Watertown Daily Times | Wind farm can meet Cape Vincent's needs
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2009
During his speech the Sunday before last, Gov. David A. Paterson told a candid story about the outlook for our region. These are tough times, which may not improve anytime soon.
Major themes of the governor's State of the State address were the advancement of renewable energy and the creation of jobs. The Cape Vincent Wind Farm can accomplish both these goals. As we all know, Cape Vincent could use an economic boost.
The proposed Cape Vincent Wind Farm will provide the town with significant yearly revenue from the payment in lieu of taxes. It will also create many jobs during construction as well as several good, full-time jobs. This is exactly what our community needs now and in the future.
Beth White
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
Wind panel in Cape haggles over setbacks
Wind panel in Cape haggles over setbacks
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2009
CAPE VINCENT — The town's wind committee finished its five-month-long consideration of a zoning law amendment for wind development by haggling over setbacks.
"Besides the state roads in the town, 11/2 times the turbine height as the setback from roads would be acceptable to me," Councilman Mickey W. Orvis said.
Richard H. Macsherry, Tibbetts Point, said, "If this ultimately is a negotiation, I would like to see a law that is worked on by this committee, not another group. To me, the requirements for sound are more of an issue."
He reminded the committee of an earlier discussion taking the setback from roads down to 750 feet.
"Once you put in a hard number, it's never going to change," Planning Board Vice Chairman Thomas D. Ingersoll said. "If you have a turbine that's 900 feet tall, then it will still be 750 feet back from the road."
The committee agreed on 1,000 feet from Route 12E from the village limits to the Lyme town line and 11/2 times the height of the turbine on all other public roads. The setback on Route 12E from the village limits to the Clayton town line was set previously at 1,000 feet plus 11/2 times the height of the turbine.
Now the draft law will go through a legal review by Whiteman, Osterman & Hanna, an Albany law firm that worked on the law. One of the questions from the committee that the firm will consider is whether a provision for waivers in the law impinges on the responsibility of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Michael J. Bourcy, Jefferson County community development coordinator, said that typically, waivers in zoning laws are for application requirements, not for standards in the law itself.
The waiver protocol in the draft law specifically rules out waiving setback, height or noise requirements.
After the meeting, Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said the law firm wanted two weeks to review the law. The Town Council then could set set a public hearing on the law based on the firm's schedule.
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2009
CAPE VINCENT — The town's wind committee finished its five-month-long consideration of a zoning law amendment for wind development by haggling over setbacks.
"Besides the state roads in the town, 11/2 times the turbine height as the setback from roads would be acceptable to me," Councilman Mickey W. Orvis said.
Richard H. Macsherry, Tibbetts Point, said, "If this ultimately is a negotiation, I would like to see a law that is worked on by this committee, not another group. To me, the requirements for sound are more of an issue."
He reminded the committee of an earlier discussion taking the setback from roads down to 750 feet.
"Once you put in a hard number, it's never going to change," Planning Board Vice Chairman Thomas D. Ingersoll said. "If you have a turbine that's 900 feet tall, then it will still be 750 feet back from the road."
The committee agreed on 1,000 feet from Route 12E from the village limits to the Lyme town line and 11/2 times the height of the turbine on all other public roads. The setback on Route 12E from the village limits to the Clayton town line was set previously at 1,000 feet plus 11/2 times the height of the turbine.
Now the draft law will go through a legal review by Whiteman, Osterman & Hanna, an Albany law firm that worked on the law. One of the questions from the committee that the firm will consider is whether a provision for waivers in the law impinges on the responsibility of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Michael J. Bourcy, Jefferson County community development coordinator, said that typically, waivers in zoning laws are for application requirements, not for standards in the law itself.
The waiver protocol in the draft law specifically rules out waiving setback, height or noise requirements.
After the meeting, Supervisor Thomas K. Rienbeck said the law firm wanted two weeks to review the law. The Town Council then could set set a public hearing on the law based on the firm's schedule.
