Straight Talk



  • Was Vermont's Lowell Mountain Wind Turbine Facility A Good Idea? The Green Mountain Power-proposed 63 MW Lowell Mountain wind turbine facility with (21) 3 MW Danish, Vestas V-112 wind turbines, 367.5-ft (112 m) rotor diameter, 275.6-ft (84 m) hub height, total height (275.6 + 367.5/2) = 459 ft, stretched along about 3.5 miles on 2,600 ft high ridge lines, has nothing to do with community-scale wind, everything with industrial, utility-scale wind. The housings, 13 ft x 13 ft x 47 ft (3.9 m x 3.9 m x 14 m), on top of the 280-ft towers, are much larger than a Greyhound bus. The GMP name for this facility is “Kingdom Community Wind”. GMP is using blatantly deceptive PR to soft-soap/deceive Vermonters. GMP claims to be all about renewables, but it recently entered into an agreement with the Seabrook nuclear power plant to buy 60 MW of steady, 24/7/365, CO2-free nuclear energy at 4.66 cents/kWh, about half the cost of the Lowell wind energy which is variable and intermittent and only partially CO2-free, because it requires gas-fired, CO2-producing, quick-ramping balancing plant energy to make it useful for use on the grid. The energy collective

  • Creating a “green energy” economy may be the most daunting central planning task ever attempted. It entails nothing less than the reengineering of our entire energy infrastructure. And, like all central planning schemes, it is based on a roadmap that eschews real-world experience and sound economics in favor of utopian ideology driven by political connections. Forbes

  • Over the past several years, Mainers heard from the Baldacci administration and the Natural Resources Counsil of Maine about the supposed virtues of wind power, but we never heard much in the way of facts. We listened as they told us wind power would get us off foreign oil, but it turns out we do not use much oil to generate electricity. We were told by former Gov. Angus King that Maine was the Saudi Arabia of wind power, and later learned that 15 other states had been given that same line. We could be the Saudi Arabia of hydro power, with real fishways of course, or tidal power. The Department of Energy‘s wind maps show most of the proposed windsprawl sites in Maine are rated “poor to marginal.”Bangor Daily News

  • Hot? Don’t count on wind energy to cool you down. That’s the lesson emerging from the stifling heat wave that’s hammering Texas. Over the past week or so, Texans have been consuming record-breaking quantities of electricity, and ERCOT, the state’s grid operator, has warned of rolling blackouts if customers don’t reduce their consumption. National Review

  • Windfall Director Laura Israel uncovers the dark side of alternative energy. Cinema Blend

  • Here is the problem with TIF when it is abused and using TIF for wind projects is truly a bastardization of the intent of TIF as an economic development tool.  When TIF shelters money the way it does and the TIF leads to true economic growth, I will support it.  This happened with the TIF on the tissue machine expansion in Lincoln.   Dozens of union scale jobs were added to the economy and the largest employer in Northern Penobscot County was able to stabilize and remain competitive, thus keeping more than 400 jobs in Lincoln.  Those jobs are important to all of the state. First Wind is nothing more than a subsidy sucking corporate welfare whore.  It demands TIFs everywhere it goes.  The Lincoln Town Council fell for their ploy and got a lousy deal, so don't celebrate it, Lisa.  You could have done much better.  That said, this is still a bad TIF, as it has caused the destruction of the ridges and changed the Lincoln Lakes into a sprawling industrial zone.  It is a project that will likely employ 5 maintenance workers and after construction have a negligible multiplier effect on the local economy.  It will have the drag of reducing property values of people within the huge project impact zone and suppressing the lake property market. Then there is the very real prospect that should Congress eliminate or severely curtail subsidies, First Wind, operating as Evergreen III, LLC just walks away from the project.  After all, as soon as it is complete the Federal government gives them 30% of the $140 million construction cost as a gift from the US taxpayers.  Then they make millions selling Enron-inspired RECs based on the full nameplate capacity of the project (60 MW) without even putting electricity into the grid.  They make their quick money and run, leaving Lincoln with useless turbines and a broken TIF. TIFs affect many communities, as the gimmick is that the increase in property values from a project (in this case, some $48.3 million in valuation for Lincoln) gets "sheltered" from being counted in the valuation of Lincoln when the state determines general revenue sharing and education subsidies, as well as determination of Penobscot County tax.  Whenever this happens, wherever it happens, it costs taxpayers in the town I live in money.  I live in a high value community that is very likely to never have a TIF project.  Therefore, I indirectly pay for the give back of half the taxes that First Wind should pay.  I'm doing the same for the tissue machine, but as stated above, I am helping the Lincoln area prosper, not helping to fund a scam. By Brad Blake

