? Equipment to measure low frequency noise is rare and expensive so how do you enforce any new laws? Low frequency noise travels great distances and is everywhere so again how do you enforce new laws regarding it? For instance how do you fine a turbine when you can't say the low frequency noise didn't come from a grain bin 2 miles away? Remember you can't hear this stuff.
I applaud a supporter of SFS for finally giving their references. It is nice to finally have someone to have intelligent conversation with. I noticed your list is identical to a list sent out by a Professor at SU. I trust you have read all of these as I admittedly have not although I have read some of them. I have read much of the work by Salt and Pedersen. Much of Pedersens work revolved around questionnaires. You must be careful of relying on information from questionnaires as a few people have pointed out earlier, using themselves as examples, that they will object regardless of facts and reality. In a questionnaire you are essentially getting someones opinion rather than an accurate depiction of if harm is occurring. It should be noted that in one of Pedersen's articles published in 2009 there was a drop in reported annoyance from noise when the turbines were out of the line of sight. That really puts a question mark on "Wind Turbine Syndrome" when the effects of reported noise distress decrease when the individual cannot see the turbine. Salt has done some very impressive work and yes some of his work did show a reaction to low frequency noise in the ear. However a reaction to low frequency noise does not indicate stress or even a mental registration of the sound. To put that in perspective there are dog whistle cell phone apps available that go down to 80hz. This isnt the ultra low frequency that Salt used but at lower decibels it is inaudible. I doubt very much many if any people could wake their spouse, roommate, significant other, etc. with the dog whistle at 80hz but it is claimed that sound as low as 20hz will keep people from sleep to the point where they suffer Wind Turbine Syndrome? I would encourage you to look up the Canadian Study (google "Health Canada Wind Turbines," it the first link available). While this study is still in the peer review process and all of its data is not available yet it does give some interesting facts. They recorded several biological factors and also used a questionnaire to report biological stress as well as reported annoyance. They found that while some people living near turbines do report an annoyance on the questionnaire there was no sign of biological stress.
I googled the sixth study and could not come up with anything. I will be happy to look at it if someone can provide it
Here is a quote from the eighth study "People living close to wind turbines have described symptoms including vertigo, tinnitus and ear pain which they believe to be caused by exposure to wind turbine noise. Other symptoms include sleep disturbance, headaches and concentration problems.
But how many of these problems are actually caused by wind turbines, and how many are just perceived to be caused by wind turbines?" No conclusions are reached. I think everyone concerned should look at those symptoms. Probably the most common symptoms people go to Doctors for. It's easy to see how a turbine goes up in a neighborhood and people get a headache and blame it on the turbine. The same hysteria was raised about power lines for years. The same thing goes on with the GMO debate today. People develop some sort of problem, as people do, they read an article about GMO and are convinced that's the problem. They didn't realize they had been eating GMO products for years. Again the Mass. study cited above reviewed all literature and stated there was not sufficient evidence to support a claim of wind turbine syndrome.
The Hoen study used by the wind industry is a diluted study because the area it studies encompasses homes no where near turbines. Upon closer examination you find homes within 2 miles lose value. Another flaw of the Hoen study is that the properties that are unmarketable are omitted.
Pioneer Green has just purchase a farm for $2.2 million across the highway from Washington High School. Looks like the footprint has moved north of Westover/Marion.
10:22 Let me be equally frank. It really does not matter to me how "overjoyed" you are. I care about Somerset being something more than one of the poorest counties on the east coast and the poorest county in Maryland. I care about business. I care about my family. You are correct you do have the ability to try to stir the political pot to try to get the elected officials to interfere in my business and with my property rights. I must ask how would you feel if you were putting an addition on your house and someone interfered, started a petition, ran to elected officials to stop it and then when they refused started to accuse everyone involved with corruption? If you really want a say on what your neighbor does with his or her property do yourself a favor and move somewhere with a HOA.
Industrial development should not be allowed for ag/residential zones. Wind turbines are not compatible development and therefore should not be allowed. The function is to protect citizens safety and property values.
8:44 I work and I still read. I keep up on the news and yes on major issues I consult literature to make an informed decision. What are you consulting to make an informed decision on what you feel I should be able to do with my property? If you want "piece and quite" then maybe you should visit a real turbine and see just how quiet they really are.
8:16 Wind turbines are typically zoned into ag/residential areas. It is your opinion they are not compatible but it is the opinion of many planning and zoning boards, most importantly our planning and zoning board that wind turbines are compatible with agriculturally zoned areas.
Industrial wind turbines are detrimental to the environment and the economy. It is sad that those being paid are willing to hide the fact that wind development increases electricity rates while lowering property values. This is a proven fact as evidenced by wind power states having the highest increase in utility rates after wind is installed and by government appellete boards decreasubg property values. Thank goodness the people of Somerset are smarter than those who represent us.
8:12 There is no area around Washington High School that would accommodate the setbacks for a industrial turbines.
8:24 You should scroll up and read Mr. Albero's post about giving a source rather than giving an unsubstantiated opinion.
Just want to let everyone know the Pioneer Green promoter is Kevin Miller. He is being paid to mislead Somerset residents about the consequences placing industrial sized turbines here will bring. He has sold out Somerset County and its people for money. You can view his easement contract at mdlandrec.net under Kevin Miller.
8:24 How are they detrimental to the environment? Someone already posted some material that debunked the mass bird kill idea. As far as the economy the Jacobs France study shows millions coming into the economy.
@8:13 Nobody but PG and you is trying to interfere with property rights. A wind ordinance removes the existing property rights of citizens to be safe, comfortable and maintain our property values.
8:33 I can see you can type so I assume you can read. Scroll up and look at whats already been cited on property values. Allowing one person to legally develop their property in accordance with zoning laws doesn't strip anyone's property rights away. You interfere with my property rights and then say somehow Pioneer is interfering with my property rights. Your really not making any sense.
The studies Pioneer Green cites were commissioned by the wind industry or the National Renewable Energy Lab whose function is to promote renewable energy. The Jacob Franc study was commissioned by Pioneer Green. Examining the study shows the economics are flawed because only a small portion of the money will be spent in Somerset and the only long term jobs are a few watchman jobs that are low paying.
here is a thought about all of this and about all of you...
Let me offer a suggestion:
Shut the fuck up and do something about it if you do not like it, other wise, continue as you already have and already will in doing absolutely nothing but bitch and complain whilst you just sit there and waste good air...
There will not be any white knight to swoop in and save the day for you lazy ass people who do nothing but jaw-jack...
"Be the change you wish to see"
-Ghandi
The county attorney represents land leasers when he is being paid by taxpayers to represent the county. The attorney's father-in-law is partnering with Pioneer Green and an LLC formed with his step son's initials has a wind lease too. Jerry Boston's daughter will benefit through her husband's lease contract and Randy Laird is bending over backwards to keep Pioneer Green in the county. There is no way to justify why these officials who have been elected as our representatives are ignoring public safety and the pleas of the majority to favor Pioneer Green who continues to mislead about the hazards of wind development.
So much for the studies, the Lord himself could post a study from God and PG would certainly find fault with it and declare it worthless.
On the other hand all of PG's studies or %100 accurate and should be believed. PG doesn't realize that they are actually turning people against them by being so arrogant.
I just don't understand how anyone could want these things anywhere near them much less on their property.
Be very careful of those you expose. Evil and wickedness lurks in their hearts and minds and they can be capable of anything. When you can and are willing to intentionally do something that will harm an innocent animal or bird you are not a stable person.
C02 measurements in wind hosting areas show no measurable decrease. This is because wind is nondisbatchable meaning it cannot be controlled. Wind does produce energy but only 30% of the time in good wind resource areas so here it will be much less. Even when wind is producing it requires a backup source. This weakens the grid and lowers efficiency. Because one source is being wasted, no C02 is eliminated. Wind turbines are made from composites that cannot be recycled. This creates a hazardous waste problem when the parts are no longer functional which is 15 years if they do not suffer a mechanical failure.