Clayton Wind panel agrees to let public attend
Watertown Daily Times | Wind panel agrees to let public attend
Wind panel agrees to let public attend
FIRST MEETING CLOSED: Clayton group to open Thursday sessions to about 25
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2009
CLAYTON — The town's wind committee agreed to open its future meetings to the public Thursday night during its first session, which was closed to the public at the request of the town supervisor and Planning Board chairman.
Four members of the public and two members of the press came to see if they would be allowed in the meeting. They were not.
Wind panel agrees to let public attend
FIRST MEETING CLOSED: Clayton group to open Thursday sessions to about 25
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
FRIDAY, JANUARY 23, 2009
CLAYTON — The town's wind committee agreed to open its future meetings to the public Thursday night during its first session, which was closed to the public at the request of the town supervisor and Planning Board chairman.
Four members of the public and two members of the press came to see if they would be allowed in the meeting. They were not.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Use turbine company's standards for setbacks ~ Letter
Use turbine company's standards for setbacks
THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 2009
Vestas is the world's largest wind turbine manufacturer. Its mechanical-operating and maintenance-manual safety regulations for operators and technicians tells workers not to stay within a radius of 400 meters (1,300 feet) from turbines unless necessary. Why should the residents of Cape Vincent by any less protected?
Our town supervisor, Tom Reinbeck, recommends a 500-foot setback from all roads. Tom was elected to preserve the health and well-being of the town residents. We ask that Tom reconsider the impacts to the residents and to our property values from anything less than a 1,300-foot setback. Will he take personal responsibility if one of us gets hurt or killed?
The Wind Law Committee is considering a 1,000-foot setback from paved roads and a 750-foot setback from unmaintained seasonal roads. If the Wind Law Committee recommends any less than the safety factor of 1,300 feet from all roads, residences, schools, churches and public land, perhaps they may be legally held personally responsible if one of us is hurt or killed.
Our town officials are legally and morally obligated to protect us. Do we deserve less protection than employees of the world's largest turbine manufacturing companies?
We ask Tom, the Wind Law Committee, the town board and the landowners planning to lease their land for wind turbines to consider retaining proper distances from your neighbors to assure their health and safety. It is critical to retain the sense of community and friendship that has always been an important part of life in Cape Vincent.
Carol Simpson
Cape Vincent
THURSDAY, JANUARY 22, 2009
Vestas is the world's largest wind turbine manufacturer. Its mechanical-operating and maintenance-manual safety regulations for operators and technicians tells workers not to stay within a radius of 400 meters (1,300 feet) from turbines unless necessary. Why should the residents of Cape Vincent by any less protected?
Our town supervisor, Tom Reinbeck, recommends a 500-foot setback from all roads. Tom was elected to preserve the health and well-being of the town residents. We ask that Tom reconsider the impacts to the residents and to our property values from anything less than a 1,300-foot setback. Will he take personal responsibility if one of us gets hurt or killed?
The Wind Law Committee is considering a 1,000-foot setback from paved roads and a 750-foot setback from unmaintained seasonal roads. If the Wind Law Committee recommends any less than the safety factor of 1,300 feet from all roads, residences, schools, churches and public land, perhaps they may be legally held personally responsible if one of us is hurt or killed.
Our town officials are legally and morally obligated to protect us. Do we deserve less protection than employees of the world's largest turbine manufacturing companies?
We ask Tom, the Wind Law Committee, the town board and the landowners planning to lease their land for wind turbines to consider retaining proper distances from your neighbors to assure their health and safety. It is critical to retain the sense of community and friendship that has always been an important part of life in Cape Vincent.
Carol Simpson
Cape Vincent
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Create an agency to oversee energy claims ~ letter
Create an agency to oversee energy claims'
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2009
Imagine this scenario: pharmaceutical companies selling any drug they feel like, having no scientific testing to support their drug's efficacy, making any claim that's in their financial interest, and having no federal or state oversight (e.g. Food and Drug Adminsitration) regarding any of these matters.
