The tiny community of King Island off the north-west tip of Tasmania has voted to push ahead with plans for the country's biggest ever wind farm.
A community ballot has revealed 59 per cent support for Hydro Tasmania to conduct a multimillion-dollar feasibility study into a 200 turbine wind farm.
It's a decision that's been made against the backdrop of a dwindling population, fewer jobs and closing businesses.
The massive wind farm would generate about 2,400 gigawatt hours of electricity a year, to be sent across Bass Strait by a high voltage underwater cable to the national electricity market.
Hydro Tasmania says it could produce enough electricity to power a quarter of a million households, a huge chunk of the nation's renewable energy targets.
But as Fiona Breen found out, the issue has divided the community. Friends and even families are no longer talking.
FIONA BREEN, REPORTER: On a wintry Saturday, a sporting battle pitches mate against mate, colleague against colleague and even family against family.
For 1,500 King Islanders, the three-team footy competition stirs sporting passion. Today, it's Grassy versus North. It's a tough, close match.
Off the field, another battle has been simmering. Like football, passions have come to the surface.
VOX POP: I'm against. Don't want any wind farms here to - they're just ugly, horrible things.
VOX POP II: I think the wind farms are a great idea for the island, even if it just goes to feasibility.
VOX POP III: I don't want to look at wind towers really, but if it's going to help out the island, well, we need it.
FIONA BREEN: King Island is in the Roaring 40s. Its rugged coastline is a graveyard of shipwrecks driven ashore by the winds. Calm days are rare and the wind blows at an average speed of 32 kilometres per hour. It's that consistent wind that Hydro Tasmania wants to harness, using 200 turbines costing $2 billion. The company has spent six months taking the proposal to the local community.
ANDREW CATCHPOLE, HYDRO TASMANIA: We're taking a very different approach in coming to King Island to have this conversation before doing a feasibility study, a different approach to that taken previously and elsewhere for these kinds of projects.
That is very deliberate to try and understand, and I suppose to demonstrate, that not all wind farm developments are the same. They don't have to be the same. And so we hope you would see that as a sign of our commitment to continue to work with you to ensure that if this goes ahead that there is an optimum outcome for the community.
FIONA BREEN: The community ballot has now been counted and the result was tight. Nearly 59 per cent supported taking the 200 turbine wind farm proposal to the next stage, but there was only 10 or 11 votes in it.
Hydro Tasmania had always said it needed at least 60 per cent community support for it to go ahead. At an emergency board meeting this week, the company decided it was close enough.
ANDREW CATCHPOLE: Well certainly we're aware that there are different views in the community and we want to work with all sections of the community going forward about their concerns, as we've indicated. But we do feel that the survey result of 59 per cent is a very strong indication of community support to go forward to a feasibility study. More information about the program is available on the web site at www.scfwindturbine.com.
2013年6月30日 星期日
Rural communities invited to bid for 15m green energy pot
The government has unveiled a 15m fund designed to encourage hundreds of communities across England to invest in small-scale renewable energy projects, such as wind turbines or heat pumps.
Rural communities were invited to bid for a share of the funding pot late last week, which can be used to support the first steps of a project, including investigating the potential for renewable energy in their area and applying for planning permission.
Communities can apply for funding for a range of technologies such as wind, solar, biomass, heat pumps, anaerobic digestion, gas with combined heat and power, and hydropower.
"Not only can local generation bring people together, boost local economies and drive forward green growth, it can help save money on energy bills too," said Climate Change Minister Greg Barker in a statement, adding that the previous Local Energy Assessment Fund helped bring forward 236 community energy generation and management projects across England.
Each community will be eligible for a grant of up to 20,000 for feasibility studies and they can also apply for a loan of up to 130,000 to help fund applications for any necessary environmental and planning permits.
The government is also currently consulting on finding new ways of funding community energy projects, and is planning to publish a community energy strategy in autumn.
Speaking at an event organised by think tank Policy Exchange last week, Ed Davey, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, said community-funded schemes could play an important role in ensuring that local people reap the benefits of onshore wind turbines and other schemes.
He said the government was looking at a range of ways to involve communities in local energy projects, including using community benefits given to them by developers of existing wind turbines to invest in even more renewable energy.
"The ownership question is a really interesting one and we are very much exploring that and want to come forward with positions in the autumn," he said.
In related news, new research has found the number of farmers using renewable energy has shot up in the past three years.
A survey by Nottingham Trent University, Forum for the Future and Farmers Weekly found that of 700 farmers asked, 40 per cent are generating renewable energy onsite, compared to five per cent in 2010.
More than two thirds of those not using renewable energy are considering investing in it over the next five years. Click on their website www.scfwindturbine.com for more information.
Rural communities were invited to bid for a share of the funding pot late last week, which can be used to support the first steps of a project, including investigating the potential for renewable energy in their area and applying for planning permission.
Communities can apply for funding for a range of technologies such as wind, solar, biomass, heat pumps, anaerobic digestion, gas with combined heat and power, and hydropower.
"Not only can local generation bring people together, boost local economies and drive forward green growth, it can help save money on energy bills too," said Climate Change Minister Greg Barker in a statement, adding that the previous Local Energy Assessment Fund helped bring forward 236 community energy generation and management projects across England.
Each community will be eligible for a grant of up to 20,000 for feasibility studies and they can also apply for a loan of up to 130,000 to help fund applications for any necessary environmental and planning permits.
The government is also currently consulting on finding new ways of funding community energy projects, and is planning to publish a community energy strategy in autumn.
Speaking at an event organised by think tank Policy Exchange last week, Ed Davey, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, said community-funded schemes could play an important role in ensuring that local people reap the benefits of onshore wind turbines and other schemes.
He said the government was looking at a range of ways to involve communities in local energy projects, including using community benefits given to them by developers of existing wind turbines to invest in even more renewable energy.
"The ownership question is a really interesting one and we are very much exploring that and want to come forward with positions in the autumn," he said.
In related news, new research has found the number of farmers using renewable energy has shot up in the past three years.
A survey by Nottingham Trent University, Forum for the Future and Farmers Weekly found that of 700 farmers asked, 40 per cent are generating renewable energy onsite, compared to five per cent in 2010.
More than two thirds of those not using renewable energy are considering investing in it over the next five years. Click on their website www.scfwindturbine.com for more information.
2013年6月26日 星期三
Better policies would allow hydropower to back up wind power
The issue of wind turbine downtime can be compensated by hydropower
but only with the correct policy and regulations, found researchers at
Pennsylvania State University.
At present, wind is the fastest growing renewable energy source in the United States. The United States Department of Energy recently found that the country could produce 20 percent of its electricity from wind by 2030.
But because Americans want low-cost electricity and expect things to continue working without blackouts, full reliance on wind is impossible as there are times when the winds suddenly cease blowing or blows to hard causing operators to shut down the turbines. Researchers at Penn State said that viable options that can back wind energy up are natural gas and hydropower, but because natural gas is not carbon neutral, hydropower is the clear and greener choice.
As part of their case study, the researchers studied the Kerr Dam in North Caroline and found that the power produced from the dam goes into the PJM segment of the electrical grid. The PJM segment includes Pennsylvania through Virginia in the East Coast, west to Indiana and the Chicago area. Due to agreements made before the establishment of the PJM market. The Kerr Dam also supplies other local outlets.
The researchers noted that the Kerr Dam can accommodate the unexpected variations in wind energy, but the problem is that hydroelectric dams cannot simply release water to meet the demand for electricity when wind energy suffers a downtime. This is because water dams operate using guide curves that are based on a one-week weather forecast and consider factors such as electric production, drinking water needs, irrigation, fish, and wildlife requirements.
To allow hydropower to come in when wind energy falls, the researchers suggest that instead of a guide curve requirement of one week, it should be two weeks. The researchers also determined that if the price of the electricity was changed in such a way that backing up wind is more lucrative, hydropower plants can pledge their electricity to make up for wind energy, instead of selling the excess on the spot market.
The president’s emphasis on renewable energy is “a big winner for Iowa,” said Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center in Chicago. In addition to being a major wind energy producer, Iowa also has become a hub for turbine manufacturing, from spinning blades to nuts and bolts. Opening more public land to wind generator should keep those plants running strong, he said.
“To the extent that the president’s climate action plan moves forward, that’s good for more wind power developments in Iowa, that’s good for job creation, that’s good for economic growth and it’s good for the environment,” Learner said.