Here we go with the SFS tactic of shifting the conversation from debatable facts to playing 21 questions as to who is on here and making false accusations of cooruption. If you want to talk about ethics in the interest of full disclosure you should really include your leader. Not only did she have a conflict of interest in relationships but she was also the leader of the opposition and was advised to abstain from voting. She did fail to be reappointed I would assume due to unprofessional behavior but she never abstained from a vote due to her conflicts of interest although SFS now files ethics complaints on others for lesser conflicts of interest such as doing business with a participating landowner. 9:05 I do not think anyone has claimed any study is 100% accurate, but reading studies, critiquing data and debating points is part of informing oneself. You are welcome to read through all the information I and others have posted and come back with your thoughts. 8:43 The only study that has been referenced that PG paid for was the Jacobs Fance study. As someone else pointed out this institute holds a high level of prestige. You say they made a mistake and didn't calculate how much would go to other counties but to which county will the 2.9 million per year in county tax revenues go? Where do you suppose much of the "millions" SFS claims the participating landowners profits from the lease will go? Generally people tend to spend the most money closest to home.
Too many cozy relationships on this flow chart to make me comfortable.
This nepotism thing continues to get worse and worse. After analyzing the chart on this post it appears at least one close relative is missing. Jerry Boston's nephew Dana Boston is also in the Simpkins family. Dana's mother is Rex and Krrk's sister and Dana was also a partner in the Simpkin's and Simpkin's law firm. Something really needs to be done about this situation and one would think that any reputable lawyer would voluntarily step aside if there was even a perceived conflict of interest.
Great wind must have tunnel vision. They seem to believe that land owners with leases have property rights that shouldn't be questioned but property owners without leases should not have any rights at all and live at the mercy of their neighbors. Seems to me that property owners should have equal rights under the law.
9:29 Please scroll up and read the posted literature on birds ad turbines. How many birds are killed each year by turbines vs power lines and houses? You speak of evil and wickedness. How evil is it to support a group that continually makes unsubstantiated claims of cooruption, makes false claims of people and is guilty of the level of hypocrisy continually demonstrated by SFS?
9:33 As you cannot bring a source for your 30% run time or your theory that additional power weakens the grid I will just assume it is desperate, baseless rhetoric and won't touch it. However your claim that turbines are made of non recyclable materials astounds me. There market for steel, copper and aluminum is so good people are breaking into houses and stealing from stores to get it. Read the newspaper and quite often you will see people arrested for stealing metal.
I believe the Ghandi quoter that uses the "f bomb" and refers to fellow citizens as lazy is the p&z commissioner who installed the turbine at CHS. Her husband is a partner with Scott Tawes, a Pioneer Green partner.
BTW, how much electricity does the turbine at the high school generate?
SFS doesn't have to claim corruption, all anyone has to do is show the "potential" conflicts and ask a few questions.
Just want to give a shout out to Safe For Somerset for raising awareness about the Great Bay Wind project. I believe our commissioners would have passed the ordinance before we had a chance to research the consequences.
Wind turbines require a minimum setback of 2,640 to keep noise levels tolerable and reduce the risks caused by mechanical failures and ice throws. That is what the manufacturer's safety manuals say. Why are these things being proposed 1000 feet from property lines and less than 600 feet from roads? YIKES!
10:54 Please scroll back and read Joe Albero's post challenging people who post claiming facts to cite the source
Nothing seems to bring out the knives from SFS as actually reading the studies they have finally been pressured into citing. If the supporters have misrepresented something or missed something relevant why not point it out in a civil debate?Nope as usual SFS has nothing so they resort to name calling and attempts at intimidation. Good luck with that!
PG is still misleading the folks. First they say SFS membership has declined and they are few in numbers. Then they accused everyone that is anti windmill of being a member of SFS. They are so desperate they will say anything.
I know one thins, PG doesn't want anything to do with a referendum because they know they would lose. If they knew they would prevail they would be begging for a referendum vote.
The seventh study makes the case that their is stimulation in the brain from low frequency noise that your brain doesn't perceive or "hear". Okay, what of it? No evidence that the sound from turbines provides any kind of unusual irritation.
The ninth study talks about turbines disturbing sleep. Frankly the numbers they showed really didn't seem to show a major problem. For instance "20% of respondents reported disturbed sleep at least one night a month." That seems low for anywhere, turbines or not. Also only used questionnaires for its research. Not the best data.
11:40 Who is misleading? SFS claimed to have 1000 signatures on their petition a few months ago and a couple weeks ago claimed to have 200-400. That's not a PG claim that is a SFS claim. If either of those figures were incorrect then come out and admit your members were publishing false information. Most of the proponents believe in property rights which is why they are against a referendum.
The evidence is overwhelming that turbines lower property values and cause health problems for some of the people who live within a mile. This is a fact and has been proven where industrial wind is sited too close to people. Vermont has lowered property values because of it and Brown County Wisconsin has declared the 8 turbines, that are less than 500 feet tall, a human health hazard. This even applies to those who merely pass through the turbine zone. These are hard facts. Many more areas will be declared disaster zones in the near future. There are scores of lawsuits in the works and many more people have been bought out under gag contracts. France's government is working on a bill to require minimum setbacks that exceed 3000 feet. Why is this still being considered? I believe the chart shows us why.
Looked at the tenth study. It claims a 20% annoyance from turbines. That may possibly be true in some wind farms but other wind farms there is almost nothing. For instance the Lewis turbine has a large population living within a half mile but only a 1% disapproval rate. Again studies using questionnaires are suspect. It also is extreme with a 35dba recommendation. How could you possible enforce that in an area with many poultry houses emitting over 100db/a and many grain bins much louder still? Even at the 20% annoyance rate that does not seem awfully high. I doubt there are many businesses in Somerset that don't annoy more than that. Traffic, smells, noise,congestion there are many things that annoy we have to find a balance that allows business.
@8:24 You claim wind energy increases electric rates. Please read the first study submitted by SFS! As reported in the 5:33 critique of the study, the study claims people enjoyed LOWER electric rates because of the turbines plus large tax revenues. This is listed as one of the possible bias factors. So tell us, does wind energy lower electric rates or are the studies submitted by SFS garbage? Do you people even read your own studies?
SFS keeps pushing a referendum. Setting aside that property rights cannot be put to a referendum putting a business to a referendum after they have been here for years and invested several million is probably the best way to ensure that no other business would ever come to Somerset. Seriously that is the message SFS would want to send to prospective businesses and property buyers? To develop your property or start a business in Somerset you may be put to a referendum after you have invested millions? Good luck bringing in business with that philosophy. Good luck bringing in major property buyers to inflate the stagnant real estate market with that approach. If Pioneer won the referendum still no other business would ever take a chance on Somerset. Either some of these people are clueless about business or they are content to see Somerset remain in poverty.
The Massachusetts health study that the wind industry uses is a study of a study. It repeatedly states that more studies are needed. Please take the time to read it and you will see what I mean.
I really wonder sometimes what is motivating some of you people. Is it all about winning the argument? Has it ever occurred to you what if you are wrong? Would you really want to see Somerset with its financial problems turn its back on a 200 million dollar investment if turbines are safe and don't hurt property values? So why do so many of you people blindly follow the SFS leadership after they have lied to you so many times? Look at the 12:43 post above! I'm pretty sure the person who posted it knows the whole Vermont story is they lowered the assessment value (related but not the same as property value) on ONE house in Vermont. The whole Brown County thing has been discussed earlier in the thread so I'm not going to waste time on it however the person who posted it knows that too and again is deliberately misleading. How many times were you told and still be told the turbines will be 690' or even 700' tall? Anybody hear GB complain about the proposed ordinance that limits them to 575'? We told you and GB has been telling you for over a year anything over the FAA Application of 599' was off the table but your leadership told you it was all a lie. Well who was lying? They've told you the DOD report shows they were lying, well read it, it confirms what GB has said, that they briefly looked at 690' but rejected it and confirmed a maximum 600'. Look earlier in this thread someone claimed GB was now going to build 50 475' turbines. I questioned it and turns out it was an honest mistake, they looked at an old quote about the 690' turbines with the tower height listed. No big deal, except later in the thread they posted the same thing knowing full well it was false. If you people are just so blinded by jealousy that you will believe anything SFS will tell you deserve to be miserable. Anyone who has honest concerns the information has been presented read it and start thinking for yourself! If you have a question ask it, you have a forum you can be anonymous and ask anything you want, don't keep relying on people for information that have lied to you before.
You people keep claiming France is restricting turbines well goggle this "The Eiffel Tower Just Got A Wind Turbine Makeover"
OK, since PG continues to insist that every anti windmill comment comes from a SFS member than we can certainly believe that every pro windmill comment comes from PG and their partners (lease holders).
I like windmills because I own a big farm and will be receiving tons of money from PG.
I like wind mills because I'm a big liberal Obama supporter!