  • Wind Power worth lots of money to developers. Research and study by concerned Maine people and groups have revealed the keys to understanding the hard and fast promotion of industrial wind in Maine.Quite simply, wind power is being promoted because of how much it's worth in government subsidy dollars to the developer for towers it can erect quickly, no matter how short-lived. Facts have been very well-hidden beneath gloss and promises of the wind profiteers. Empty promises of gain. Vague outlines. Hurried-up legislation that helps the builders but takes rights away from the citizenry. Without our tax dollars being made available to this unscrupulous few, industrial wind would be a bad investment, plain and simple. Maine would be beneath any developer's notice were it not for the available money to line their pockets. People who are frightened for our state's environmental integrity or outraged by having the wool pulled over our eyes, should let their elected officials and representatives know about it. Is it too late? Never. Arlene G. Trudel, Highland Plantation Kennebec Journal

  • People opposed to the sacrifice of Maine’s landscape have the deck stacked against them. Laws in place prevent citizens from challenging the economic and environmental assumptions used to justify wind power. The cumulative effects of multiple wind projects are ignored by the agencies responsible for protecting our environment and wildlife habitats. Bangor Daily News

  • Meanwhile, the home construction industry in Maine has the highest rate of unemployment of any sector. If the tax dollars being poured into wind power development were instead directed to conservation and efficiency programs, approximately $10,000 per household would be available to reduce oil consumption for heating by installing insulation in basements and attics, upgrading heating systems, tightening up loose fitting windows and doors and air sealing leaking openings in the structure. This would create thousands of jobs throughout the state for many years and cost effectively reduce consumption of fossil fuel, something wind turbines simply will not do, since wind power costs $150 per MW in a market where electricity sells for a out $50 per MW (the difference being made up with subsidies and tax benefits of many kinds). Alternatively, these dollars could remain in taxpayers wallets, where they could be used to feed and clothe families, pay mortgages, and keep vehicles on the road.

  • Wind will not displace other forms of power. To justify the destruction of Maine's landscapes with his wind turbines, Angus King repeats the familiar claim that "there would be a 1-to-1 reduction in greenhouse gases because existing plants would be throttled back whenever the turbines are in operation."This is simply not true. To understand why, consider that the grid is like the generator many of us have for emergency or camping use. If you plug a 1,500-watt space heater into a 1,000-watt generator, you have overloaded it by 500 watts and the circuit breaker will trip. Plug the same heater into a 2,000-watt generator and you have 500 watts of unused capacity. Unused capacity in the electrical grid is known as "spinning reserve."The grid operator maintains enough spinning reserve at all times to ensure that if one of the largest generators suddenly fails, or demand increases unexpectedly, there will be no tripped circuit breakers. The grid operator therefore does not have to precisely balance supply and demand as the wind industry claims.It is not necessary for some generator to "throttle back" when a wind turbine "throttles up."The grid does not react to every flick of a light switch, it simply provides more than enough generation at all times. The grid operator is not required by any rules to reduce fossil fuel generation when the wind blows.His primary job is to provide us with reliable electricity. The regional power agency ISO-New England has been studying the problems of integrating uncontrollable wind power for several years and has not found a successful fossil fuel reduction program that works.Wind power, when available, simply adds to the safety buffer known as spinning reserve. In grid terms it is "spilled," as in spilled milk. Steve Thurston co-chair, Citizens Task Force on Wind Power, Oquossoc 