Neila Seaman, director of the Sierra Club’s Iowa Chapter, echoed the president’s argument that the plan moves the country as a whole closer to a “clean energy economy,” in which new technologies create new jobs that more than offset those lost in the transition.
“We’re not trying to put anybody out of business,” Seaman said. “We think there will be enough green jobs resulting from this plan today that I’m not sure the critics would have good argument against it.”
At present, wind is the fastest growing renewable energy source in the United States. The United States Department of Energy recently found that the country could produce 20 percent of its electricity from wind by 2030.
But because Americans want low-cost electricity and expect things to continue working without blackouts, full reliance on wind is impossible as there are times when the winds suddenly cease blowing or blows to hard causing operators to shut down the turbines. Researchers at Penn State said that viable options that can back wind energy up are natural gas and hydropower, but because natural gas is not carbon neutral, hydropower is the clear and greener choice.
As part of their case study, the researchers studied the Kerr Dam in North Caroline and found that the power produced from the dam goes into the PJM segment of the electrical grid. The PJM segment includes Pennsylvania through Virginia in the East Coast, west to Indiana and the Chicago area. Due to agreements made before the establishment of the PJM market. The Kerr Dam also supplies other local outlets.
The researchers noted that the Kerr Dam can accommodate the unexpected variations in wind energy, but the problem is that hydroelectric dams cannot simply release water to meet the demand for electricity when wind energy suffers a downtime. This is because water dams operate using guide curves that are based on a one-week weather forecast and consider factors such as electric production, drinking water needs, irrigation, fish, and wildlife requirements.
To allow hydropower to come in when wind energy falls, the researchers suggest that instead of a guide curve requirement of one week, it should be two weeks. The researchers also determined that if the price of the electricity was changed in such a way that backing up wind is more lucrative, hydropower plants can pledge their electricity to make up for wind energy, instead of selling the excess on the spot market.
The president’s emphasis on renewable energy is “a big winner for Iowa,” said Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center in Chicago. In addition to being a major wind energy producer, Iowa also has become a hub for turbine manufacturing, from spinning blades to nuts and bolts. Opening more public land to wind generator should keep those plants running strong, he said.
“To the extent that the president’s climate action plan moves forward, that’s good for more wind power developments in Iowa, that’s good for job creation, that’s good for economic growth and it’s good for the environment,” Learner said.
Neila Seaman, director of the Sierra Club’s Iowa Chapter, echoed the president’s argument that the plan moves the country as a whole closer to a “clean energy economy,” in which new technologies create new jobs that more than offset those lost in the transition.
“We’re not trying to put anybody out of business,” Seaman said. “We think there will be enough green jobs resulting from this plan today that I’m not sure the critics would have good argument against it.”
2013年6月23日 星期日
Public Eye
Opponents of a potential eastern Howard County wind turbine project packed the Howard County Commissioners meeting this past week. It was the fifth straight commissioners meeting dominated by the white-shirted opponents.
The opponents want county officialsto create larger setback requirements and to require wind turbines to obtain a special exception use permit from the Howard County Board of Zoning Appeals.
The irony here is that the opponents are appealing to two of the individuals responsible for the current setback requirements, and for the fact that in Howard County, you need a special exception permit to build a cell phone tower, but you don’t need one to build a much taller wind turbine.
On May 19, 2009, the Howard County Plan Commission met to consider a proposed wind turbine amendment to the Howard County Zoning Ordinance.
At the meeting, the plan commission voted to change key provisions of the proposed new wind turbine rules, jettisoning a proposal to require a special exception permit, and voting for shorter setback requirements.
Commissioner Tyler Moore, who was on the plan commission at the time, “said he felt he spoke for the Commissioners in saying they would like to see the 1,000 foot setback from residences reduced. He said seeing that reduction considered was a welcome surprise. He felt the process needed to be as smooth as possible. The Special Exception process was probably prohibitive for the land owner as well as the wind energy companies,” the minutes state.
Commissioner Paul Wyman was also at the meeting, to speak in favor of the changes.
According to the minutes, Wyman said “He would like to see the change of the 500 feet and the Special Exception as a requirement. He said Howard County needs to be in the most competitive position possible.”
Several representatives of wind energy companies, as well as individuals and attorneys representing landowners interested in leasing property to the wind companies, were also at the meeting to press for the last-minute changes, which passed unanimously.
Brian Oaks, who was acting as the plan commission’s attorney at the time, also recommended getting rid of the special exception permit requirement, telling the commission members he didn’t think it would hold up in court, if the BZA rejected a special use permit application.
Thursday, Wyman said he hasn’t changed his position on the issue, but is hopeful there may be room for compromise between wind developer E.On Climate & Renewables and the opponents, noting that E.On has proposed setbacks for recent projects which exceed the Howard County zoning requirements.
Wyman also said he was concerned about economic development in 2009, a year when Kokomo was beset by bankruptcies in the auto industry, and unemployment reached 20 percent.
“Our community was looking to diversify, and wind energy was an up-and-coming investment,” he said. Click on their website www.scfwindturbine.com for more information.
The opponents want county officialsto create larger setback requirements and to require wind turbines to obtain a special exception use permit from the Howard County Board of Zoning Appeals.
The irony here is that the opponents are appealing to two of the individuals responsible for the current setback requirements, and for the fact that in Howard County, you need a special exception permit to build a cell phone tower, but you don’t need one to build a much taller wind turbine.
On May 19, 2009, the Howard County Plan Commission met to consider a proposed wind turbine amendment to the Howard County Zoning Ordinance.
At the meeting, the plan commission voted to change key provisions of the proposed new wind turbine rules, jettisoning a proposal to require a special exception permit, and voting for shorter setback requirements.
Commissioner Tyler Moore, who was on the plan commission at the time, “said he felt he spoke for the Commissioners in saying they would like to see the 1,000 foot setback from residences reduced. He said seeing that reduction considered was a welcome surprise. He felt the process needed to be as smooth as possible. The Special Exception process was probably prohibitive for the land owner as well as the wind energy companies,” the minutes state.
Commissioner Paul Wyman was also at the meeting, to speak in favor of the changes.
According to the minutes, Wyman said “He would like to see the change of the 500 feet and the Special Exception as a requirement. He said Howard County needs to be in the most competitive position possible.”
Several representatives of wind energy companies, as well as individuals and attorneys representing landowners interested in leasing property to the wind companies, were also at the meeting to press for the last-minute changes, which passed unanimously.
Brian Oaks, who was acting as the plan commission’s attorney at the time, also recommended getting rid of the special exception permit requirement, telling the commission members he didn’t think it would hold up in court, if the BZA rejected a special use permit application.
Thursday, Wyman said he hasn’t changed his position on the issue, but is hopeful there may be room for compromise between wind developer E.On Climate & Renewables and the opponents, noting that E.On has proposed setbacks for recent projects which exceed the Howard County zoning requirements.
Wyman also said he was concerned about economic development in 2009, a year when Kokomo was beset by bankruptcies in the auto industry, and unemployment reached 20 percent.
“Our community was looking to diversify, and wind energy was an up-and-coming investment,” he said. Click on their website www.scfwindturbine.com for more information.
Sustainable Energy boss's windfarm 'conflict of interest'
Labour Senator John Whelan has warned that Communications Minister Pat Rabbitte will have to address the "apparent conflict of interest" where the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland chairman Brendan Halligan, a long-term Labour apparatchik, is also a director of Mainstream Renewable Power; one of the major wind-farm developers in Ireland.
Mr Whelan issued the warning in the wake of a major demonstration outside Dublin Castle against proposals to erect 2,500 "185 metre high wind generator, higher than the spike in Dublin, near family homes in 14 counties across Ireland".
Speaking to the Sunday Independent, he warned the status of Halligan was leading to "much public disquiet and fuelling public cynicism with regard to wind energy policy and an increasingly controversial planning process."
The Labour senator asked, "How can Mr Halligan serve both the public interest and the commercial interests of a private company? This is not best practice and will have to be addressed; there is no way around it."
He added that "it is unacceptable and should not be allowed to continue and I will now be raising the issue with both Minister Rabbitte and the Oireachtas Committee on Energy and Natural Resources".
This is likely to lead to tensions between the senator and Mr Rabbitte, who has made renewable energy one of his core departmental objectives.
But Whelan warned that on this issue Labour "can't come across all pious and highly principled on other issues and then turn a blind eye when [it] suits us. In public life you cannot serve two masters".
Decisions, he said, "to be made around wind farm policy and planning are going to have a profound effect on thousands of rural families for generations to come".