Would that make any sense at all? Would we be healthier under that setup? Would you be surprised that bogus products would proliferate? Well, that is exactly the absurd situation we currently have with electrical energy.
The FDA exists because health is a top priority — but energy and health now significantly overlap. For instance some energy pollutants (e.g. from coal facilities) are known carcinogens. More importantly, many believe that the sum effect of energy contaminants will result in the human species demise. What trumps that?
Currently electrical energy profiteers can sell essentially any "alternative" source of energy they feel like, have no independent scientific testing to support its efficacy, and make almost any assertion that's in their financial interest. Wind power is an example.
Since this fiasco exists due to the lack of adequate oversight, the best solution is to create an Electrical Energy Administration, which would be given Food and Drug Administration-like responsibilities.
In short, companies wanting to sell an alternative that garnered financial incentives (or counted toward a Renewable Portfolio Standard), would be required to submit extensive, independent, objective scientific testing to verify that their alternative was at least equal to conventional electrical power sources.
The EEA wouldn't do testing themselves, but rather would be a panel of independent scientific experts who would evaluate the evidence presented, and approve or reject proposed alternatives based on its technical, economic and environmental merits. Additionally, the EEA would have the authority to subsequently see that there wasn't false advertising, and would be able to pull an alternative power source if new adverse information was revealed. Such an agency would be a perfect watchdog over economic-stimulus electrical energy dollars.
If done correctly (learning from FDA experiences), the economic and environmental benefits to consumers, taxpayers, ratepayers, and the country as a whole would be profound.
The alternative is to continue down a senseless street: essentially a completely unregulated Wild West bonanza, where smooth-talking lobbyists and their shills are peddling snake oil, where no claim is too outrageous, and over a trillion dollars will be sucked out of the pockets of us unsuspecting marks — with miniscule merits.
John Droz jr.
Brantingham Lake
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2009
Imagine this scenario: pharmaceutical companies selling any drug they feel like, having no scientific testing to support their drug's efficacy, making any claim that's in their financial interest, and having no federal or state oversight (e.g. Food and Drug Adminsitration) regarding any of these matters.
Would that make any sense at all? Would we be healthier under that setup? Would you be surprised that bogus products would proliferate? Well, that is exactly the absurd situation we currently have with electrical energy.
The FDA exists because health is a top priority — but energy and health now significantly overlap. For instance some energy pollutants (e.g. from coal facilities) are known carcinogens. More importantly, many believe that the sum effect of energy contaminants will result in the human species demise. What trumps that?
Currently electrical energy profiteers can sell essentially any "alternative" source of energy they feel like, have no independent scientific testing to support its efficacy, and make almost any assertion that's in their financial interest. Wind power is an example.
Since this fiasco exists due to the lack of adequate oversight, the best solution is to create an Electrical Energy Administration, which would be given Food and Drug Administration-like responsibilities.
In short, companies wanting to sell an alternative that garnered financial incentives (or counted toward a Renewable Portfolio Standard), would be required to submit extensive, independent, objective scientific testing to verify that their alternative was at least equal to conventional electrical power sources.
The EEA wouldn't do testing themselves, but rather would be a panel of independent scientific experts who would evaluate the evidence presented, and approve or reject proposed alternatives based on its technical, economic and environmental merits. Additionally, the EEA would have the authority to subsequently see that there wasn't false advertising, and would be able to pull an alternative power source if new adverse information was revealed. Such an agency would be a perfect watchdog over economic-stimulus electrical energy dollars.
If done correctly (learning from FDA experiences), the economic and environmental benefits to consumers, taxpayers, ratepayers, and the country as a whole would be profound.
The alternative is to continue down a senseless street: essentially a completely unregulated Wild West bonanza, where smooth-talking lobbyists and their shills are peddling snake oil, where no claim is too outrageous, and over a trillion dollars will be sucked out of the pockets of us unsuspecting marks — with miniscule merits.
John Droz jr.