I am pro wind because it will give the county more money to waste.
I love windmills because it employes so many PHD's to study there positive effects on humans and wildlife.
Windmills must be great, our EDC loves them just as much as they do prisons and land fills.
I like Great bay windmills because it will make so many Texas lawyers richer.
3:14 I realize that the last few of your posts were pathetic attempts at humorous sarcasm but seriously. Do you like to drive on paved roads free of debris? Do you like to have a sheriffs office to call in an emergency? Do you like to see kids given a chance for an education? Yes? Do you want to see your county taxes raised? No? Then the county needs business revenues. And BTW I think your 3:12 post really spells out your motivations. Why are you so jealous of one of your neighbors receiving a profit? Go out and talk to some of your neighbors and you will find that many if not most of the landowners involved are conservatives. Your mockery of liberals would indicate you would like to think of yourself as a conservative but you cannot stand the thought of a business doing well or the farmers in the area (who are businessman) doing well. Wouldn't you like to see the county one day have an education system that could offer competitive salaries? Wouldn't you like to see Somerset rise just a little ways out of poverty? Apparently you are content to see Somerset continue down the path to fiscal insolvency as long as it means your neighbors won't be doing any better than you.
I would like people to research this Texas "company" Pioneer Green Energy and see why they exited projects in northern Alabama, in Cherokee County, Erie County, PA; California---the newspaper are posted on wind-watch.org
Please read them and you may understand why many people in Somerset County, Maryland are opposing this project. Pioneer does not care about anything but selling (and raking in a pile of cash)the project once they get the permit approvals and then the big guys like E.ON,Iberdrola, APEX, First Wind will come into the county andtake over. The wind industry does employ writers to make anonymous comments like some of the ones posted here. The comments by the landowners, lobbyists make Somerset County look like a hick county and what manufacturer would want to start a business in such a backward county? People who will be taken in my the snake oil salesmen and sell out their neighbors for a few dollars. Don't allow the carpetbaggers and Obama Administration to destroy this beautiful county. Wake Up Folks!!
Just finished reading the eleventh study listed and found it very informative. Well written and loads of information. Actually bookmarked it for future reference. It takes a reasonable look at why some people may be more susceptible to problems from low frequency noise. Here is a quote "Under some clinical conditions, such as Meniere’s disease, superior canal dehiscence, or even asymptomatic cases of endolymphatic hydrops, individuals may be hypersensitive to infrasound" I don't disagree with that but the question is what do you do about it? In other studies it has been estimated that about 2.5% of the population may be sensitive to low frequency noise. If you look at the proposed turbine sites very few people live within a half mile of them. In all likelihood even if that number is true no one will be affected. Again some perspective over three times that number of people have asthma. I would argue that it is far worse as people die from asthma attacks. Poultry Farms irritate most asthma suffers. So should we shut down the poultry industry? Of course not! Nor should we turn our backs on this great opportunity for Somerset! BTW this study and I believe the other ten all recommended more study. Wouldn't mention it but that fact really seems to bother a SFS poster!
France is working on a bill to enact minimum setbacks to over 3000 feet because wind developers have made poor placement decisions. Several towers have been taken down because of being in the view shed of historic properties.
Kevin you really need help. In order for you to validate your liaison with Pioneer Green, you believe you have to attack any one who voices concern about setbacks, noise, property values, public safety and our environment. It is our right to defend what we have. The current ordinance protects us because it does not allow for wind development and that is they way it should stay. Placing industrial wind towers in a densely populated community that is ranked number 3 in the nation for bald eagles and has a poor/marginal wind resource is a recipe for disaster. Face it.
Yep!4:25 Lets get our news from an anti wind blog! Its on the internet its got to be true! So Sad! Don't you get tired of having your false claims corrected on this blog now you want everyone to get their news from the same source. Let me guess that's where you got the story on the Vermont property devaluation? Remember the ONE house!
4:25 I doubt any wind company has the funding to pay people to moniter local blogs. On the other hand the coal industry has plenty of cash to throw around, and some of the ridiculous statements made to discredit proponents and Pioneer make me wonder where all of SFS's funding is coming from. I think it would take a lot to have billboards, signs and a propaganda forum and as SFS claims to have lost 600 to 800 supporters in a few months it does make one wonder where there funding is coming from. All I can say is if someone is paying for all the misinformation and paying for the argument SFS is putting up they are getting ripped off.
You people keep claiming France is restricting turbines well goggle this "The Eiffel Tower Just Got A Wind Turbine Makeove
5:28 you just made another ridiculous statement. You insinuate that PG doesn't have enough money to pay someone to comment on a blog but you are quick to say that you are going to spend 200 million dollars in the county if you can just get permission. It's really sad that you thing we are so stupid as to believe what you have to say. There is no study for common sense.
I want a windmill on my farm because they are sooooooo beautiful.
I want two windmills because my neighbor is getting one.
5:08 Not a Kevin but let me respond. There have already been sources cited on here verifying that the bald eagle population is not at risk. Scroll up and read at your leisure. I also have to ask why you feel two met towers installed in the county that have apparently recorded sufficient wind are wrong? You know better than the people with the MET towers? Also I am a bit curious at what you feel constitutes an attack. You mention nothing of the false allegations of cooruption that have been thrown around on here. You mention nothing of the smear tactics I have seen on several names. Have you read through this thread? For that matter have you read on the subject at all or are you one of those people that insists that you don't need to read anything on the subject to make an educated opinion. Also you mention dense populations. Lewes is far more densely packed and it has a 400ft turbine 1800 feet from a devolopment with a 90+% approval rating. Do some reading sometime.
I want a windmill because Obama says they are good and the XL pipeline and oil independence is bad.
I want windmills because I'm only getting $200,000 a year now in government subsidies.
If farmers need windmills in order to survive it is time for them to sell the farm and get a job. I don't know any POOR farmers.
This could be another 400+ post because PG will not give up as long as anyone else is posting or reading.
6:07 you think Pioneer has 200 million sitting in a bank? The project would have to be financed, they have said this several times. You think a company that currently employs less than 20 people has money to pay someone to moniter blogs? I think if you look you will quickly realize SFS has spent a lot more on advertising in Somerset then Pioneer.
6:13 if you don't see farming as a job then you are completely lost and one of the reasons we need better education in the county. Also I realize it may be hard for you to keep up with the conversation on here but as of now the PTC has expired. As it stands now new wind projects will be the only energy fully unsubsidized baring a renewal of the PTC.
So we come back to there are those who are for turbines and those that are against. Applying labels to either side doesn't solve anything nor does it encourage discussion and potentially compromise.
But some food for thought: is Somerset County going to survive if it continues as it has been? In today's County Times, there is an article about a business that may pull out because of excessive sewer fees. If business cannot be enticed here, how will we convince our children and grandchildren to remain here? There are fewer and fewer watermen making a living here. There are fewer and fewer farmers. With the regulatory environment in Maryland, it is difficult to get any business interested. Couple this with the remote location of Somerset County and the business interest dwindles more.
For those who oppose turbines on any grounds, regardless of your memebership and affiliation, are you willing to have your real estate taxes increase in order to generate revenue for those things the citizens have cried out for? Those things like a new vocational school, more maintenance on our school buildings, improved roadways and bridges, more police patrol in problem areas? Are you willing to see your tax rates increase not by a penny per $100 of assessed value, but ten cents? twenty cents?
Wind energy may not be the answer to Somerset's problems, but maybe, it could be a start. Even providing one job is better than what we have now which is no jobs. Rather than try and shut down the entire project, look for compromise and make it reasonable.
Having heard the setbacks suggested in conversations over the last two years move from a quarter mile to a half mile to now (I believe I read in this thread) three miles, does not indicate any interest in compromise. Is eliminating interest by any business in any project for Somerset County your ultimate goal? Do you think anyone researching this area and seeing all of this hate and discontent going to make this county attractive as an investment?
Instead of elevating yourself to the lofty position of "I love my county the most and if you don't agree, you don't care" look to understand why land owners believe this is a good investment for their business. Look at what if could potentially bring to the County. Offer constructive alternatives and suggest what you believe are more appropriate industries for this county. Don't just be against everything, state what you will support.
Just a different thought process.
6:15 We keep hoping you guys will do some reading and come back with some real facts and sources for a real debate. I realize that's a lot to ask for but we keep hoping.
Great post 6:28.