Whelan's position was echoed by the Labour Senator John Kelly who noted "all that the people want is for the Government to sit up and listen to them, that they don't want to live beside wind turbines for reasons of health, noise, and the safety of their children.
He said Friday's protest was peaceful and passionate, held by decent families trying to protect their human right to live in peace and tranquillity, not surrounded by wind farms "that are bigger than the spike".
Kelly added: "It is indeed ironic that Enda Kenny is saying the Seanad is ineffective, whilst at the same time, when I brought a Wind Turbine 2012 Bill through the Seanad, achieving cross-party support, it was Enda who blocked the same bill going the Dail. He considers this to be democracy, when in fact he himself is blocking democracy".
Speaking to the Sunday Independent Mr Whelan also claimed "much of the public disquiet would be resolved and allayed if the Government accepted Deputy Willie Penrose's and Senator John Kelly's legislative proposals affording 1.5km setback from family homes".
Mr Whelan issued the warning in the wake of a major demonstration outside Dublin Castle against proposals to erect 2,500 "185 metre high wind generator, higher than the spike in Dublin, near family homes in 14 counties across Ireland".
Speaking to the Sunday Independent, he warned the status of Halligan was leading to "much public disquiet and fuelling public cynicism with regard to wind energy policy and an increasingly controversial planning process."
The Labour senator asked, "How can Mr Halligan serve both the public interest and the commercial interests of a private company? This is not best practice and will have to be addressed; there is no way around it."
He added that "it is unacceptable and should not be allowed to continue and I will now be raising the issue with both Minister Rabbitte and the Oireachtas Committee on Energy and Natural Resources".
This is likely to lead to tensions between the senator and Mr Rabbitte, who has made renewable energy one of his core departmental objectives.
But Whelan warned that on this issue Labour "can't come across all pious and highly principled on other issues and then turn a blind eye when [it] suits us. In public life you cannot serve two masters".
Decisions, he said, "to be made around wind farm policy and planning are going to have a profound effect on thousands of rural families for generations to come".
Whelan's position was echoed by the Labour Senator John Kelly who noted "all that the people want is for the Government to sit up and listen to them, that they don't want to live beside wind turbines for reasons of health, noise, and the safety of their children.
He said Friday's protest was peaceful and passionate, held by decent families trying to protect their human right to live in peace and tranquillity, not surrounded by wind farms "that are bigger than the spike".
Kelly added: "It is indeed ironic that Enda Kenny is saying the Seanad is ineffective, whilst at the same time, when I brought a Wind Turbine 2012 Bill through the Seanad, achieving cross-party support, it was Enda who blocked the same bill going the Dail. He considers this to be democracy, when in fact he himself is blocking democracy".
Speaking to the Sunday Independent Mr Whelan also claimed "much of the public disquiet would be resolved and allayed if the Government accepted Deputy Willie Penrose's and Senator John Kelly's legislative proposals affording 1.5km setback from family homes".
2013年6月19日 星期三
Germany Opens Another Hybrid Wind Power Plant
From this tweet by the always excellent Energiewende Germany I learned about an article titled “Hydrogen plant starts storing wind energy in Germany“.
As is clear from the title, this is another project to use wind energy in times where demand can’t keep up with supply to make some hydrogen from water. That is the future for storage of surplus renewable energy, since the existing infrastructure can store massive amounts of hydrogen gas.
The German existing gas infrastructure could handle storage of up to 200 TWh, which is much more than the about 30 TWh an electricity system of 100% renewable would need. But to get that capacity, people need to start building these kind of plants that store electricity from wind or solar as hydrogen. We still have a decade or two to go until renewable gets to 100%, but it is still a good idea to start early.
Enertrag has opened the first plant like this in 2011. At the time with a capacity of only 500 kW. The new plant reported on in that article has 2 MW. And it is operated by E.ON, one of the “big four” German utilities that used to show no interest in renewable energy and leave the investment in the sector to citizen projects.
As the article notes, only about 50% of the energy from the surplus electricity can be stored in hydrogen.
But that is of course not a problem. In the many time slots where demand can’t keep up even now, the electricity would be wasted anyway. And in the few time slots without wind and solar available (the occasional cold November night) that stored energy will have a very high value on the market.
Over this weekend, many countries in Europe saw negative electricity prices, with France and its inflexible nuclear plants reaching minus 4 cent per kWh. People were paid good money if they used electricity, helping to reduce the supply overload. In such a time slot it doesn’t matter that only 50% of the energy will be stored. There is too much available in the first place.
And while the technology for making hydrogen may still be somewhat expensive (that 2 MW plant cost around $2 million), there is only a need to store around 5% of yearly demand. Spread that cost over all electricity over a feed-in tariff or some such policy, and it won’t matter much. Let’s also note that gas plant capacity is by far the cheapest to build of all power plants at only about EUR400 a kW, which helps save money on the cost of the whole system as well.
The idea involves flying a turbine in circles 800-1,950 feet up in the air, where winds are steadier and stronger than on the ground. Because most of the power in a traditional turbine is generated at the tips, these new generators would consist of a pair of such tips mounted to a wing. The wing flies in vertical circles, attached to the ground by a tether, which both carries the traction force of the wing, and transmits the electricity generated to the ground. A computer uses the flaps on the wing to control the flight.
It will also be possible to use similar wings in offshore areas, where the wing would be stowed atop a buoy until wind conditions are favorable. Then, the wing would take off like a helicopter, fly up to 1,300 feet high, generate electricity and then land once more on the buoy.Click on their website www.scfwindturbine.com for more information.
As is clear from the title, this is another project to use wind energy in times where demand can’t keep up with supply to make some hydrogen from water. That is the future for storage of surplus renewable energy, since the existing infrastructure can store massive amounts of hydrogen gas.
The German existing gas infrastructure could handle storage of up to 200 TWh, which is much more than the about 30 TWh an electricity system of 100% renewable would need. But to get that capacity, people need to start building these kind of plants that store electricity from wind or solar as hydrogen. We still have a decade or two to go until renewable gets to 100%, but it is still a good idea to start early.
Enertrag has opened the first plant like this in 2011. At the time with a capacity of only 500 kW. The new plant reported on in that article has 2 MW. And it is operated by E.ON, one of the “big four” German utilities that used to show no interest in renewable energy and leave the investment in the sector to citizen projects.
As the article notes, only about 50% of the energy from the surplus electricity can be stored in hydrogen.
But that is of course not a problem. In the many time slots where demand can’t keep up even now, the electricity would be wasted anyway. And in the few time slots without wind and solar available (the occasional cold November night) that stored energy will have a very high value on the market.
Over this weekend, many countries in Europe saw negative electricity prices, with France and its inflexible nuclear plants reaching minus 4 cent per kWh. People were paid good money if they used electricity, helping to reduce the supply overload. In such a time slot it doesn’t matter that only 50% of the energy will be stored. There is too much available in the first place.
And while the technology for making hydrogen may still be somewhat expensive (that 2 MW plant cost around $2 million), there is only a need to store around 5% of yearly demand. Spread that cost over all electricity over a feed-in tariff or some such policy, and it won’t matter much. Let’s also note that gas plant capacity is by far the cheapest to build of all power plants at only about EUR400 a kW, which helps save money on the cost of the whole system as well.
The idea involves flying a turbine in circles 800-1,950 feet up in the air, where winds are steadier and stronger than on the ground. Because most of the power in a traditional turbine is generated at the tips, these new generators would consist of a pair of such tips mounted to a wing. The wing flies in vertical circles, attached to the ground by a tether, which both carries the traction force of the wing, and transmits the electricity generated to the ground. A computer uses the flaps on the wing to control the flight.
It will also be possible to use similar wings in offshore areas, where the wing would be stowed atop a buoy until wind conditions are favorable. Then, the wing would take off like a helicopter, fly up to 1,300 feet high, generate electricity and then land once more on the buoy.Click on their website www.scfwindturbine.com for more information.
Anger at wind turbine plan on land that inspired David Hockney
PLANS for a 45m wind turbine in the heart of Wolds – which has inspired artist David Hockney – are being opposed by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
The owner of Tuft Hill Farm in Woldgate, near Bridlington, has already installed a 34m turbine in the same area after it was granted on appeal.
East Riding Council had rejected the original turbine due to the impact it would have on the Wolds countryside.
Now, there is further opposition and concern raised by the MoD, English Heritage and the Humber Archeology Partnership.
An MoD spokesman said: "The turbine will cause unacceptable interference to the radar at Staxton Wolds.