Brantingham Lake
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Orleans wind group to focus on safety
Orleans wind group to focus on safety
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SATURDAY, JANUARY 17, 2009
LAFARGEVILLE — The town of Orleans Citizen Wind Committee was encouraged to focus on public health and safety at its first meeting Thursday night.
"The primary concern of any project is public safety," Councilman Dean T. Morrow told the committee. "We want to make sure that you all focus on our objective — that where we place windmills is not going to harm people and the environment."
He said the Town Council will consider the economic impact of a project in the town.
"The big issue is with setbacks," Councilman Thomas A. Johnston Jr. said. "With setbacks comes many things
Committee members agreed that they wanted to examine audible and low frequency noise, snow and ice throw, effects on underground aquifers, the possibility of releasing radon gas and shadow flicker. The committee will ask experts on those subjects to give presentations and will look for scientific evidence.
The committee's final product will be facts and recommendations to turn over to the Town Council for integration into a revised zoning law.
Mr. Morrow said there have been complaints the committee might not be balanced enough.
"But if you take the scientific approach and keep from taking a certain bent or following predisposed notions and keep your mind open, I think you can find the facts," he said. "I think a lot of good will come from this."
The committee, which has five members, is open to having several more. The members agreed to meet from 7 to 9 p.m. every other Friday.
The members hoped to complete the fact-finding process far in advance of the year timeline that had been discussed.
Mr. Johnston encouraged them to move as quickly as possible. He is a member of the group of officials from different taxing jurisdictions that has begun work on a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement for wind farms. The group last met in June before the Horse Creek Wind Farm application was suspended by the developer, Iberdrola SA of Spain.
"It has stalled because of the environmental impact study," he said. "As soon as it's done, they'll go back at the PILOT."
The committee's next meeting is at 7 p.m. Friday at the town office. Members will appoint a chairperson and will begin a discussion about noise.
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SATURDAY, JANUARY 17, 2009
LAFARGEVILLE — The town of Orleans Citizen Wind Committee was encouraged to focus on public health and safety at its first meeting Thursday night.
"The primary concern of any project is public safety," Councilman Dean T. Morrow told the committee. "We want to make sure that you all focus on our objective — that where we place windmills is not going to harm people and the environment."
He said the Town Council will consider the economic impact of a project in the town.
"The big issue is with setbacks," Councilman Thomas A. Johnston Jr. said. "With setbacks comes many things
Committee members agreed that they wanted to examine audible and low frequency noise, snow and ice throw, effects on underground aquifers, the possibility of releasing radon gas and shadow flicker. The committee will ask experts on those subjects to give presentations and will look for scientific evidence.
The committee's final product will be facts and recommendations to turn over to the Town Council for integration into a revised zoning law.
Mr. Morrow said there have been complaints the committee might not be balanced enough.
"But if you take the scientific approach and keep from taking a certain bent or following predisposed notions and keep your mind open, I think you can find the facts," he said. "I think a lot of good will come from this."
The committee, which has five members, is open to having several more. The members agreed to meet from 7 to 9 p.m. every other Friday.
The members hoped to complete the fact-finding process far in advance of the year timeline that had been discussed.
Mr. Johnston encouraged them to move as quickly as possible. He is a member of the group of officials from different taxing jurisdictions that has begun work on a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement for wind farms. The group last met in June before the Horse Creek Wind Farm application was suspended by the developer, Iberdrola SA of Spain.
"It has stalled because of the environmental impact study," he said. "As soon as it's done, they'll go back at the PILOT."
The committee's next meeting is at 7 p.m. Friday at the town office. Members will appoint a chairperson and will begin a discussion about noise.
I was sent an interesting email yesterday in regards to Rienbeck’s Wind law revisions ~
This email also refreshed my memory of an incident, at the now infamous board meeting where Rienbeck called the Cops.
At this meeting someone reported to Tom Rienbeck,that a wind representative admitted that they had approached people in the Lake District about putting wind turbines on their land.