  • Facts on wind's poor stats not being publicized well. What are the "true numbers" where wind power is concerned? As a concerned citizen of Maine who has read extensively about the performance statistics of wind power, I feel that the public is being left in the dark on this issue. Why are the very people who serve us so reluctant to spill the facts on the lack of effectiveness of wind energy? Could it possibly be that they do not want us to know the truth? There have been reports regarding the poor performance of wind turbines in the news recently. It is very troubling to me to see the way this is downplayed by most of the media, and how wind energy is pushed forward as the cure-all for Maine's dependence on oil. I don't get it. How is wind power going to help Maine's dependence on oil, which is not used to generate electricity? I recently read of a challenge for Angus King and Jonathan Carter to debate wind-power issues in a public forum so that the questions citizens have may be brought to light and answered in a straightforward way. I happen to know that Carter is very willing to debate King publicly on the issues of wind energy. Will King accept the challenge? I think the public has a right to have the honest facts about the effectiveness of wind power. What better way to get them out in the open? How about it, Mr. King? Linda Miller Lexington Township  Portland Press Herald

  • What are the true numbers where wind power is concerned?  As a concerned citizen of Maine who has read extensively about the performance statistics of wind power, I feel that the public is being left in the dark on this issue. Why are the very people who serve us so reluctant to spill the facts on the lack of effectiveness of wind energy? Could it possibly be that they do not want us to know the truth? There have been reports regarding the poor performance of wind turbines in the news recently. It is very troubling to me to see the way this is downplayed by most of the media; and how wind energy is pushed forward as the cure-all for Maine’s dependence on oil. I don’t get it. How is wind power going to help Maine’s dependence on oil? In a letter on July 16, “We should have a public debate about wind power,” I read a challenge to Angus King and Jonathan Carter to debate the wind power issues in a public forum so that the questions citizens have may be brought to light and answered in a straightforward way. I happen to know that Carter is very willing to debate King publicly on the issues of wind energy. Will King accept the challenge? I think the public has a right to have the honest facts about the effectiveness of wind power. What better way to get them out in the open? Kennebec Journal

  • Wind power in Maine is a chess game, a chess game for those protected by multinational companies and allies in the current administration. It is a game that took 20 years to design, a game that redefined new rules for state and federal agencies, reshaping their mandates of protecting America’s citizens and majestic lands into doing the exact opposite. A game that put people’s rights and public health behind those of the wind industry and simply ignored the complaints of those disturbed by the maddening whoosh of turbines. Bangor Daily News

  • As a resident of Highland Plantation, a proposed wind facility site, I’ve educated myself about industrial wind turbines and the effects of them. With all the rush to develop industrial wind turbines on 360 miles of mountains, so many things are being neglected. The effects on animals caused by wind turbines are alarming. Bats internally hemorrhaging, moles disappearing from surrounding areas, alpacas changing their instinctual birthing patterns resulting in stillborns and miscarriages, goats dying, dogs nervously barking at night and wetting on the floor, and ponies nervously trembling and shaking, their owners having to sell them. The deer too nervous to eat and moving into the village because of wind turbines. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife wrote me saying, “unfortunately some of the concerns we share can only be addressed by studying wildlife interactions at operational wind facilities. This is particularly true for understanding the effect low frequency noise and shadow flicker have on the survival, reproduction, and habits of wildlife associated with a proposed wind facility.” So, basically let’s build them and see what happens? I’m outraged! Why not study the sites we already have and postpone future projects until we have real answers? What about understanding the effects of low frequency noise and shadow flicker on the survival, reproduction and habits of humans? Are they doing the same for humans, “build first and see what happens”? This kind of attitude will result in devastation to our animals and people of Maine. Heidi Emery, Highland Plantation www.highlandmts.org

  • ‘Wind backers decry conflict-of-interest claims.’As Maine rushes to embrace wind power, unnamed critics posting on Internet sites and reader comment pages contend that money and political connections — reaching all the way to the governor's office — are greasing the skids. By Tux Turkel Maine Business.com