"The probability of the radar detecting aircraft flying over or in the vicinity of the turbines would be reduced and the RAF would be unable to provide a full air surveillance service in the area of the proposed wind turbine."
English Heritage is concerned the turbine is close to a number of important sites and could have a detrimental visual impact.
In submitting comments, the organisation said: "The application site is adjacent to a number of scheduled monuments and listed buildings and the Kilham Village Conservation Area."
English Heritage is calling for the application to be deferred as it does not feel there is enough information.
Humber Archeology Partnership has echoed English Heritage's concerns and is asking for a geological survey to be carried out to provide more information about the impact of the proposed turbine.
Rudstone and Burton Agnes parish councils have also opposed the application, believing the turbine would spoil the view along the ridge of the Wolds and are concerned because there is already a turbine on site.
But there has been support for the application with more than 20 neighbours backing the plans, claiming that there is an vital need for renewable energy.
In the design statement, landowner Harrison Farms said: "The second turbine would ensure that the energy needs of the farm are met in the long-term, as well as the aspirations of the Harrison Farm business be carbon neutral overall.
"The turbine would provide a number of economic and environmental benefits, enabling the business to absorb the energy demands resulting from its recent expansion.
"The business is also under pressure to introduce sustainable sources of energy linked to an agreement it has with a local growers' co-operative."
The first turbine was rejected by East Riding Council planners, who feared it would intrude on views across the countryside.
But, following a public inquiry, planning inspector David Pinner said the turbine's impact on the area would be "slight". Read the full story at scfwindturbine web.
The owner of Tuft Hill Farm in Woldgate, near Bridlington, has already installed a 34m turbine in the same area after it was granted on appeal.
East Riding Council had rejected the original turbine due to the impact it would have on the Wolds countryside.
Now, there is further opposition and concern raised by the MoD, English Heritage and the Humber Archeology Partnership.
An MoD spokesman said: "The turbine will cause unacceptable interference to the radar at Staxton Wolds.
"The probability of the radar detecting aircraft flying over or in the vicinity of the turbines would be reduced and the RAF would be unable to provide a full air surveillance service in the area of the proposed wind turbine."
English Heritage is concerned the turbine is close to a number of important sites and could have a detrimental visual impact.
In submitting comments, the organisation said: "The application site is adjacent to a number of scheduled monuments and listed buildings and the Kilham Village Conservation Area."
English Heritage is calling for the application to be deferred as it does not feel there is enough information.
Humber Archeology Partnership has echoed English Heritage's concerns and is asking for a geological survey to be carried out to provide more information about the impact of the proposed turbine.
Rudstone and Burton Agnes parish councils have also opposed the application, believing the turbine would spoil the view along the ridge of the Wolds and are concerned because there is already a turbine on site.
But there has been support for the application with more than 20 neighbours backing the plans, claiming that there is an vital need for renewable energy.
In the design statement, landowner Harrison Farms said: "The second turbine would ensure that the energy needs of the farm are met in the long-term, as well as the aspirations of the Harrison Farm business be carbon neutral overall.
"The turbine would provide a number of economic and environmental benefits, enabling the business to absorb the energy demands resulting from its recent expansion.
"The business is also under pressure to introduce sustainable sources of energy linked to an agreement it has with a local growers' co-operative."
The first turbine was rejected by East Riding Council planners, who feared it would intrude on views across the countryside.
But, following a public inquiry, planning inspector David Pinner said the turbine's impact on the area would be "slight". Read the full story at scfwindturbine web.
2013年6月17日 星期一
Runway extension could affect wind farm plans
Cielo Wind Power has been thinking about building a wind farm somewhere on Port of Brownsville property for a decade or so.
The Austin-based company is still thinking about it, and it's by no means certain all the pieces will fall into place and all the obstacles will be cleared away for such a project to become a reality.
So says Walter Hornaday, who founded Cielo in 1998. According to its website, the firm has completed more than a dozen wind farm projects, most of them in Texas and two in New Mexico. The company recently began another wind farm outside Amarillo that will feature 87 GE wind turbines.
Brownsville is a promising site for a wind farm, though the project could meet an obstacle in the form of Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport's plans to extend its runway, Hornaday said.
A longer runway would mean planes on approach would fly lower farther away from the airport, which could preclude construction of towering wind turbine.
It's premature to say, though, since it all comes down to where Cielo wants to build versus how airspace is affected. Airport officials hope to extend the main runway from its current 7,400 feet to 10,000 feet or longer. An environmental review is still under way, though, and no funding has been allocated for the project yet.
"Obviously if you extend the runway there's more airspace that's going to be covered," Director of Aviation Larry Brown said. That said, it's not yet clear to what extent changes in airspace would affect Cielo's plans, he said.
"Until we know more details, we can't answer the question," Brown said. "It's all going to be a function of math."
He said Corpus Christi's airport is dealing with airspace issues arising from wind farms located south and east of Sarita.
Hornaday said he hopes Cielo, if it does decide to move forward with a project at the port, can come to an arrangement with the airport amenable to all parties concerned.
"We're trying to see what they will allow to be done," he said. "It's highly speculative at this point. It's a great, windy area. The pieces are there. It's a good wind resource and there's a growing demand for electricity, but there are a lot of moving parts."
We suspect those opposed to energy generated by wind turbines will be rubbing their hands together with a good deal of glee this morning, following revelations that the wind farm industry is being propped up by domestic energy bills.
New figures indicate that wind turbine owners received 1.2 billion in consumer subsidies last year. That is, unquestionably, a staggeringly large amount to draw from the public purse at any time, let alone in this period of austerity.
So it seems clear that this assessment of the balance sheet for wind power will be another blow for an industry already reeling from the Government's recent announcement that new rules will give people greater powers to block turbine applications, when they are proposed near where they live.
We do not, however, subscribe to the view that all wind turbines must therefore be uprooted and dismantled. Far from it. wind energy is a new technology that should and does command significant investment. There is no doubt that wind energy is here to stay. It must surely be allowed to play a part in helping keep the lights on as traditional high-carbon energy sources diminish.
The Austin-based company is still thinking about it, and it's by no means certain all the pieces will fall into place and all the obstacles will be cleared away for such a project to become a reality.
So says Walter Hornaday, who founded Cielo in 1998. According to its website, the firm has completed more than a dozen wind farm projects, most of them in Texas and two in New Mexico. The company recently began another wind farm outside Amarillo that will feature 87 GE wind turbines.
Brownsville is a promising site for a wind farm, though the project could meet an obstacle in the form of Brownsville South Padre Island International Airport's plans to extend its runway, Hornaday said.
A longer runway would mean planes on approach would fly lower farther away from the airport, which could preclude construction of towering wind turbine.
It's premature to say, though, since it all comes down to where Cielo wants to build versus how airspace is affected. Airport officials hope to extend the main runway from its current 7,400 feet to 10,000 feet or longer. An environmental review is still under way, though, and no funding has been allocated for the project yet.
"Obviously if you extend the runway there's more airspace that's going to be covered," Director of Aviation Larry Brown said. That said, it's not yet clear to what extent changes in airspace would affect Cielo's plans, he said.
"Until we know more details, we can't answer the question," Brown said. "It's all going to be a function of math."
He said Corpus Christi's airport is dealing with airspace issues arising from wind farms located south and east of Sarita.
Hornaday said he hopes Cielo, if it does decide to move forward with a project at the port, can come to an arrangement with the airport amenable to all parties concerned.
"We're trying to see what they will allow to be done," he said. "It's highly speculative at this point. It's a great, windy area. The pieces are there. It's a good wind resource and there's a growing demand for electricity, but there are a lot of moving parts."
We suspect those opposed to energy generated by wind turbines will be rubbing their hands together with a good deal of glee this morning, following revelations that the wind farm industry is being propped up by domestic energy bills.
New figures indicate that wind turbine owners received 1.2 billion in consumer subsidies last year. That is, unquestionably, a staggeringly large amount to draw from the public purse at any time, let alone in this period of austerity.
So it seems clear that this assessment of the balance sheet for wind power will be another blow for an industry already reeling from the Government's recent announcement that new rules will give people greater powers to block turbine applications, when they are proposed near where they live.
We do not, however, subscribe to the view that all wind turbines must therefore be uprooted and dismantled. Far from it. wind energy is a new technology that should and does command significant investment. There is no doubt that wind energy is here to stay. It must surely be allowed to play a part in helping keep the lights on as traditional high-carbon energy sources diminish.