This person then asked Tom Rienbeck if this was his reasoning behind the moratorium on wind development in the river and Lake District.
Rienbeck seemed sort of surprised at the revelation of people in the Lake District being approached.
He seemed to reply no, but he was sort of vague, perhaps he was surprised that people in the general public knew.
~~~
As I read the wind law I do not see any protection for the Lake District.
~~~
WIND LAW REVISIONS
RIENBECKS REVENGE
~~~PAGE(8)
~~~
WIND LAW REVISIONS
RIENBECKS REVENGE
~~~PAGE(9)
This email also refreshed my memory of an incident, at the now infamous board meeting where Rienbeck called the Cops.
At this meeting someone reported to Tom Rienbeck,that a wind representative admitted that they had approached people in the Lake District about putting wind turbines on their land.
This person then asked Tom Rienbeck if this was his reasoning behind the moratorium on wind development in the river and Lake District.
Rienbeck seemed sort of surprised at the revelation of people in the Lake District being approached.
He seemed to reply no, but he was sort of vague, perhaps he was surprised that people in the general public knew.
~~~
As I read the wind law I do not see any protection for the Lake District.
~~~
WIND LAW REVISIONS
RIENBECKS REVENGE
~~~PAGE(8)
~~~
WIND LAW REVISIONS
RIENBECKS REVENGE
~~~PAGE(9)
Orleans wind group to focus on safety
By NANCY MADSEN
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SATURDAY, JANUARY 17, 2009
Link Here
LAFARGEVILLE — The town of Orleans Citizen Wind Committee was encouraged to focus on public health and safety at its first meeting Thursday night.
"The primary concern of any project is public safety," Councilman Dean T. Morrow told the committee. "We want to make sure that you all focus on our objective — that where we place windmills is not going to harm people and the environment."
He said the Town Council will consider the economic impact of a project in the town.
"The big issue is with setbacks," Councilman Thomas A. Johnston Jr. said. "With setbacks comes many things."
Committee members agreed that they wanted to examine audible and low frequency noise, snow and ice throw, effects on underground aquifers, the possibility of releasing radon gas and shadow flicker. The committee will ask experts on those subjects to give presentations and will look for scientific evidence.
The committee's final product will be facts and recommendations to turn over to the Town Council for integration into a revised zoning law.
Mr. Morrow said there have been complaints the committee might not be balanced enough.
"But if you take the scientific approach and keep from taking a certain bent or following predisposed notions and keep your mind open, I think you can find the facts," he said. "I think a lot of good will come from this."
The committee, which has five members, is open to having several more. The members agreed to meet from 7 to 9 p.m. every other Friday.
The members hoped to complete the fact-finding process far in advance of the year timeline that had been discussed.
Mr. Johnston encouraged them to move as quickly as possible. He is a member of the group of officials from different taxing jurisdictions that has begun work on a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement for wind farms. The group last met in June before the Horse Creek Wind Farm application was suspended by the developer, Iberdrola SA of Spain.
"It has stalled because of the environmental impact study," he said. "As soon as it's done, they'll go back at the PILOT."
The committee's next meeting is at 7 p.m. Friday at the town office. Members will appoint a chairperson and will begin a discussion about noise.
TIMES STAFF WRITER
SATURDAY, JANUARY 17, 2009
Link Here
LAFARGEVILLE — The town of Orleans Citizen Wind Committee was encouraged to focus on public health and safety at its first meeting Thursday night.
"The primary concern of any project is public safety," Councilman Dean T. Morrow told the committee. "We want to make sure that you all focus on our objective — that where we place windmills is not going to harm people and the environment."
He said the Town Council will consider the economic impact of a project in the town.
"The big issue is with setbacks," Councilman Thomas A. Johnston Jr. said. "With setbacks comes many things."
Committee members agreed that they wanted to examine audible and low frequency noise, snow and ice throw, effects on underground aquifers, the possibility of releasing radon gas and shadow flicker. The committee will ask experts on those subjects to give presentations and will look for scientific evidence.