Kevin Miller, posting all of the pro pioneer green propaganda, had a family member who did time in federal prison for stealing millions from the company he worked for. That pretty much say it all!
6:26 I offered other business that would benefit Somerset on another blog site only to have you tear them down and tell us that it would not work in Somerset.
It seems that you have learned all of the scare tactics like the current administration. Somerset is not going anywhere, we will all be better off without windmills. Why would PG care about Somerset anyway, they only are in business to make money. There are counties in the USA that are in worse shape that Somerset so if PG really cares about county governments I would suggest they go find a really poor county.
What about the property rights of the Ocean City property owner that just got turned down and wasn't allowed to build a windmill on his property? It happens all the time, we have no property rights, we live at the hands of our elected officials and most of them only care about getting reelected. Sad but true.
Mr. Swift gets over $300,000 a year in farm subsidies so I'm sure he really needs an extra few bucks from a couple of windmills.
@6:07 - windmills are beautiful. When you ride around the country, you will notice that there are pull offs so the tourists can pull over and take pictures safely.
@6:13 - where do you propose a farmer get a job??? There aren't any in Somerset County. Since you haven't met a "poor" farmer, I suggest that you go purchase a few hundred acres (at the market price of $5,500 per acre), buy $1million worth of equipment to work the land, invest tens of thousands of dollars into seed and fertilizer and watch the weather destroy the crop. Try to make a budget for living expenses without knowing how much income you will have in a year. Very stress free way to live - you should try it!
Since education funding has been mentioned as a reason to bring in the giant wind turbines, I checked the 2010 census numbers for high school graduation data in the county. It listed Somerset county for those over 25 years of age as having a non-high school graduation rate of just over 20 %, for the state of MD it was 11.5% and nationally just over 14 %. Really a lousy indication of the education level in Somerset County--this would look appalling to prospective employers thinking to move operations here.
Would more money solve that problem or does the fault lie elsewhere?
I have heard that two other industrial wind turbine developers are looking at Somerset County for more projects-perhaps they are waiting to see if Pioneer gets in here. Who in there right mind will want to live in a county plastered with giant wind turbines from one end to the other? A modern day junkyard for giant fans--machines that may last perhaps 15 years with luck and good maintenance and then they will stand as monuments to government incompetence at local, state, and federal levels.
8:20 I am not sure where you are getting your information but for one I am doubtful any farmer in the area is getting 300000 in farm subsidies but they might be grossing that amount but I am not sure who you think you are to determine how much someone should make in a year.
8:17 I am not sure to what you refer or to whom you refer. I have never torn down any business idea. I am very pro business (unlike SFS) and support any idea that would bring more business into the area. If you have a business idea then get a loan, develop it, make a fortune and unlike many of the jealous residents of the area I will be thrilled for you.
USA Today just did an article on the poorest counties in the US. Guess what the 20th poorest county and the poorest county in Maryland is?? Somerset. And you guys don't think we need business and revenue??
8:42 Can you provide a list of these junkyards of abandoned turbines you allude to? As far as who will live here do yourself a favor and scroll up a ways and look through the material already cited on property values.
Many of the studies cited by Simona St. Ives-Gillette are examined in the " Wind Turbine Health Impact Study:
Report of Independent Expert Panel
January 2012
Prepared for:
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection
Massachusetts Department of Public Health" The studies examined are the First,Second,Sixth,Fifteenth,Seventeenth,Nineteenth, and twenty fourth. Since this is a very highly qualified panel let's see what they gather from these studies."Typically, at distances larger than 400 m, sound
pressure levels for modern wind turbines are less than 40 dB(A), which is below the level
associated with annoyance in the epidemiological studies reviewed" " "There is no evidence for a set of health effects, from exposure to wind turbines that could
be characterized as a "Wind Turbine Syndrome." "None of the limited epidemiological evidence reviewed suggests an association between
noise from wind turbines and pain and stiffness, diabetes, high blood pressure, tinnitus,
hearing impairment, cardiovascular disease, and headache/migraine. "the Panel concludes the weight of
the evidence suggests no association between noise from wind turbines and measures of
psychological distress or mental health problems."
@8:42 We should get so lucky as to have two other developers be interested in Somerset after the way GB has been treated! I would be very surprised to see any company want anything to do with Somerset! As who would want to live around turbines, many people! There are many high end areas in the country with turbines. One good example is the North Shore of Oahu. Very high end area. Very expensive real estate. And literally covered with turbines. But you don't have to go that far to see a nice area with a turbine just go to Lewes. They have a 400' turbine right next to town. A very nice development 1800' away that was built after the turbine. A recent poll showed only a 1% disapproval rate. You are also wrong about how long they last. A modern turbine should last 30 years. But you tell me, who would want to live in an area with dilapidated schools and a 30% poverty rate? The only people I know who find that appealing are the SFS elites.
8:42 Do some checking for yourself on a few things. What AP programs are offered in Somerset vs what students in other programs can receive? What elective courses are available in Somerset vs other areas? What about athletics? What programs are offered elsewhere that we don't have? I should say do some checking on the lack thereof in each of those categories. To me that is sad, that students in many other counties get a chance for a better education then our students. What about teachers, how many teachers come to Somerset and stay until retirement vs how many put in a few years for experience and then move on to greener pastures? On the topic of retirement, in a few years the county will have to pick up the tab for teachers retirement. How do you propose we pay for that without raising taxes?
I read that some people felt sorry for the wind companies and believed they were hurting for money and could not possibly afford to hire lobbyists. Well thanks to President Obama and Congress money is still being provided to them under Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce issued a report on January 17, 2013 of foreign wind companies feeding off this program. They looked at Grant money (our tax money) through December 5, 2012. The Spanish company Iberdrola was the winner up to then by collecting over $ 1.7 Billion dollars of our tax money under just this one give away program. This company collected a check of over $ 172 million dollars for just its Blue Creek Paulding County, Ohio project.
Over 50 wind companies have collected under this program. You can see the numbers yourself- just go to the IRS website for this program-they are administering it for the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Do you people still feel that the wind companies cannot afford to pay for lobbying efforts? They are using our individual tax money to line their pockets with grant money. And the latest news from IRS is that some wind companies may be fudging their numbers.
Hey elite landowner/Pioneer lobbyist please post a link/source for your comments about upscale homeowners on north shore of Oahu, Hawaii happy with industrial wind turbines. Also regarding that 443 ft high Lewes, DE IWT in that your observation about sub -development near the turbine-please include a link to a new story about these examples you used. If you go to www.wind-watch.org you will find different newspaper accounts of these turbines.
In the Honolulu Star Advertiser there is a story about defunct wind farm- "-Kamana Wind project 37 derelict wind turbines " on 3/31/12. Also in the Hawaii Free Press dated 2/11/15 is opinion piece about "SEC: Defective turbines....."
Internet newspaper in Hawaii called Civil Beat has a number of stories under Energy section about opposition to IWTs in Oahu and the Big Island.
Hey jealousy consumed SFS elitest. I don't think I should have to provide info on the North Shore of Oahu. Are you serious? It is a well known for tourism,bird watching, and especially surfing. Don't believe me just google it.You can also google "WELCOME TO KAWAILOA WIND" for info on one of the wind farms on the North Shore. Lewes turbine information came from a Delmarvanow column on September 25 2014. I used Goggle Earth to measure the distance to the development and I have visited the development myself so I know it is a very nice upscale development. I can find no information on the Kamana Wind project. I suspect you are referring to the KAWAILOA WIND project mentioned above. It had a massive fire a few years ago and was down for quite awhile. The turbines were not derelict as they were well maintained the whole time. I know anti wind groups are not good with details but the fire was not with the turbines but a experimental battery storage system they were using. If you go back through this thread and others on other blogs you will find SFS is constantly being corrected for their misinformation, an example is just above regarding Vermont, this is from SFS using anti wind forums like wind watch. And also because the leadership of SFS is a bunch of liars!
Much concern has been expressed on this thread about noise from the turbines. I think much of this comes from SFS losing a battle with the zoning board about db/a limits. SFS of course wanted whatever it took for a zone out but 40db/a was looked at for a while. Glenn Ains correctly pointed out that with the state limit being 55db/a it would be impossible to enforce. They finally agreed GB should have the same limit as every other business in the state (except agriculture) of 55db/a. That does not mean that neighbors of a site will be exposed to 55db/a not that it would be unreasonable if they were. Lets look at what people can expect. This is what the Mass. study listed above states " Typically, at distances larger than 400 m, sound
pressure levels for modern wind turbines are less than 40 dB(A), which is below the level
associated with annoyance in the epidemiological studies reviewed" 400 meters is 1312'. The setbacks in the proposed ordinance are 2.5 times the height of the tower (twice industry standards) so assuming a 575' turbine (height limit in ordinance) that comes to 1437.5'at the property line.Most people's home is a significant distance from the property line. Also consider than as turbines evolve and are made more efficient they have become more quiet. In all likelihood most people will only have 30 to 35 db/a at their homes well below background noise.