Wind farm rallies blow into town
Opposing sides of an increasingly bitter wind farm debate will rally in Canberra on Tuesday, with supporters gathering in the city and opponents at Parliament House.
Wind farms bring billions of dollars in new investment to regional areas according to their supporters, but households are being slugged with higher power bills, according to opponents.
Crookwell grazier Charlie Prell, who wants to host residential wind turbines, said opponents were wealthy, well-connected landholders who did not want to look at the turbines.
"To be honest, we need to stand up and fight for what we believe in," Mr Prell said. He is a spokesman for NSW Regional Renewables Alliance, a group of 70 landholders and regional businesses, and said the rally in Garema Place at noon would be supported by various groups, including chief organisers Friends of the Earth and the online activist group GetUp! Action for Australia.
In a statement Mr Prell said the Renewable Energy Target had generated $18.5 billion over 12 years and reduced electricity prices by 8 per cent.
Alliance member, Goulburn earthmoving contractor Andy Divall said the RET was making a big difference in regional NSW.
"In the 25 years we have been in business we haven't seen anything like the opportunities the renewables industry will bring to the region," he said. Another alliance member, Tarago farmer Joan Limon said: "There are six turbines on my property. They take up very little land. The closest is 800 metres from my house and they don't worry me, my sheep or my cattle."
Rallying from 11am under a "Wind Power Fraud" banner, critics will say every turbine is issued between 8000 and 10,000 renewable energy certificates every year, which translates into a tax on power consumers.
Friends of Collector president Tony Hodgson said the rally at Parliament House would show growing opposition to industrial wind power because of rising costs to the community for no benefit.
Mr Hodgson said $52 billion in wind subsidies would ultimately be paid by electricity consumers and taxpayers over the next 18 years.
"The 63 turbines at the proposed wind farm at Collector alone could attract almost $1 billion in that time if the same system of RECs remains in place."
Joining the anti-wind farm rally will be Boorowa and Yass "landscape guardians". Mary Ann Robinson from the Yass group said their battle with wind farm proponent Epuron was in flux because Epuron had to re-submit planning documents for a large project west of the town.
Wind farms bring billions of dollars in new investment to regional areas according to their supporters, but households are being slugged with higher power bills, according to opponents.
Crookwell grazier Charlie Prell, who wants to host residential wind turbines, said opponents were wealthy, well-connected landholders who did not want to look at the turbines.
"To be honest, we need to stand up and fight for what we believe in," Mr Prell said. He is a spokesman for NSW Regional Renewables Alliance, a group of 70 landholders and regional businesses, and said the rally in Garema Place at noon would be supported by various groups, including chief organisers Friends of the Earth and the online activist group GetUp! Action for Australia.
In a statement Mr Prell said the Renewable Energy Target had generated $18.5 billion over 12 years and reduced electricity prices by 8 per cent.
Alliance member, Goulburn earthmoving contractor Andy Divall said the RET was making a big difference in regional NSW.
"In the 25 years we have been in business we haven't seen anything like the opportunities the renewables industry will bring to the region," he said. Another alliance member, Tarago farmer Joan Limon said: "There are six turbines on my property. They take up very little land. The closest is 800 metres from my house and they don't worry me, my sheep or my cattle."
Rallying from 11am under a "Wind Power Fraud" banner, critics will say every turbine is issued between 8000 and 10,000 renewable energy certificates every year, which translates into a tax on power consumers.
Friends of Collector president Tony Hodgson said the rally at Parliament House would show growing opposition to industrial wind power because of rising costs to the community for no benefit.
Mr Hodgson said $52 billion in wind subsidies would ultimately be paid by electricity consumers and taxpayers over the next 18 years.
"The 63 turbines at the proposed wind farm at Collector alone could attract almost $1 billion in that time if the same system of RECs remains in place."
Joining the anti-wind farm rally will be Boorowa and Yass "landscape guardians". Mary Ann Robinson from the Yass group said their battle with wind farm proponent Epuron was in flux because Epuron had to re-submit planning documents for a large project west of the town.
2013年6月12日 星期三
Wind farm generates fund money
The county's biggest wind farm has handed over its first community payment to surrounding villages. The 11-turbine Swinford wind farm, south of Lutterworth, has been generating green electricity since November.
As part of the planning approval, the company agreed to set up the community fund. Energy firm Vattenfall marked the project's first six months generating power at the weekend with a day of fun, games and activities for the family at the wind farm site and at South Kilworth.
The company also handed over 44,000, the first of 25 annual payments which will go into the combined fund during the life of the wind farm.
Michael Murphy, chairman of the community fund, who supported the project, said: "Vattenfall's contribution to a community fund will greatly help community life over the next two decades.
"Applications have been received for the fund to support a range of projects, from sports equipment for young people to community buses.
"I would encourage anyone who has any other suggestions to get in touch. Application forms can be picked up from parish councils."
Thousands of residents opposed the scheme and raised more than 50,000 to fight it at a planning inquiry.
However, the go-ahead was granted by then Secretary of State, John Denham, with the project due to power up to 12,000 homes a year.
Graham Hart, county councillor for the area, said: "Not everyone, myself included, welcomed the idea of wind turbines initially.
"But we're now delighted Vattenfall is investing in the future of our communities, with the parish councils and young people having their say in how the money is spent."
The family day featured a marquee full of arts, crafts and games, and saw the announcement of the winners of a turbine-naming competition run with children from South Kilworth and Swinford School.
Seven-year-old Harvey Everton, from Swinford School, won the overall prize for his artwork and naming one of the turbines Swift.
Later in the day, the event moved to South Kilworth village hall, where there was live music, activities for children, along with food and refreshments. The project took just over a year to construct and UK companies received key contracts.
Piers Guy, Vattenfall's head of onshore wind development in the UK, said: "It was great to see so many of the community taking part in the inauguration event.
"Being on site not only gave them the opportunity to get involved in the activities on the day, but also gave them the chance to see the wind farm up close.
"We were very happy to present the first year of community funding, which we are sure will have a very real impact in the area."
The turbine towers were constructed in south Wales and another British company was contracted to carry out all the civil engineering work on site.
Businesses in the area also received contracts to provide environmental and geographical surveying, site security, and gravel for the access tracks was supplied by a nearby quarry.
As part of the planning approval, the company agreed to set up the community fund. Energy firm Vattenfall marked the project's first six months generating power at the weekend with a day of fun, games and activities for the family at the wind farm site and at South Kilworth.
The company also handed over 44,000, the first of 25 annual payments which will go into the combined fund during the life of the wind farm.
Michael Murphy, chairman of the community fund, who supported the project, said: "Vattenfall's contribution to a community fund will greatly help community life over the next two decades.
"Applications have been received for the fund to support a range of projects, from sports equipment for young people to community buses.
"I would encourage anyone who has any other suggestions to get in touch. Application forms can be picked up from parish councils."
Thousands of residents opposed the scheme and raised more than 50,000 to fight it at a planning inquiry.
However, the go-ahead was granted by then Secretary of State, John Denham, with the project due to power up to 12,000 homes a year.
Graham Hart, county councillor for the area, said: "Not everyone, myself included, welcomed the idea of wind turbines initially.
"But we're now delighted Vattenfall is investing in the future of our communities, with the parish councils and young people having their say in how the money is spent."
The family day featured a marquee full of arts, crafts and games, and saw the announcement of the winners of a turbine-naming competition run with children from South Kilworth and Swinford School.
Seven-year-old Harvey Everton, from Swinford School, won the overall prize for his artwork and naming one of the turbines Swift.
Later in the day, the event moved to South Kilworth village hall, where there was live music, activities for children, along with food and refreshments. The project took just over a year to construct and UK companies received key contracts.
Piers Guy, Vattenfall's head of onshore wind development in the UK, said: "It was great to see so many of the community taking part in the inauguration event.
"Being on site not only gave them the opportunity to get involved in the activities on the day, but also gave them the chance to see the wind farm up close.
"We were very happy to present the first year of community funding, which we are sure will have a very real impact in the area."
The turbine towers were constructed in south Wales and another British company was contracted to carry out all the civil engineering work on site.
Businesses in the area also received contracts to provide environmental and geographical surveying, site security, and gravel for the access tracks was supplied by a nearby quarry.
Offshore Wind Rules Set New Standard
The new Rules form part of the wider Mobile Offshore Unit Rule set 2013 launched by Lloyd’s Register in June, and is for vessels engaged in installation and/or maintenance activities relating to offshore wind turbines. It covers a number of unit types as well as liftboats, whose primary function is to provide support services to offshore wind turbine installations or other types of offshore installation.