The committee's final product will be facts and recommendations to turn over to the Town Council for integration into a revised zoning law.
Mr. Morrow said there have been complaints the committee might not be balanced enough.
"But if you take the scientific approach and keep from taking a certain bent or following predisposed notions and keep your mind open, I think you can find the facts," he said. "I think a lot of good will come from this."
The committee, which has five members, is open to having several more. The members agreed to meet from 7 to 9 p.m. every other Friday.
The members hoped to complete the fact-finding process far in advance of the year timeline that had been discussed.
Mr. Johnston encouraged them to move as quickly as possible. He is a member of the group of officials from different taxing jurisdictions that has begun work on a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement for wind farms. The group last met in June before the Horse Creek Wind Farm application was suspended by the developer, Iberdrola SA of Spain.
"It has stalled because of the environmental impact study," he said. "As soon as it's done, they'll go back at the PILOT."
The committee's next meeting is at 7 p.m. Friday at the town office. Members will appoint a chairperson and will begin a discussion about noise.
Monday, January 12, 2009
NCPR~ Interview Paul DeSotis Deputy Energy Secretary ~ Weasel Words
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2009
NCPR ~ GOVERNOR CAUTIOUS ON WIND POWER~
Last week in Watertown, Governor Paterson was asked for his opinion about the wind power projects near the St. Lawrence River in Cape Vincent, Clayton, and Hammond. He said wind power developers need to be “more careful about siting” in the region, given the St. Lawrence River’s “cultural and historic value”. That sounded extremely cautionary for a Governor who’s just proposed ambitious growth plans for wind and solar energy in New York. So David Sommerstein called Paul DeSotis, deputy energy secretary for Governor Paterson, to interpret the Governor’s remarks. Speaking while on a layover at National airport, DeSotis said Paterson was referring to wind power’s intermittency -
wind turbines only make electricity when the wind’s blowing. And he was talking about bottlenecks in the state’s power grid that make it hard to send electricity from northern New York - where the wind is - downstate to where the most demand is.
Tuesday JANUARY 20, 2009
This is What Governor Paterson said . I went over the video many times to be as accurate as possible!!
The Governors words were not just about the intermittency of wind power!
~~~~~~
Tuesday nights town hall meeting was an opportunity to find out what Governor Paterson’s thoughts are about industrial wind development in the St. Lawrence region and the corruption that is plaguing the wind industry in our communities, such as the unethical behavior and conflicts of interests pertaining to the siting of wind power.
A woman from Hammond attending the meeting addressed a few of these issues. She spoke about a scheduled project in her community, that she thought would provide power to Downstate .Her questions addressed issues effecting land owners and tax payers, the adverse impacts resulting from living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines. At one point she stated “ we are wondering what your plans are to help tax payers and property owners who are on the other side, That are being, or will be impacted , by the quality of life issues” such as medical and psychological , lowered property values , the divisiveness, between local government and community residents.
To this Governor Paterson replied
I think that number one, particularly in that area and because of its, cultural and historic, value and also it’s a place that people come to see, that we have to be a lot more careful, about the siting of, wind turbine facilities, that would obviously, impact on the economic development, of the area and property values .There is enough area in the region, to affect this.
One thing that you said, that I would like to comment on and it has a little bit to do, with the transmission of power to downstate.
One of the misnomers on wind power and solar power and even hydro power, is that it is very hard to transmit power, through these clean renewable sources. They are clean and renewable, but they're very inefficient.
And the piping of the resources is not the same as piping oil. As a matter of fact, 3% of the product escapes the pipe everyday, and 3.4% is the best we've ever done. As a result of a study done at the University of California Berkeley.
Solar and wind power really come from the ability to heat nitrogen to a boiling point, where it cracks, and then becomes an energy source. Nitrogen is not an energy source, it is a conductor. So one of the reasons why we will have to have wind turbines is not because it's being piped to “Downstate”, but because the way we are going to win the battle over clean and renewable energy and replace the traditional, many of them carbon emission forms of energy, is to localize our product, so that in the end, the wind turbines that exist will actually go to generate power here. Only in the distant future with a lot of research will we be able to transmit that power, the way we do with other forms of energy.