11:54 I see someone already responded to your rhetoric but I wanted to chime in. I want to apologize for the implication made earlier that SFS or the fossil fuel industry may be throwing some money around to discredit the wind industry. If that were the case than a lobbyist would take the time to get the information straight which you clearly have not done. The KAMAOA wind farm of 37 turbines on the Big Island was removed in 2012. You can look it up online or Google earth. The Google earth picture shows them being decommissioned and scraped. You indicate you get your wind information from anti wind sites, can we assume you then get your information on poultry farms from PETA?
A family member of the PG group stole millions? That sounds like business as usual in Somerset county
11:20 I cannot find a report of Section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 on the IRS website. I do not see the relevance anyway. It has been stated repeatedly that the Great Bay Wind Project is investor funded not grand funded. Iberdrola has nothing to do with Pioneer Green Energy. Do you have trouble with reading comprehension or do you ignore facts when they do not suit your agenda?
@9:35 Shame on you for comparing SFS to PETA. Sure PETA makes ridiculous claims and absurd statements but they have much more honor and integrity than SFS!
Pioneer Green just paid $22,000 per acre for farmland on Rt. 13 to the tune of $2.2 million. The land is across from WHS and was purchased so they will qualify to get the BIG FAT CASH GRANT from the Federal government. If they are spending $200 million the government will give them 30% up front. NO JOKE. Pax River has already spend millions studying the impact this garbage will have on them and our county has spent tons of money too. This makes ZERO CENTS. It will devastate our environment and kill jobs.
Copy & paste the link below. I found this in about 30 minutes. Looks like there may be many more. Looks like Hebron Bank loaned MRJ properties $415,000. Then MrJ defaulted and Hebron bought back at foreclosure for $275,000. Then Sold to Tawes for $100,000. They even financed the entire $100,000 to Tawes as in no downpayment. I am not an expert but that's what it looks like.
https://webmail1.networksolutionsemail.com/ajax/mail?action=attachment&session=5b434588424d4152b869cce99fe82ed8&folder=default0%2FINBOX&id=5693&attachment=2&save=0&filter=1
The county commissioners stacked the planning and zoning commission board. Safety and property value protections is being ignored in order to make this project fit here. It doesn't work. The Shirley Wind Project in Wisconsin has similar terrain and similar turbines but there are only 8 of them. It has been a complete and utter disaster for the people. This does not have to happen here. It is time to take action.
J and J Ag sold Pioneer Green 100 acres south of Princess Anne for $22,000 per acre.
Who are the members of J and J Ag?
10:32 I could post that your full of it. I could point out that the economic points and environmental points have already been debated and the proponents have offered multiple sources whereas you cite only yourself. I could point out that repeatedly it has been stated that this project is investor funded and receives no grants. There is no 30% grant Pioneer is receiving for wind. If you say different then cite a source proving it! You guys need to address reality at some point.
Wind energy is only in existence because of subsidies and mandates. Get rid of the renewable mandates and the subsidies, wind is dead. It is not feasible, not reliable, and weakens the grid. If you want to combat climate change, wind is the worst way to do it because it does not warrant the shutdown of any other plant. The blades are not recyclable and contain toxins. Disposal of these 200' long behemoths will be a huge problem. No one will want to take them unless they are paid an exorbitant amount of money. Wind facilities are LLC's within LLC's that will disband and leave us holding the bag. Follow the money.
10:40 If you think there has been mismanagement at HSB then perhaps you should consult with them. I do not see what this has to do with Pioneer. You guys are getting really desperate to put something up.
@10:32 You have no idea what PG plans are for this property but yet you are already against it! Like I've always said about SFS the say no to everything crowd! Could you give details on this 30% cash grant, excuse me if I don't hold my breath waiting for that reply!For all you know they have simply bought the property as a investment. Yet you feel you can claim it will "devastate our environment and kill jobs"!!! I guess that's not any crazier than other SFS claims. BTW isn't that property zoned commercial? Isn't that what SFS has been demanding? Proves once again you can't please fanatics!
ON that Scott Tawes scheme that was just mentioned, was that purchased in the name of Scott Tawes or one of his many LLC's. Can you also include a date.
Please list any known LLCs, for Glenn Ains and Scott Tawes. I think these two birds flock together.
10:40 Looks like a dead link and a accusation of corruption that has nothing to do with Pioneer.
Pioneer Green's principals are lawyers, lobbyist, and a private detective. The private detective came here first so he could find our weakest links. These links turned out to be Danny Thompson, the EDC director, and Scott Tawes and his cronies. Too bad that being so greedy opens up all of us to this bad policy. It is time for ordinary citizens to take back our county.
@10:45 You people really crack me up! Are you off your Meds today? The commissioners stacked the planning and zoning board? Are you really serious? They put the leader of the opposition on the board!!! She would still be there if she wasn't so rude and obnoxious! They sent the turbine ordinance back to the zoning board knowing Tammy and Dr. Say no to everything Fleury were waiting for it. They also knew Ms.Samus leaned strongly against turbines. The zoning board, led by Fleury bent over backwards for SFS. Example two SFS members were allowed to give presentations after public comments were stopped. Example they used a SFS member as a sound expert, allowing him to interject at will even going to a sound chamber with him. BTW he has no acoustical credentials. Example they denied GB offer to provide a real sound expert. Example Tammy Turbine being quoted in the Delmarva Farmer that she was confident the project would be zoned out. Example the Chairman voting to create a tie. Example Legal Counsel that was obviously opposed to the project being allowed to rudely shout at the GB representative. Example same legal counsel proposing language instead of advising. Example proposed turbine sites were zoned out. SFS would without doubt got much more but they overplayed their hand just like their doing now with the commissioners.
Simona most of these studies have nothing to do with turbines. They are simply studies regarding hearing and low frequency noise. You could say they were about ocean waves just as well. Have you read them? Did you just try to put together a list you thought looked impressive?
I want as many windmills as possible so Scott Tawes can get even richer!
10:45 I take it your from out of town or you would know the commissioners put the leader of SFS, the opposition on the zoning board. The Shirley Wind project you are so fond of is one health department making a case that involved no justification or science. Since that is all you seem to hang to it really shows you have nothing. Health effects have been discussed on here with much literature cited. Please review and feel free to comment.
10:47 I haven't seen anything of a property sale worth that much in that area. But if they did sounds like the owners got a great price. I take it you are jealous someone made a buck?
10:59 it was in his own name and was on march 27 2013. Could you not open the link.
10:54 turn on the news from time to time. The PTC is expired and yet wind development continues and it continues in many states that have no mandates. By the way by subsidies I assume you mean tax credits. Can you name any form of industrial energy that does not use tax credits (other than wind at the moment) or is this selective outrage? To my knowledge the blades are made of carbon fiber, PVC and fiberglass. I take it you don't have a car or use running water f you are against those components?
10:59 Another unsubstantiated accusation of corruption? You guys are developing a reputation for this. No wonder SFS is losing support so fast!
11:26 You have no evidence for corruption or to back actions you claim. You people are grasping at straws to make a case. If you are so jealous of land holders and land sellers why don't you go out and try to make a buck for yourself instead of allowing yourself to become consumed by so much greed. It is sad really.
12:30 Unlike you, yes if any of my neighbors in the community do well, yes I am happy for them. If you have evidence of wrongdoing then report it. Otherwise get over your apparent jealousy. I would love for every businessman in Somerset to do well....even the ones I don't care for because I like local businesses to do well and I would like the County to be more than than poorest county in Maryland.
Someone was recently praising the University of Delaware industrial wind turbine in Lowes, Delaware as not being a problem for residences near it.