Vessels which comply with the requirements of the new Rules will be eligible for a new classification notation.
The release of the new Rules and Guidance Notes coincides with reports that operators are suffering from the substantial incremental rise in the cost of constructing offshore wind assets and is casting new light on the value of independent third-party assurance, and how certification authorities are informing asset design and construction.
Rob Whillock, Offshore Renewables Lead Naval Architect at Lloyd’s Register said, “It is critical that throughout the process of independent assurance, there is an eye to the future of the industry as well as current guidelines.”
Offshore wind projects have tended to run late and over-budget, but the industry is forecast to grow at pace. The European Environment Agency’s (EEA) estimates that Europe’s offshore wind potential is able to meet the continent’s energy demand seven times over.
Whillock states that modern certification authorities have to offer technical solutions that recognize industry’s future growth.
“As the industry matures, we will see a greater number of larger turbines being installed in deeper water and further from shore, such as the planned 9GW wind farm at Dogger Bank, which lies some 125km off the east coast of England,” said Whillock. “Such developments will require owners and operators of offshore wind farms to rethink their installation and service vessels entirely. The new Lloyd’s Register Rules highlight the importance of independent technical assessment of structures, systems and capabilities. We are demonstrating to the world that our offshore Rules reflect best practice.”
The intention of the new Lloyd’s Register Rules is to help clients understand the classification process and clearly set out the rules to be applied to various vessels and unit types, from the Lloyd’s Register classed ship to the Mobile Offshore Unit.
To support the development of these new Rules, Lloyd’s Register developed a set of client guidance notes (titled Mobile Offshore Units - Wind Turbine Installation Vessels) which were also approved at the recent Offshore Technical Committee where more than 100 industry stakeholders attended Lloyd’s Register’s Singapore based Group Technology Centre. These guidance notes provide summary information on classification rules and regulations, national administration requirements, documentation required to be submitted, and the Rules requirements for various types of units used in installing and maintaining offshore wind turbines.
More information about the program is available on the web site at www.scfwindturbine.com.
Vessels which comply with the requirements of the new Rules will be eligible for a new classification notation.
The release of the new Rules and Guidance Notes coincides with reports that operators are suffering from the substantial incremental rise in the cost of constructing offshore wind assets and is casting new light on the value of independent third-party assurance, and how certification authorities are informing asset design and construction.
Rob Whillock, Offshore Renewables Lead Naval Architect at Lloyd’s Register said, “It is critical that throughout the process of independent assurance, there is an eye to the future of the industry as well as current guidelines.”
Offshore wind projects have tended to run late and over-budget, but the industry is forecast to grow at pace. The European Environment Agency’s (EEA) estimates that Europe’s offshore wind potential is able to meet the continent’s energy demand seven times over.
Whillock states that modern certification authorities have to offer technical solutions that recognize industry’s future growth.
“As the industry matures, we will see a greater number of larger turbines being installed in deeper water and further from shore, such as the planned 9GW wind farm at Dogger Bank, which lies some 125km off the east coast of England,” said Whillock. “Such developments will require owners and operators of offshore wind farms to rethink their installation and service vessels entirely. The new Lloyd’s Register Rules highlight the importance of independent technical assessment of structures, systems and capabilities. We are demonstrating to the world that our offshore Rules reflect best practice.”
The intention of the new Lloyd’s Register Rules is to help clients understand the classification process and clearly set out the rules to be applied to various vessels and unit types, from the Lloyd’s Register classed ship to the Mobile Offshore Unit.
To support the development of these new Rules, Lloyd’s Register developed a set of client guidance notes (titled Mobile Offshore Units - Wind Turbine Installation Vessels) which were also approved at the recent Offshore Technical Committee where more than 100 industry stakeholders attended Lloyd’s Register’s Singapore based Group Technology Centre. These guidance notes provide summary information on classification rules and regulations, national administration requirements, documentation required to be submitted, and the Rules requirements for various types of units used in installing and maintaining offshore wind turbines.
More information about the program is available on the web site at www.scfwindturbine.com.
2013年6月7日 星期五
Wind farms are a 'complete scam'
Wind farms have been branded a 'complete scam' by Environment Secretary Owen Paterson, reigniting coalition battle over green power.
As the government unveiled new powers for local residents to block turbines blighting their villages, Mr Paterson condemned many planned schemes as 'deeply unpopular' and causing 'huge unhappiness' across the country.
The outspoken remarks from a senior Tory minister in charge of environmental policy risks a furious reaction from Liberal Democrats pushing for more renewable power projects.
The Conservatives have taken a tougher line on wind farms in recent months, and this week unveiled plans to give communities a powerful 'veto' over controversial new onshore developments.
Schemes will have to gain local residents' consent before a planning application can even be made, effectively handing them the power to prevent turbines being erected.
Planning rules are also to be changed so that the drive for renewable energy can no longer be used as a reason for overriding environmental and other concerns.
Mr Paterson signalled that plans for wind farms will have to take into account the impact on the countryside and views as well as the desire to save the planet.
In an extraordinary intervention at the Royal Cornwall Show yesterday, the Tory Cabinet minister said: 'Turbines are regarded as a complete scam, but as of today we have given power to local communities to decide.
'The criteria is now that environment and landscape will have to be taken into consideration as well as the national energy requirement.'
Under the new rules councils must look at the cumulative impact of wind turbines and reflect the effect on landscape and local facilities.
There is also a major increase promised in the amount developers pay local communities to win them over, including long-term electricity bill discounts of up to 20 per cent.
However, Mr Paterson suggested anger with many schemes would not be overcome by additional bribes.
He added:'I know there is huge unhappiness with some of these projects, both from what I hear nationally and from my own constituency in Shropshire.
'There are places where these projects are well prepared, the community wants it and it will be worthwhile. But in inland areas they are very often deeply unpopular,' the Western Morning News reported.
Leila Deen, Greenpeace energy campaigner, said: 'Wind farms may seem like a scam to a Government minister who questions the science of climate change and who's pushing for his Shropshire constituency to be fracked for shale gas.
'The public disagrees - two thirds of people would rather have a wind turbine near their home than a fracking site.
'Onshore wind powered almost 2.5 million homes in 2011, is falling in cost and will play a key role in our future energy mix.'
Mr Paterson's appointment to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs last September was controversial, with allies forced to deny he was a climate change denier.
In 2007, he described wind farms as ridiculous, claiming they 'demand vast amounts of public subsidy and do not work'.
As the government unveiled new powers for local residents to block turbines blighting their villages, Mr Paterson condemned many planned schemes as 'deeply unpopular' and causing 'huge unhappiness' across the country.
The outspoken remarks from a senior Tory minister in charge of environmental policy risks a furious reaction from Liberal Democrats pushing for more renewable power projects.
The Conservatives have taken a tougher line on wind farms in recent months, and this week unveiled plans to give communities a powerful 'veto' over controversial new onshore developments.
Schemes will have to gain local residents' consent before a planning application can even be made, effectively handing them the power to prevent turbines being erected.
Planning rules are also to be changed so that the drive for renewable energy can no longer be used as a reason for overriding environmental and other concerns.
Mr Paterson signalled that plans for wind farms will have to take into account the impact on the countryside and views as well as the desire to save the planet.
In an extraordinary intervention at the Royal Cornwall Show yesterday, the Tory Cabinet minister said: 'Turbines are regarded as a complete scam, but as of today we have given power to local communities to decide.
'The criteria is now that environment and landscape will have to be taken into consideration as well as the national energy requirement.'
Under the new rules councils must look at the cumulative impact of wind turbines and reflect the effect on landscape and local facilities.
There is also a major increase promised in the amount developers pay local communities to win them over, including long-term electricity bill discounts of up to 20 per cent.
However, Mr Paterson suggested anger with many schemes would not be overcome by additional bribes.
He added:'I know there is huge unhappiness with some of these projects, both from what I hear nationally and from my own constituency in Shropshire.
'There are places where these projects are well prepared, the community wants it and it will be worthwhile. But in inland areas they are very often deeply unpopular,' the Western Morning News reported.
Leila Deen, Greenpeace energy campaigner, said: 'Wind farms may seem like a scam to a Government minister who questions the science of climate change and who's pushing for his Shropshire constituency to be fracked for shale gas.
'The public disagrees - two thirds of people would rather have a wind turbine near their home than a fracking site.
'Onshore wind powered almost 2.5 million homes in 2011, is falling in cost and will play a key role in our future energy mix.'