But, that does not mitigate from what you are saying about placement, about the process by which contracts are granted. By the discipline that must be maintained, by people who are on the types of boards that vote for this.
The inherent problem of conflicts of interest, tainting the process. By companies that are just trying to get started too quickly. There is a real rush for energy creation these days, it has to be balanced with good government, and integrity on the part of those who take part in the decision making process.
NCPR ~ GOVERNOR CAUTIOUS ON WIND POWER~
Last week in Watertown, Governor Paterson was asked for his opinion about the wind power projects near the St. Lawrence River in Cape Vincent, Clayton, and Hammond. He said wind power developers need to be “more careful about siting” in the region, given the St. Lawrence River’s “cultural and historic value”. That sounded extremely cautionary for a Governor who’s just proposed ambitious growth plans for wind and solar energy in New York. So David Sommerstein called Paul DeSotis, deputy energy secretary for Governor Paterson, to interpret the Governor’s remarks. Speaking while on a layover at National airport, DeSotis said Paterson was referring to wind power’s intermittency -
wind turbines only make electricity when the wind’s blowing. And he was talking about bottlenecks in the state’s power grid that make it hard to send electricity from northern New York - where the wind is - downstate to where the most demand is.
Tuesday JANUARY 20, 2009
This is What Governor Paterson said . I went over the video many times to be as accurate as possible!!
The Governors words were not just about the intermittency of wind power!
~~~~~~
Tuesday nights town hall meeting was an opportunity to find out what Governor Paterson’s thoughts are about industrial wind development in the St. Lawrence region and the corruption that is plaguing the wind industry in our communities, such as the unethical behavior and conflicts of interests pertaining to the siting of wind power.
A woman from Hammond attending the meeting addressed a few of these issues. She spoke about a scheduled project in her community, that she thought would provide power to Downstate .Her questions addressed issues effecting land owners and tax payers, the adverse impacts resulting from living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines. At one point she stated “ we are wondering what your plans are to help tax payers and property owners who are on the other side, That are being, or will be impacted , by the quality of life issues” such as medical and psychological , lowered property values , the divisiveness, between local government and community residents.
To this Governor Paterson replied
I think that number one, particularly in that area and because of its, cultural and historic, value and also it’s a place that people come to see, that we have to be a lot more careful, about the siting of, wind turbine facilities, that would obviously, impact on the economic development, of the area and property values .There is enough area in the region, to affect this.
One thing that you said, that I would like to comment on and it has a little bit to do, with the transmission of power to downstate.
One of the misnomers on wind power and solar power and even hydro power, is that it is very hard to transmit power, through these clean renewable sources. They are clean and renewable, but they're very inefficient.
And the piping of the resources is not the same as piping oil. As a matter of fact, 3% of the product escapes the pipe everyday, and 3.4% is the best we've ever done. As a result of a study done at the University of California Berkeley.
Solar and wind power really come from the ability to heat nitrogen to a boiling point, where it cracks, and then becomes an energy source. Nitrogen is not an energy source, it is a conductor. So one of the reasons why we will have to have wind turbines is not because it's being piped to “Downstate”, but because the way we are going to win the battle over clean and renewable energy and replace the traditional, many of them carbon emission forms of energy, is to localize our product, so that in the end, the wind turbines that exist will actually go to generate power here. Only in the distant future with a lot of research will we be able to transmit that power, the way we do with other forms of energy.
But, that does not mitigate from what you are saying about placement, about the process by which contracts are granted. By the discipline that must be maintained, by people who are on the types of boards that vote for this.