Turns out that have been dozens of residents that opposed this turbine when it was constructed and afterwards. There was an organization called Citizens Advocating for a Livable Lewes which fought this one turbine project. Many newspaper stories about it can be found on it by searching for "U. of Delaware wind turbine
at www.wind-watch.org
I saw that a news story by the cape gazette village soup, reporter Dennis Forney 11/29/13 titled "of bats and birds and wind turbines" indicated the a U of Delaware study indicated that three Ospreys were killed during the study period and they estimate that at this one 400 foot high wind turbine there will be a YEARLY kill of 14 birds and 110 bats.
This was a study by the same organization that owns the turbine and which gets grant funding for research projects on wind energy (primarily for offshore wind ) from the U.S. Dept of Energy and wind industry sources. Not exactly an independent organization when it comes to doing a study of its own wind turbine.
I wanted to see if the U. of Delaware got federal funding for its turbine under that section which someone referred to as section 1603. I found on the Dept. Of Treasury-IRS website for grants under section 1603 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 that an organization identified as First State Marine Wind LLC received a grant award of $ 1,665, 089 for a Delaware wind project. Further investigation revealed that First State Marine Wind LLC is a partnership between Blue Hen (owned by the U. of Delaware) and spanish wind company Gamesa. This was U.S. Taxpayer money given to U. of Delaware directly owned company and Gamesa for the wind turbine built on the campus. Turns out the turbine was actually built on public land and the propriety of thst is an issue involved in a state lawsuit right now.
So whoever the person was praising the U. of Delaware wind turbine try doing a little research. And apparently the University through its Blue Hen company failed to a preliminary environmental analysis before building the turbine when gettinfg federal funding.
There have been many posts stating wind energy doesn't save anything because it has to be backed up. This is just more SFS deception. The statement has some truth wind power does have to be backed up. The deception is ALL electrical generation has to be backed up. Even nuclear! I,m dating myself but I remember when Three Mile Island went off line. The lights stayed on because power companies always keep a reserve ready. Wind power is no different. People are also confused because they think the wind 200' up is the same as ground level. Just not so, the wind 200' up is much more reliable and predictable. This easily confirmed. I have been to Lewes when there was absolutely no air moving, not one leaf stirring but the turbine was running strong.
How many times do I have to say this the PTC has not expired if the project meets the capital expenditure and Pioneer Green has until December 31, 2016 to do this because they are grandfathered in.
If you had read the post you would see the property was valued at way more than Scott Tawes paid for it when he purchased it through HSB foreclosure.
The problems with wind turbines and human health are due to the low frequency noise which is inaudible. It is the force of sound that our body reacts to. Even though we cannot hear it we can feel it. Symptoms include heart palpitations, ringing in the ears, headaches, vertigo, and nausea. Not everyone is affected. Anther name for it is vibrcoustics disease. Sleep deprivation also brings on symptoms. Wind developers do not address the c weighted noise that turbines emit. Noise is recognized throughout the world to have an impact on people's health and quality of life.
If noise is not a problem, why did Pioneer Green say instituting a 40 dba would kill the project?
Pioneer data shows at a distance of 1000 feet the noise emitted from a turbine does not exceed 40dba.
We know under certain conditions the noise will be louder than 70dba at these distances which is intolerable for those who have homes that will bombarded with this noise. Low frequency noise will be rated even higher than 70.
1:10 Yes I have hard that there was a group similar to SFS that protested the building of the Lewes turbines. They told residents similar SFS lies about health and the environment. Now according to a poll that has been cited here already the turbines has a 99% approval rate. You wish to dwell on the 1% that disapprove which is a typical SFS way of distorting the facts. It must be comforting to you to know there are other off the wall fringe groups out there fighting wind development. The turbine is right on the water and it is projected to kill only 14 birds per year? Thats fewer than many houses especially in a snowstorm like what we have today, a very minuscule number. Bat kills are a problem with turbines. Did you stumble on the research U of Delaware is doing to help curb bat kills from turbines? Apparently shutting down turbines for a very short period of time right after dusk dramatically curbs bat kills. WBOC did an article on that project a while back. That a public University got a grant to build a sustainable power source doesn't surprise me. It is a public University so at some point the taxpayers were going to pay for it anyway. Many Universities are putting in sustainable energy sources. Great Bay is investor funded so I am not sure where the relevance is with that. It does sound like some errors were made in the permitting process. Doesn't really have anything to do with great bay so I am not sure why you think that is relevant. So what you want us to take from your post is that despite a 99% approval there is still a group of SFS-like people who are going to complain non-stop about it that constitutes less than 1% of the Lewes population and a land based turbine located right on the water will still only kill 14 birds per year? Thanks for the update, go do some more reading.
1:39 Actually on the post on 2/23 it was indicated they would need to start construction by 1/31/2015, which is impossible. You can say they need to start construction by 12/31/2016 to qualify all you want but it isn't true.
http://dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=US13F
"Projects that are not under construction by January 1, 2015 are ineligible for this credit."
To qualify under the Safe Harbor clause Pioneer would have needed to spend at least 5% of the total project cost before January 2015. On a $200 million project this would mean Pioneer would have had to have spent more than 10 million on this project. They haven't.
@1:10 I am well aware that there is an opposition group to the Lewes turbine. I have talked to people while visiting the Lewes turbine and they have described the fear mongering, lies and deceptive comments. Sound familiar? One man even talked about how they claimed it would sound like a jet engine which was remarkable since I had just seen a SFS post make the same claim. They were told property values would crash and the town of Lewes would be ruined. Once the turbine was built all that died down. In a post up this thread is a list of property values studies read the one by Hinman. It goes into detail about this as property values do drop after permitting but before construction, after construction property values actually rebounded to a higher level! I don't comment on wind watch other than to correct the many ridiculous posts by SFS members quoting them. Two examples are just above, a claim of property value loss in Vermont that was one house and a claim made about an abandoned wind farm in Hawaii that had been removed years ago. The turbine in Lewes was bought with a grant, it was built for research for the University of Delaware. They do a lot of excellent research on bat kills. The turbine also powers the campus. I'm sure it does kill a number of birds there right on the water that's why GB has sited all of it's turbines away from the water. It's ideal for Lewes because that's what they research. The thing to remember is wind energy is the most wildlife friendly way to generate electricity. That is why both the Sierra Club and the Audubon society endorse the GB project.
1:39 I read the post and responded to it. Plenty of people get great deals on foreclosures, but it seems to me it just bothers you because he is a leaseholder. If you have evidence of wrongdoing then report it. Otherwise he was connected and got a great deal. If you have no evidence of wrongdoing then it is a pointless conversation. If you do have evidence of wrongdoing that still has nothing to do with Pioneer.
1:50 Pioneer indicated that a low limit would hurt there ability to finance. The chart you are referring to is actually published by GE I believe. You know these turbines which are not selected will produce more than 70dba? That would be quite a prediction but if you are right than sit back and relax. Pioneer will have to follow that state guidelines of 55dba. All they asked for was to held to the same standard of every other business and household in Maryland that does not fall under the right to farm. 40dba is ridiculous in an agricultural area. If you want a 40dba limit go somewhere without grain bins, combines, tractors and poultry houses.
@1:46 A few more quotes from the Mass. study cited above should put your mind at ease."Infrasound refers to vibrations with frequencies below 20 Hz. Infrasound at amplitudes
over 100–110 dB can be heard and felt. Research has shown that vibrations below these
amplitudes are not felt. The highest infrasound levels that have been measured near
turbines and reported in the literature near turbines are under 90 dB at 5 Hz and lower at
higher frequencies for locations as close as 100 m also read this one "There is no evidence for a set of health effects, from exposure to wind turbines that could
be characterized as a "Wind Turbine Syndrome." I would encourage you to read the study it goes into great detail the bottom line is yes infrasound can cause health problems but not at the levels you get from turbines.
@1:50 What pioneer data are you talking about? Paul Harris stated to the zoning board so it should be on record that PG projects are engineered for 55db/a at 1000'. What Data do you have that suggests 70db/a? The 40 db/a was not acceptable because as Glen Ains stated how do you enforce it. An SFS member living next door could legally make 55db/a and blame it on GB who would only be allowed 40db/a. The offer has been made several times to measure the sound from the property line of Tammy's poultry Farm and make that the limit. That way GB would not be allowed to make any more noise than the SFS leader.
I think all this griping about Scott Tawes is because he does more Tax business than Tammy!