Mr Paterson's appointment to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs last September was controversial, with allies forced to deny he was a climate change denier.
In 2007, he described wind farms as ridiculous, claiming they 'demand vast amounts of public subsidy and do not work'.
Wind farm seeks permit to avoid fines in case of eagle deaths
A wind farm being developed in Osage County has applied for federal bald eagle "take" permits for the deaths of up to three of the protected birds each year for at least five years.
Opponents of the permit, including conservationists and tribes in the area, say they aren't against "green" energy investments. However, they are firmly against the placement of the planned 94-turbine wind farm, which is surrounded within five miles by several active bald eagle nests.
Wind Capital Group, a St. Louis-based energy organization, battled the Osage Nation - which has local interests in oil and gas - until late 2011 over the right to build the wind farm on land the tribe said was former hunting grounds and would be damaged by the project.
Tom Green, senior manager of project development for Wind Capital Group's Osage Wind farm, said he's eager to get the project built and confident that turbine construction will begin soon and finish next year.
"When I started in this business, I never imagined that people would think that wind was the environmental problem," Green said.
Steve Sherrod, executive director of the Sutton Avian Research Center in Bartlesville, said wind farms can lead to a multitude of environmental problems for eagles and ground animals.
Animals can mistake the moving shadows of wind turbine for predators, said Sherrod, whose organization helped rehabilitate the bald eagle population by raising eagles from hatchlings and releasing them into the wild.
Eagles may travel up to 50 miles between feeding area and nest, according to the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, and Sherrod said he's opposed to the wind farm's being so close to the eagles' hunting grounds.
"If you look at one site, it's not that big of a deal, but you look at all the sites ... collectively, you're looking at a huge impact," he said.
According to the Department of Wildlife Conservation, 800 to 2,000 eagles inhabit Oklahoma each year, with peak numbers in January and February.
Sherrod said wind farms across the nation are being built in previously untouched areas and upset the ecosystem not just for eagles but for all wildlife.
The permit for Osage Wind - filed late last year - has not been approved, but Green said the government agency has been positive about its outcome and that the construction of turbines is still planned to start as soon as this summer.
Green said the company is working to protect eagles alongside the project as much as possible and that in the permit process it included plans to help the eagle population.
"The eagle permit is something that has been developed over the last several years with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, environmental groups and outside agencies," he said.
The killing of bald eagles - even incidentally as part of some other action - violates federal law. The acquisition of permits to kill them is voluntary and is taken as a precaution to avoid steep fines of up to $500,000 per offense under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Scott BigHorse, assistant principal chief of the Osage Nation, said that during the ongoing battle between the tribe and Wind Capital, it has wanted the business to compromise on the land use and project scope. He said the plans for the property began in 2007 but that little to no interaction took place with the tribe.
"These were our hunting grounds. It was our domain," BigHorse said. "I don't know why they didn't come to the tribe. ... We could have sat down at the table, ... and we could have strategically placed these wind turbines to where they are not so much in the path."
BigHorse said the issue is also of high cultural significance to the tribe because of the importance of eagle feathers. The feathers are used in rituals "from when their (Indian children's) little feet hit the ground to the time of their passing, when we put them in the ground."
Opponents of the permit, including conservationists and tribes in the area, say they aren't against "green" energy investments. However, they are firmly against the placement of the planned 94-turbine wind farm, which is surrounded within five miles by several active bald eagle nests.
Wind Capital Group, a St. Louis-based energy organization, battled the Osage Nation - which has local interests in oil and gas - until late 2011 over the right to build the wind farm on land the tribe said was former hunting grounds and would be damaged by the project.
Tom Green, senior manager of project development for Wind Capital Group's Osage Wind farm, said he's eager to get the project built and confident that turbine construction will begin soon and finish next year.
"When I started in this business, I never imagined that people would think that wind was the environmental problem," Green said.
Steve Sherrod, executive director of the Sutton Avian Research Center in Bartlesville, said wind farms can lead to a multitude of environmental problems for eagles and ground animals.
Animals can mistake the moving shadows of wind turbine for predators, said Sherrod, whose organization helped rehabilitate the bald eagle population by raising eagles from hatchlings and releasing them into the wild.
Eagles may travel up to 50 miles between feeding area and nest, according to the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation, and Sherrod said he's opposed to the wind farm's being so close to the eagles' hunting grounds.
"If you look at one site, it's not that big of a deal, but you look at all the sites ... collectively, you're looking at a huge impact," he said.
According to the Department of Wildlife Conservation, 800 to 2,000 eagles inhabit Oklahoma each year, with peak numbers in January and February.
Sherrod said wind farms across the nation are being built in previously untouched areas and upset the ecosystem not just for eagles but for all wildlife.
The permit for Osage Wind - filed late last year - has not been approved, but Green said the government agency has been positive about its outcome and that the construction of turbines is still planned to start as soon as this summer.
Green said the company is working to protect eagles alongside the project as much as possible and that in the permit process it included plans to help the eagle population.
"The eagle permit is something that has been developed over the last several years with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, environmental groups and outside agencies," he said.
The killing of bald eagles - even incidentally as part of some other action - violates federal law. The acquisition of permits to kill them is voluntary and is taken as a precaution to avoid steep fines of up to $500,000 per offense under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
Scott BigHorse, assistant principal chief of the Osage Nation, said that during the ongoing battle between the tribe and Wind Capital, it has wanted the business to compromise on the land use and project scope. He said the plans for the property began in 2007 but that little to no interaction took place with the tribe.
"These were our hunting grounds. It was our domain," BigHorse said. "I don't know why they didn't come to the tribe. ... We could have sat down at the table, ... and we could have strategically placed these wind turbines to where they are not so much in the path."
BigHorse said the issue is also of high cultural significance to the tribe because of the importance of eagle feathers. The feathers are used in rituals "from when their (Indian children's) little feet hit the ground to the time of their passing, when we put them in the ground."
2013年6月2日 星期日
No Wynne on wind
Premier Kathleen Wynne last week promised to give municipal governments a greater say in the location of industrial wind turbines (IWTs) in their communities, short of being able to veto them.
In other words, she’s promising residents across Ontario battling the imposition of industrial wind factories on their communities any and all assistance, short of help.
Given the Liberals’ appalling history on this issue, skepticism is justified about anything they say.
Indeed, the determination of Wynne’s predecessor, Dalton McGuinty, to ram IWTs down the throats of communities across Ontario is one of the most shameful episodes in the Liberals’ 10-year record of government.
People who objected to IWTs were mocked as suffering from NIMBYism (not-in-my-backyard syndrome) by McGuinty.
His Green Energy Act took away the rights of local municipalities to any say in the location of these giant, industrial wind factories.
When people started complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines, environment ministry officials lied to them.
They told them they were the only ones complaining — implying it was all in their heads — when in fact the ministry was receiving hundreds of complaints from across Ontario.More information about the program is available on the web site at www.scfwindturbine.com.
A 2011 CBC news investigation, which obtained 1,000 pages of internal government documents through a Freedom of Information request, revealed that even as the environment ministry was publicly downplaying the growing controversy, it was internally warning the government its noise limits and setbacks for wind turbines were flawed, inadequate, hard to monitor and difficult to enforce.
Meanwhile the Liberals publicly mouthed the same platitudes as the wind industry they were enriching by paying outrageous prices for unreliable electricity.
That fiasco was fully documented by then auditor general Jim McCarter in his devastating 2011 assessment of the Liberals’ renewable energy program. He concluded poor Liberal decision-making will cost Ontarians billions of dollars on their hydro bills for generations to come.
Meanwhile, back on the health front, the Liberals and the wind industry insisted scientific studies, often funded by the wind industry, showed turbines were safe.
They also cited a 2010 literature review by Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health which found no “direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” At the same time, wind companies were buying out families driven from their homes by turbine noise, vibration and flickering, while making them sign confidentiality agreements, so they couldn’t talk about it.
More recently, however, there has been a growing pushback against the Liberals’ scurrilous suggestion anyone complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines must be a NIMBY or nuts.
An article in the May issue of Canadian Family Physician — official journal of The College of Family Physicians of Canada — warns doctors to brace for increasing numbers of medical complaints from people living close to industrial wind turbines.
“Adverse health affects of industrial wind turbines”, by Dr. Roy D. Jeffery, Carmen Krough and Brett Horner notes, “people who live or work in close proximity to IWTs have experienced symptoms that include decreased quality of life, annoyance, stress, sleep disturbance, headache, anxiety, depression and cognitive dysfunction. Some have also felt anger, grief or a sense of injustice. Suggested causes of symptoms include a combination of wind turbine noise, infrasound, dirty electricity, ground current and shadow flicker.”