The inherent problem of conflicts of interest, tainting the process. By companies that are just trying to get started too quickly. There is a real rush for energy creation these days, it has to be balanced with good government, and integrity on the part of those who take part in the decision making process.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Minimum setbacks jeopardize community Letter
Watertown Daily Times | Minimum setbacks jeopardize community
FRIDAY, JANUARY 2, 2009
I completely disagree with Supervisor Thomas Rienbeck's assessment that we are overregulating wind turbines in Cape Vincent, especially since the issue that prompted his remark is that of public safety.
We can place as many turbines as the wind developers want in this township and not worry about destroying scenic beauty or the potential harm to wildlife. We can place them as close to people's homes as the developers say is safe, and disregard the volumes of information that have been presented to the community warning of the hazards to our health from excessive noise, low-frequency sound and the shadow flicker effect, all caused by living too close to turbines of this size.
We can forego an unbiased, accurate determination of the ambient noise level to serve as a basis for siting these turbines, and learn to adjust our sleeping habits. We can ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of our community (local as well as seasonal) regarding the overall impact on the quality of life in Cape Vincent. We can do all this for the financial gain of the wind developers and some landowners, whereas the benefit to the community as whole remains undisclosed and therefore unknown and nonnegotiable.
What we cannot do is jeopardize the entire community as well as everyone who visits here by minimizing the setbacks from our public roads. There are documented reports that ice can build up on the turbine blades and be flung considerable distances. Mechanical failure can and has resulted in blade pieces being thrown as far as 400 meters. A turbine manufacturer recommends developer and maintenance personnel maintain a safe distance of 1,300 feet once the turbines are erected
In my opinion it is unreasonable and irresponsible for Supervisor Rienbeck and the zoning law review committee to recommend any less setback from all of our public roads. The notion that the users of secondary or seasonal roads warrant less protection from potential harm than those using main roads is an absurd idea.
I am discouraged that this review committee is resisting virtually every effort to significantly regulate the placement of wind turbines in Cape Vincent contrary to Mr. Rienbeck's claim. They consistently recommend the minimum restrictions preferring to create a compliance nightmare. I support the concept of wind energy in Cape Vincent, but not on this scale, and not at the expense of the quality of life of our citizens.
David LaMora
FRIDAY, JANUARY 2, 2009
I completely disagree with Supervisor Thomas Rienbeck's assessment that we are overregulating wind turbines in Cape Vincent, especially since the issue that prompted his remark is that of public safety.
We can place as many turbines as the wind developers want in this township and not worry about destroying scenic beauty or the potential harm to wildlife. We can place them as close to people's homes as the developers say is safe, and disregard the volumes of information that have been presented to the community warning of the hazards to our health from excessive noise, low-frequency sound and the shadow flicker effect, all caused by living too close to turbines of this size.
We can forego an unbiased, accurate determination of the ambient noise level to serve as a basis for siting these turbines, and learn to adjust our sleeping habits. We can ignore the legitimate concerns of a large segment of our community (local as well as seasonal) regarding the overall impact on the quality of life in Cape Vincent. We can do all this for the financial gain of the wind developers and some landowners, whereas the benefit to the community as whole remains undisclosed and therefore unknown and nonnegotiable.
What we cannot do is jeopardize the entire community as well as everyone who visits here by minimizing the setbacks from our public roads. There are documented reports that ice can build up on the turbine blades and be flung considerable distances. Mechanical failure can and has resulted in blade pieces being thrown as far as 400 meters. A turbine manufacturer recommends developer and maintenance personnel maintain a safe distance of 1,300 feet once the turbines are erected
In my opinion it is unreasonable and irresponsible for Supervisor Rienbeck and the zoning law review committee to recommend any less setback from all of our public roads. The notion that the users of secondary or seasonal roads warrant less protection from potential harm than those using main roads is an absurd idea.
I am discouraged that this review committee is resisting virtually every effort to significantly regulate the placement of wind turbines in Cape Vincent contrary to Mr. Rienbeck's claim. They consistently recommend the minimum restrictions preferring to create a compliance nightmare. I support the concept of wind energy in Cape Vincent, but not on this scale, and not at the expense of the quality of life of our citizens.
David LaMora
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)