To Anonymous supporter of U. of Delaware IWT
I did see that article that said a poll showed only 1 per cent of responders were against the Lewes wind turbine
The poll was taken in 2010 by the University of Delaware which wanted the turbine. A little conflict of interest there?? -and I did not see how the questions were actually poised as that will be critical as to how people respond. If you are the organization wanting the turbine (like the U. Of Delaware) and you want want federal funding (and future gov't wind energy research projects) you may just poise the question to get the answer you want to obtain. And the poll was taken in 2010 before the turbine was put up. Most people would guess the turbine was like those quaint ones seen in movies of Holland in the 19th century.
As to saying the projected bat kills of 14 and bat kills of 110 on a yearly basis at this small industrial wind turbine are low for a seaside location - please also explain that it was the U. of Delaware that did this study.
This non-independent study was questioned by Willdlife biologist Jim Wiegand in his comments to the news story. He said the estimate of annual bird and bat kills were much lower than would actually be expected to occur. He said the kill numbers would most likely be similar or higher than the Spanish kill estimates at wind turbines that the Spanish Ornithological Society made in January, 2012. In their yearly estimate of bird and bat kills at Spain's then 18,000 industrial wind turbines they forecast up to 1,000 birds and bats will be killed per year per turbine or from 6-18 million kills for the year.
As Warren Buffett said in an Wall Street Journal article last year: the only reason his wind companies build wind turbines is for the tax credits---otherwise they make no sense.
Amen Mr. Buffett
Pioneer Green is breaking the project into small pieces in order to still qualify. That is why they are proposing just one turbine in Westover, that lowers the 5% capital expenditure so that they already qualify with what they have spent. They will then add on more turbines to get the project size where the want, which is what the Navy Commander published in early January. Pioneer Green is as slick as they come.
I agree all energy is subsidized, but not equally. Wind receives 42% of all energy subsidies but only produces 4% of the energy.
I think the people of Somerset know who the greedy ones are. They are the ones who can never be happy because no matter how much they have, it is never enough. Up until now that was not a big problem because they did not seem to be hurting others, but this is different. We are going to get screwed by this scheme and our government officials are in on it.
1:53 The 99% approval sounds suspiciously like the election results in the old Soviet Union or Cuba. Perhaps it was because those polled were in Wilmington.
2:17 I have found one of the answers to my questions -----------the panel conducted a literature review, met as a group 3 times ,had to issue the report within 3 months. No wonder the people of Massachusetts consider the study Cherry-picked JUNK SCIENCE.
@3:56 Oh My!!!! You have figured us out!!! Please put that on the SFS facebook page!!! Please own that loudly and proudly!!!
I have really been pondering the comment earlier on this thread about all this causing employees at the county office complex to be terrified. Does them being terrified have anything to do with Tammy's husband getting drunk and going in there and making an ass of himself when Tammy got booted off the zoning board?
Warren Buffett gets another mention. Here's a link to see what one of his companies has to say about wind power http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/231343-a-companys-perspective-on-why-wind-energy-matters
It's a shame Consumers Energy / Lake Winds Wind Plant in Michigan has settled out of court w/ residents having health issues . Why do you think that happened ??
I want to know more about Kevin's family member that stole MILLIONS.
Please elaborate. I have also heard there was a theft from the board of education that was swept under the rug. It involved a relative of Kevin's wife.
Actually it was Kevin's wife!
All claims are true and Vicki cheats at Monopoly too
3:58 As previously noted if the PTC is not extended the Great Bay Wind project will be the only source of energy that is not at all subsidized.
6:38 Happens all the time. It is cheaper to settle than go to court. I agree it would have been nice for the wind company to go in to win but they have to look out for business.
3:56 YOur not making any sense. If Great Bay were to split the project into smaller LLC's then those LLC's would have spent nothing. They would still not qualify for the PTC. Come here to reality.
NOOO YOU CHEAT!
5:17 Could you offer us something more than your word?
@6:38 What happened is you have been reading wind watch again
@5:17 You know what, this is the panel, you read the credentials of these people and then if you want to call it junk science you go for it. However I don't see you posting the credentials of the Brown County Health Board. Jeffrey M. Ellenbogen, MD; MMSc
Assistant Professor of Neurology, Harvard Medical School
Division Chief, Sleep Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital
Sheryl Grace, PhD; MS Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Boston University
Wendy J Heiger-Bernays, PhD
Associate Professor of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Health,
Boston University School of Public Health
Chair, Lexington Board of Health
James F. Manwell, PhD Mechanical Engineering;
MS Electrical & Computer Engineering; BA Biophysics
Professor and Director of the Wind Energy Center, Department of Mechanical & Industrial
Engineering University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Dora Anne Mills, MD, MPH, FAAP
State Health Officer, Maine 1996–2011
Vice President for Clinical Affairs, University of New England
Kimberly A. Sullivan, PhD
Research Assistant Professor of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Health,
Boston University School of Public Health
Marc G. Weisskopf, ScD Epidemiology; PhD Neuroscience
Associate Professor of Environmental Health and Epidemiology
Department of Environmental Health & Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health
Facilitative Support provided by Susan L. Santos, PhD, FOCUS GROUP Risk
Communication and Environmental Management Consultants
3:56 If they were to do that then they would get the PTC on one turbine and this would then still be the lowest subsidized form of energy in the US. A company can't claim the PTC now on one turbine and then indefinitely claim the PTC on additions. Furthermore it would then take them 25 years to put up 25 turbines. I have serious doubts on anyone ever financing that. But if someone did finance that who would buy it at the end? No company is going to buy a project with 25 turbines ages 1yr to 25yrs especially as there would invariably be numerous models involved making it a permanent maintenance nightmare. I am not sure where you are getting this stuff.
@3:56 Don't let PG get away with this sneaky plan! Make sure everyone in the county knows about it! Rent more billboards! Buy more full page adds in the paper! How about some TV commercials! The county needs you to save it! Only SFS has the intelligence to figure out the sneaky things those Texas lawyers will do! Somerset desperately needs SFS to pull out all stops and make sure everyone knows about this plan!
@6:38 The Lake Winds settlement shows why GB needs a 55db/a limit. Lake Winds foolishly built with a 45db/a limit thus allowing themselves to be sued when background noise exceeded the limit. Make no mistake about it, this is what's is behind SFS's push for lower db/a limits. It has nothing to do with their lofty claims of protecting the public. It is all legal wrangling, trying to get a lower sound limit on GB than any other business in the state so as to open them up for a future law suit. As Glenn Ains pointed out putting a lower limit on GB than everyone else would be impossible for the county to enforce. However it would make them very vulnerable to a frivolous law suet for sound they did not even emit.
Since some of you want to challenge the validity of the Lewes Poll I suggest, as GB has also suggested that anyone concerned about the impact of wind energy simply drive an hour to Lewes and visit the turbine there and talk to people about it. It is always easier to get people to complain about things, if there any truth at all to the SFS claims they would be all over that suggestion. You would think they would be chartering buses to carry people there to prove their points. But no its always GB and the supporters making that suggestion.
Kevin you need help, now you are pretending to speak for SFS.
Placing an industrial wind project in a bald eagle haven has never been done before. FWS analysis shows PHASE 1 will require 20 bald eagles takes per year. A 30 year take permit would result in the death of 600 eagles for just 25 turbines. Placing this project somewhere else would result in the deaths of ZERO eagles.
Pioneer Green was forced out of New Hampshire, California, Alabama, and Pennsylvania because the ordinance required safe boundaries for setbacks and noise.
Patrick Buckley of Pioneer Green said that 1500 setbacks are industry standard on the 330' which is 4.5 times the height of the turbine. So why is Somerset going to allow less?
Adam Cohen of Pioneer Green told the people of New Hampshire to keep noise levels @ 33dba, the turbines would need to be 4 miles away. I think for once Adam was telling the truth. This article was written by Angela Jan Evancie of the Monadnock Ledger titled "The Best Laid Plans: Proposed revisions to wind regulations receive sparse reaction".
Production information is not available on the Lewes turbine because it is so poor.
It uses an inadequate area to monitor bird deaths.
A big problem with wind facilities is they monitor and report their kills under a voluntary basis.
An eagle has already been killed in MD by a nonfunctioning turbine that was only 60 feet tall in Kent County, MD. The government wasted tons of taxpayer money on a turbine that did not produce. It costs so much to take the turbine down that they kept it up and allowed it to free spin. When it killed a bald eagle, a passerby was the one who reported it.