The article cited a 2011 Ontario environmental review tribunal which concluded: “This case has successfully shown that the debate should not be simplified to one about whether wind turbines can cause harm to humans. The evidence presented to the Tribunal demonstrates that they can, if facilities are placed too close to residents. The debate has now evolved to one of degree.”
In other words, she’s promising residents across Ontario battling the imposition of industrial wind factories on their communities any and all assistance, short of help.
Given the Liberals’ appalling history on this issue, skepticism is justified about anything they say.
Indeed, the determination of Wynne’s predecessor, Dalton McGuinty, to ram IWTs down the throats of communities across Ontario is one of the most shameful episodes in the Liberals’ 10-year record of government.
People who objected to IWTs were mocked as suffering from NIMBYism (not-in-my-backyard syndrome) by McGuinty.
His Green Energy Act took away the rights of local municipalities to any say in the location of these giant, industrial wind factories.
When people started complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines, environment ministry officials lied to them.
A 2011 CBC news investigation, which obtained 1,000 pages of internal government documents through a Freedom of Information request, revealed that even as the environment ministry was publicly downplaying the growing controversy, it was internally warning the government its noise limits and setbacks for wind turbines were flawed, inadequate, hard to monitor and difficult to enforce.
Meanwhile the Liberals publicly mouthed the same platitudes as the wind industry they were enriching by paying outrageous prices for unreliable electricity.
That fiasco was fully documented by then auditor general Jim McCarter in his devastating 2011 assessment of the Liberals’ renewable energy program. He concluded poor Liberal decision-making will cost Ontarians billions of dollars on their hydro bills for generations to come.
Meanwhile, back on the health front, the Liberals and the wind industry insisted scientific studies, often funded by the wind industry, showed turbines were safe.
They also cited a 2010 literature review by Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health which found no “direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.” At the same time, wind companies were buying out families driven from their homes by turbine noise, vibration and flickering, while making them sign confidentiality agreements, so they couldn’t talk about it.
More recently, however, there has been a growing pushback against the Liberals’ scurrilous suggestion anyone complaining about adverse health effects from wind turbines must be a NIMBY or nuts.
An article in the May issue of Canadian Family Physician — official journal of The College of Family Physicians of Canada — warns doctors to brace for increasing numbers of medical complaints from people living close to industrial wind turbines.
“Adverse health affects of industrial wind turbines”, by Dr. Roy D. Jeffery, Carmen Krough and Brett Horner notes, “people who live or work in close proximity to IWTs have experienced symptoms that include decreased quality of life, annoyance, stress, sleep disturbance, headache, anxiety, depression and cognitive dysfunction. Some have also felt anger, grief or a sense of injustice. Suggested causes of symptoms include a combination of wind turbine noise, infrasound, dirty electricity, ground current and shadow flicker.”
The article cited a 2011 Ontario environmental review tribunal which concluded: “This case has successfully shown that the debate should not be simplified to one about whether wind turbines can cause harm to humans. The evidence presented to the Tribunal demonstrates that they can, if facilities are placed too close to residents. The debate has now evolved to one of degree.”
Mindless "green" indoctrination of children
Although fracking has been used for 60 years, in combination with deep horizontal drilling it has sent US oil and gas production sharply upward for the first time in decades, turned "imminent depletion" into another century of affordable petroleum, generated millions of jobs and billions of dollars in government revenues, kept home heating and electricity prices from skyrocketing in the face of EPA's war on coal, brought a resurgence in US petrochemical and other industries, and helped reduce CO2 emissions (which should make Earth Guardians and other global warming true believers happy). It's meant fewer oil imports, improved balance of trade, and more opportunities to lift more people out of poverty worldwide.
A recent IHS Global Insight report documents that, in the United States alone, fracking has already created 1.7 million new direct and indirect jobs, with the total likely to rise to 3 million jobs over the next eight years. It's added $62 billion to federal and state treasuries, with that total expected to rise to $111 billion by 2020. And by 2035, it could inject over $5 trillion in cumulative capital expenditures into the economy, while generating over $2.5 trillion in cumulative additional government revenues.
By contrast, $26 billion taken from taxpayers and given to wind, solar and biofuel energy projects via Department of Energy subsidies and loan guarantees since 2009 created only 2,298 permanent jobs, at a cost of $11.45 million per job, the Institute for Energy Research calculates, using DOE data.
If more of this new natural gas were devoted to generating electricity – instead of just backing up 40,000 US wind turbines – millions of birds and bats would not be slaughtered every year, and vital species would not be driven to the brink of extinction in wildlife habitats that have been blanketed by turbines.
The Earth Guardians ignore all of this, and claim hydraulic fracturing is poisoning our air and water.
The facts say otherwise. As the film FrackNation and numerous articles and reports have documented, there has never been a confirmed case of groundwater contamination due to fracking, despite numerous investigations by state agencies and the US Environmental Protection Agency. There is no evidence of air or people being poisoned, and companies continue to improve their technologies, to reduce methane leakage and employ more biodegradable and "kitchen cabinet" chemicals.
But the Earth Guardians still deliver outright falsehoods about fracking, by children to children, in public schools funded by taxpayer dollars. Perhaps this goes on because teachers and school administrators fail to recognize the potential harm, or are themselves devoted to promoting extreme environmentalist ideologies. Certainly they failed to exercise their responsibility and authority as educators to provide a balanced curriculum and avoid being used by groups with political agendas, to inculcate a new generation of Americans in perverse Hard Green dogmas that are harmful to wildlife, people and the environment.
Why is it that the Earth Guardians, Sierra Club and similar groups detest fracking? Maybe because this technology demolishes their Club of Rome claims that mankind is about to run out of petroleum – or because it means fossil fuels are again on the ascendency, making wind and solar even less viable and further demonstrating that wind energy is a far less sustainable energy resource than petroleum.
Even older students are vulnerable to being spoon-fed incorrect information. And student voters who are reluctant or too disinterested to seek truthful information can have a profound impact on U.S. elections and national policy.
A recent IHS Global Insight report documents that, in the United States alone, fracking has already created 1.7 million new direct and indirect jobs, with the total likely to rise to 3 million jobs over the next eight years. It's added $62 billion to federal and state treasuries, with that total expected to rise to $111 billion by 2020. And by 2035, it could inject over $5 trillion in cumulative capital expenditures into the economy, while generating over $2.5 trillion in cumulative additional government revenues.
By contrast, $26 billion taken from taxpayers and given to wind, solar and biofuel energy projects via Department of Energy subsidies and loan guarantees since 2009 created only 2,298 permanent jobs, at a cost of $11.45 million per job, the Institute for Energy Research calculates, using DOE data.
If more of this new natural gas were devoted to generating electricity – instead of just backing up 40,000 US wind turbines – millions of birds and bats would not be slaughtered every year, and vital species would not be driven to the brink of extinction in wildlife habitats that have been blanketed by turbines.
The Earth Guardians ignore all of this, and claim hydraulic fracturing is poisoning our air and water.
The facts say otherwise. As the film FrackNation and numerous articles and reports have documented, there has never been a confirmed case of groundwater contamination due to fracking, despite numerous investigations by state agencies and the US Environmental Protection Agency. There is no evidence of air or people being poisoned, and companies continue to improve their technologies, to reduce methane leakage and employ more biodegradable and "kitchen cabinet" chemicals.
But the Earth Guardians still deliver outright falsehoods about fracking, by children to children, in public schools funded by taxpayer dollars. Perhaps this goes on because teachers and school administrators fail to recognize the potential harm, or are themselves devoted to promoting extreme environmentalist ideologies. Certainly they failed to exercise their responsibility and authority as educators to provide a balanced curriculum and avoid being used by groups with political agendas, to inculcate a new generation of Americans in perverse Hard Green dogmas that are harmful to wildlife, people and the environment.
Why is it that the Earth Guardians, Sierra Club and similar groups detest fracking? Maybe because this technology demolishes their Club of Rome claims that mankind is about to run out of petroleum – or because it means fossil fuels are again on the ascendency, making wind and solar even less viable and further demonstrating that wind energy is a far less sustainable energy resource than petroleum.
Even older students are vulnerable to being spoon-fed incorrect information. And student voters who are reluctant or too disinterested to seek truthful information can have a profound impact on U.S. elections and national policy.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)