  • I, for one among many others, am getting some friggin' sick and tired of seeing the huge amount of print/video devoted to perpetuating the Big Wind/Big Lie!  Come on, BDN, Portland Press and all you others, try some reporting other than glorifying an industry that wouldn't even exist without taxpayer subsidies. How about equal amount of space to exposing the corrupt relationships that are driving this folly in Maine:  Baldacci--Kurt Adams--First Wind.  Juliot Browne (First Wind Lawyer)--her husband Rep.  Jon Hinck--Expedited Wind Permitting Law.  Larry Summers--D E Shaw--First Wind--Obama's $40.4 million gift to rescue Stetson II.  Ad nauseum! How about equal space to exposing the true ramifications of the goals for industrial wind sites that were incorporated into that unconstitutional Expedited Wind Permitting law?  45 to 50 more projects the size of Stetson Mt.  Blasting away some 350 miles of ridgelines for at least 1800 industrial turbines, permanently clearcutting at least 50,000 acres of forest.  Contaminating our streams and ponds with silt and herbicides, fragmenting wildlife habitat, killing birds and bats, and ruining the peace and quiet and health of people in the noise impact zone. What about a true discussion of the facts here and questioning why the politicians of the state decided without asking the citizens to go down the road to this folly.  Maine gets nothing from this except a handful of temporary construction jobs and some promise of some property taxes.  But wait, not too much taxes because this stupid state grants TIFs to these thieves!  We get no electricity from these and we don't need them anyway.  How about exposing the real reason why ineffective, unreliable industrial machines will be cluttering up every vista in the state? Try some real reporting.  Try some digging into some controversy.  Try some reporting on the real impact of these.  I could give a damn about tower training.  Another waste of taxpayers dollars.  I do give a damn about why these ugly, useless machines are being planted throughout my beautiful state!

  • Industrial Wind Power in Maine’s Mountains is Bad Policy (Testimony of Citizens Task Force on Wind Power) MasterResource.org

  • CAPE ELIZABETH — The romantic view of wind power is a stand of wind turbines atop a ridge gently spinning in a breeze generating clean electricity in place of an emission-producing power plant. Another view is a natural landscape defaced by huge structures whose operation annoys its neighbors, produces power randomly and does not reduce pollutants because fossil-fueled plants continue to operate as backup. The "pop" culture support and promotion of wind power is all based upon conceptual or theoretical constructs which do not reflect the physical, financial or regulatory realities of operating our electric grid system. Out-of-context claims that a wind power facility will generate the "average equivalent energy to power XXX homes" are akin to a statement that average workers will each earn $2 million in their lifetimes (including 3 years they are unemployed and earning nothing). There is no empirical data or industry information that demonstrates wind power reduces emissions, lowers our reliance on foreign oil, is easily integrated into the electric grid system or is cost-competitive. Government policies which encourage wind power development do not mandate any scientifically sound measurement provisions to evaluate its actual efficacy and remediation.

  • In order for wind power to reduce emissions, it must displace the operation of fossil-fueled plants. Most of the electricity generated in the United States is from such plants, which operate at high temperatures. It takes many hours to start up or shut down (or "cycle") these plants. The Energy Information Administration has stated that it is unaware of any program which shuts down fossil-fueled plants during wind power production. The EIA says all its CO2 reduction numbers attributable to wind are based upon "forecasts using theoretical models." In the absence of real data, reductions attributable to wind power are a myth.

    Portland Press Herald, William L. Downes, Oct. 19, 2009

 

  • Protestors Target Governor’s Energy Conference. More than two dozen picketers from small towns across Maine staged a protest in front of the Augusta Civic Center Tuesday over what they say is a flawed and unfair process to develop industrial wind projects in the state. Inside, Governor John Baldacci and other state officials were hosting a daylong wind energy conference.  Protestors say they want to put the state and wind developers on notice that they won't stand idle any longer. MPBN Oct. 6 2009, By Susan Sharon

  • I recently made my annual migration to my camp in Lakeville. I love the Lincoln Lakes Region. I live here 6 months out of every year. I buy all my groceries, gas and supplies in this area. My legal residence may not be here but my heart and soul are. As I drove along Route 6 I encountered a convoy of trucks carrying enormous white wind turbine blades. Once I settled in, I picked up the Lincoln News and read about the approval of the Rollins Mountain Industrial Wind Project.... Even If by Gary Campell

  • Wind turbines should not be built within 1.5 miles of people’s homes. There will still be health and life quality problems caused by wind turbines beyond this radius. People living 1.5 to 3 miles from a proposed turbine site should be notified of potential health and life quality effects, and for this they should be appropriately compensated. In our area, this 3 mile arc encloses a lot of surrounding territory: East Winn, Silver Lake, Madagascal Pond, the Upper Cold Stream Ponds, Bagley Mountain, and more. By Gordon Johnson, Lincoln