The bird kill argument is really one of the easiest to disprove. A number of studies have been cited on this thread so I won't waste time citing more. The thing to keep in mind is wind energy kills far less birds than fossil fuels or even nuclear. That's by MW or any way you want to look at it. Actually more birds are killed by power lines than any form of generation. For any people concerned I would refer them to both the Sierra Club and the Audubon Society who both strongly endorse wind energy and have both fought for the Great Bay project.
@7:33 You mention four communities that have decided that they don't want wind power as a reason for Somerset to refuse wind power. Well what about all the communities that have added wind power. The USA now leads the world in Wind Power. Reliable Polls such as Gallup show high approval rates especially in states with wind power. Kansas for example produces high amounts of wind power and has some of the highest approval rates in the country. If we are going to let the opinions of people in other areas influence our policies then lets go with the majority opinion not a select few.
9:12 Kansas has wind. It is sparcely populated especially in the high desert western part of the state where the turbines are.
Yes USFWS says permits will be required to compensate for the deaths of UP TO 20 eagles. You are twisting the numbers greatly to come to the conclusion of 600 deaths over 30 years and ignoring a wide body of research. These permits are required for any activity that might kill or injure eagles. The permits also must be for a greater amount than the eagles actually killed as per CFR 50 part 22. So the USFWS is required to take a worst case scenario and expand it when issuing permits. Can you provide any evidence that these permits will be used in entirety? The Center of Biological Diversity issued a report in 2007 (Eagle populations have increased even more since then) that stated that there were 363 and 560 PAIRS of eagles in Maryland and Virginia respectively. This is a total of 1846 eagles in Maryland and Virginia (it should be pointed out that bald eagles now carry a conservation status of "least concern"). I include those two states as wildlife do not recognize state lines and Somerset is located near the Virginia border. This means that even if the worst case scenario envisioned by the USFWS is realized, then 1.08% of eagles will be killed by the proposed project (going off the 2007 numbers which as I said are lower than the current population). You keep saying massive numbers of birds will be killed but you fail to provide any evidence of this. As per the research already provided it suggests a fatality rate of less than 1%. Can you provide any peer reviewed research indicating wind turbines will kill greater than 1% of the raptor population? There is additional research data to dispel the myth of mass raptor kills. Langston and Pullan (2003) indicated less than .01% of all bird kills can be attributed to wind turbines. Lucas et al (2005) failed to find any species of bird that would suffer a mortality rate of greater than 5%. Karlsson (1983), Byrne (1983) and Winkelman (1985) all recorded very low mortality rates at wind farms. Barrios and Rodriguez (2004) studied two wind farms in high traffic migratory areas over seas. One of the wind farms studied did have elevated mortality of two species of birds. However at the other farm studied mortality was almost 0%. It should be noted the two species of birds that were found to have elevated moralities at one wind farm are not native to the US (Griffon vulture and common kestrel). Turbines would be a concern if there was a population of Golden Eagles in Somerset Count as they were shown to be more susceptible to turbine strikes in a Journal of Raptor Research article in 2013. There simply is no data to substantiate the wild claim of mass raptor fatalities but there is plenty of data to debunk it.
Good Morning Kevin!
Safety is the reason Pioneer Green has left the four other communities where it was planning wind projects. Safety is not negotiable. A turbine in Ireland liberated its blade on January 2 leaving a debris field that exceeded 1/2 mile. Setbacks need to be beyond this distance to ensure public safety.
Under Pioneer Green's plan, Somerset Intermediate School is surrounded by turbines. I guess our children are to "poor and dumb" to warrant safe siting.
9:30 Somerset has wind as reported by two MET towers. The area the project is slated for is far from urban. If you didn't notice it is rural farmland.
9:46 What were the safety requirements for the turbine in Ireland? Was that turbine rated for a CAT 5 hurricane like the ones Pioneer has said they will use? Were the engineering requirements anything close to what would be acceptable in the US? Did you hear about the turbines in Oklahoma that survived a EF5 tornado? Ever consider there might be engineering requirement differences in the US? You pick one turbine overseas, don't even mention a model, fail to even mention if it was a high speed or low speed gearbox, leave out how old the turbine is, can't even bother to mention if it was properly maintained and announce that this is what setbacks need to be based on? No wonder the zoning board didn't listen to you.
9:53 I live here. It is not rural. There are farms, but small fields and lots of houses. The USGS supplied map shows this to be a low wind area. A PG salesman told me that we have wind 30% of the time. The power companies don't want it because it is too variable to use.
10:36 Your going to argue that an area zoned for agriculture is not rural? You would rather rely on an outdated map, based on outdated technology that included turbines that wouldn't even be over the tree line than data from two current MET towers? Says a lot about what SFS considers credible information. If there was no one that wanted to buy the power and no wind there would be no investors for the project....which would mean no project. As Pioneer has never sent a "salesmen" to the area and none of your information checks out I do not see a basis for your 30% claim. But that claim is still redundant. Investors that have looked at data from two current MET towers feel that data is more reliable than a 2003 map on the SFS website and are willing to invest 200 million in the county and feel confident they can find a buyer for the power.
The only reason that there will be buyers is that there are state mandates that will force the power companies to buy it and charge the consumers very high prices.
As Obama said : under his plan electric rates will skyrocket.
11:58 Are you saying wind only succeeds in states that have green energy mandates? You need to travel and read. Texas has its own power grid and deregulated which lowered prices and if anything you said was in the least true would have killed wind development. But wind has and continues to do well in Texas. In fact wind I believe is one of the cheapest forms of energy in Texas. Kansas has no green energy mandate but wind has done well there.
@11:58 That is incorrect and I strongly suspect you know it! There is absolutely no mandate that would require any power company to buy electricity from GB. There are mandates that require they use Green Energy but they can purchase it from anywhere on the grid. Actually they can purchase it from anywhere in the country but there is a cost to cross grids. You again try to make the claim GB will cause electric prices to go up and I again refer you to the first study provided by Simone. Under potential bias it said " Both Mars Hill and Vinalhaven residents gain financially from the wind projects, either through reduced electricity costs and / or increased tax revenues". So are the studies supplied by SFS garbage or are you wrong about GB raising electric rates? Also as you know the Obama quote was referring to him shutting down coal plants not wind energy. GB will have to negotiate the sale of its electricity to the power companies. They will look at the reliability and the amount of electricity that GB can provide and offer what is worth to them. If is is less than what GB needs to break even the investors in the project loose not Somerset.
Good point 12:16 since Texas deregulated wind power has really taken off there. And yes you are correct it is the cheapest form of electricity there. Texas is a excellent state to study as it is a grid unto itself. As wind energy has expanded in Texas consumer electric prices have come down.
Studies completed near Canadian wind farms, as well as international
experience, suggest that the levels of infrasound near modern wind turbines,
with rated powers common in large scale wind farms are in general not
perceptible to humans, either through auditory or non-auditory mechanisms.
Additionally, there is no evidence of adverse health effects due to infrasound
from wind turbines. (Howe, 2006, p.11)
“The sound level from wind turbines at common residential setbacks is not
sufficient to cause hearing impairment or other direct health effects…”
(King, 2010 p.2)
Since no one seems to be able to dispute the Mass. study, other than to call it junk science, but there are still posters claiming negative health effects lets look at another review Wind Turbine Sound and
Health Effects
An Expert Panel Review This is their conclusion. In the case of wind turbine noise and its hypothetical relationships to “wind turbine
syndrome” and vibroacoustic disease, the weakest type of evidence—case series—is
available, from only a single investigator. These reports can do no more than suggest
hypotheses for further research. Nevertheless, if additional and independent investigators
begin to report adverse health effects in people exposed to wind turbine noise, in excess of
those found in unexposed groups, and if some consistent syndrome or set of symptoms
emerges, this advice could change. Thus, at this time, “wind turbine syndrome” and VVVD
are unproven hypotheses (essentially unproven ideas) that have not been confirmed by
appropriate research studies, most notably cohort and case control studies. However, the
weakness of the basic hypotheses makes such studies unlikely to proceed.
Wind Turbine Sound and
Health Effects
An Expert Panel Review Following review, analysis, and discussion, the panel reached agreement on three key
points:
• There is nothing unique about the sounds and vibrations emitted by wind turbines.
• The body of accumulated knowledge about sound and health is substantial.
• The body of accumulated knowledge provides no evidence that the audible or
subaudible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological
effects.
@9:46 You once again bring up a turbine accident in Ireland without stating any relevant facts to go with it. Then you insist that setbacks in Somerset should be based on that. So tell me should setbacks to nuclear plants be based on chernobyl?
Post a Comment