  • From Wendy Todd, Mars Hill, ME. Ignorance is bliss. I wish I could go back and find the bubble that I was living in before industrial wind. We grow up here in the states thinking that we are safe and reasonably well protected. If we follow the golden rule that life will somehow be kind and that what is right will prevail. The residents of Mars Hill assumed that their town leaders and the Maine DEP would never let anything bad happen to them. Most of us believed that the developers of the Mars Hill wind project were trustworthy. We were wrong. Now we are caught in a battle to save a way of life. Wind turbines can be a good way to diversify our electrical future but they are not the answer to stopping global warming. The Mars Hill facility was touted as being apable of reducing carbon emissions by 120,000 tons back when the project was being sold to the town. Last year when the project completed its first year of operations and was so pleased with its 36% capacity rating, it was stated that the Mars Hill facility had reduced carbon emissions by 60,000 tons. Which is correct?? Neither. Be careful, go backand read the fine print "traditional New England power plants would release 60,000 tons of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide to produce the same amount of electricity". Now call MPS and ask if power generation in the area has changed since Mars Hill went on line. The answer, from a reliable source, is "NO". So, if there are no carbon producing plants that have to slow down or stop, there are no carbon reductions for Maine. The fact that Maine only uses oil for a reported 1-2% of its electrical generation makes you wonder how much foreign oil will be reduced because of "Maine" wind facilities. So why are we sacrificing our ridgelines? Why are we sacrificing residents health, safety and property values? Does it matter that the low frequency repetitive noise, shadow flicker and visual pollution that turbines create make people ill and destroy quality of life and property values? It seems that, for now, it does not. All that most of us are asking for are meaningful setback requirements that protect the public. Why can't we strike a fair balance between economic growth and the golden rule?

  • A site like the Rollins project in Lincoln Lakes will consume more than 700 acres of land, an acreage far larger than most Maine farms. It entails creating a 3-6 acre clearcut for each turbine site, blasting and leveling, digging down to bedrock and pouring tons of concrete to anchor each 262 foot tower which is topped by a 92 ton nacelle (turbine generator) and 253 foot wide blades. A huge, wide network of roads must be created up to and across ridgelines to get these huge components into place. At Rollins, more than 20 miles of powerlines will be cut. All of the turbine sites and powerlines will be kept cleared by the use of herbicides, effecting dozens of streams, all of the lakes around Lincoln and the watershed of three rivers. Siltation of streams and lakes will occur from erosion from all this construction. Lastly, important wildlife habitat will be fragmented and ruined.

  • Maine's 'wind rush' an abuse of the public trust. An Editorial by WindAction

  • First Wind is a company whose business model depends on subsidies and market manipulations to make money. They already have tremendous advantages from double declining balance 5-year depreciation for writing off infrastructure and equipment costs. They can write off windmills quicker than the mill can write off a tissue machine! They have 2.1 cents per kilowatt-hour production tax credit, which will reap them more than $4 million dollars per year from this project. They have the ability to sell the same kilowatts as “green tax credits” to polluting industries. Through Renewable Portfolio Standards, they have guaranteed access to the New England electricity market whether the electricity is needed or not. These investors are laughing all the way to the bank at taxpayers and ratepayers expense!

  • What it's like to live near a wind turbine...Before the turbines were erected on Beaver Ridge, I visited wind turbines in other towns with the knowledge that one was going to be built very close to my house. I came away thinking living next to one was going to be somewhat annoying but that it probably was going to be OK. I was encouraged by promises from Competitive Energy Services, the parent company of the developer Beaver Ridge Wind LLC By Phil Bloomstein:

  • First Wind spent $120,000 to get access to US lawmakers who were working on a proposal to revive the use of tax credits for renewable-energy projects. “This is absolutely critical both to our company and to the growth of renewable energy across the country,” said Carol Grant, vice president of external affairs for the company, which is seeking funding to build four wind farms in New England. Grant said First Wind representatives met with lawmakers to discuss problems with the financial markets and ways to restore credit. The Obama administration is still developing guidelines for the energy incentives approved in the legislation."

Webmaster, 110901