AUBURN — Even though the bulk of all wind power regulations at the town level are pretty much the same, they can differ in big ways.
Panelists at a planning conference Thursday afternoon at Auburn's Hilton Garden Inn reviewed three ordinances designed to put limits on power-generating wind turbines. They looked at ordinances adopted by the town of Phillips, a measure being considered in the town of Dixfield and one being drawn up by Bethel and its neighbors.
About 120 town officials, managers and selectmen from across central Maine attended the daylong convention hosted by the Androscoggin Valley Council of Governments.
AVCOG planner John Maloney noted that most of the officials attending stayed for the afternoon session.
"This should be a good item," Maloney said. "Most times, people leave right after lunch."
Maloney said the discussion wasn't a debate about the merits of wind power, but about how towns have tried to regulate them.
The state's model ordinance suggests limiting noise generated by a wind turbine to 45 decibels at night and 55 during the day when it's measured at nearby residences.
But Dain Trafton, Planning Board member for the town of Phillips, said their ordinance went deeper.
"There is a great deal of controversy about noise, and we were not happy with any of the other solutions that were presented," he said. The town worked with an acoustic engineer to draw up rules that change based on individual turbines. Louder turbines need to be farther back.
"This approach benefits the manufacturer of quieter turbines," Trafton said.
Jim Doar, town manager of Bethel, said he has been working with the towns of Newry, Woodstock, Greenwood and Hanover to come up with regulations that suit all of them.
"It doesn't make much sense for Newry to have a limit of 35 decibels if Bethel builds a 65-decibel turbine within town limits that's going to affect Newry's residents," Doar said. He said he hoped work on that regional plan would be finished by the end of the year, in time to be voted on during next year's town meetings.
Kay Rand, of Bernstein Shur Government Solutions, cautioned town officials not to be too strict. Rand represents wind energy company FirstWind, but said that was not her purpose Thursday.
One section of a measure adopted in Rumford limits low frequency sound to 20 decibels.
"But a wind power manufacturer pointed out that they just cannot comply with that," Rand said. "At 20 decibels, the wind was that loud by itself. Wind power strong enough to turn a turbine was already that loud."
Report a correction
FoulWind LLC
Who does CandyAnne want to believe, the sound eng. from FirstWind? C'mon, really. This company wants any zoning ignored or rewritten, the DEP standards loosened up so far they might as well not exist, wetlands protection made nonexistent and LURC forgotten about. Why wouldn't any town look upon them as suspicious? The oil argument is silly. I came up I95 today at 75 mph and I must have been passed 50 times. If people were so concerned about saving oil they would slow down. If we all went the limit it would save 100 times more at least than the IMAGINARY savings from peppering Maine with thousands of wind turbines. That is preposterous. Denmark has increased its coal use every year since installing 6000 turbines. Wind energy is for the classroom. In the real world it is just a distraction from real solutions, and there is a cabal of opportunists who instead of robbing us with a gun and knife , will use lawyers and pencils to take our tax dollars.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.lol
Kay Rand, of Bernstein Shur Government Solutions, cautioned town officials not to be too strict. Rand represents wind energy company FirstWind, but said that was not her purpose Thursday.
One section of a measure adopted in Rumford limits low frequency sound to 20 decibels.
"But a wind power manufacturer pointed out that they just cannot comply with that," Rand said. "At 20 decibels, the wind was that loud by itself. Wind power strong enough to turn a turbine was already that loud."
^^^Oh yes, Kay, we'll be sure not to be too strict. LOL, you represent FirstWind and you expect us to trust that you're looking out for OUR best interest? Any sound studies would account for ambient noise and would take care of the 20 dB caused by wind.
I hope the towns hire their own acoustic engineer, one that is not tied up with wind interests. The low frequency noise is very important to take into consideration and is not currently taken into consideration by the state.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3) Agree (4)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Maine families vs. computer programs paid for by wind companies
Industrial wind parks emit different types of sounds that can't be compared to natural sounds. They are low frequency, repetitive, pulsating sounds that human minds try to interpret as speech. It is highly annoying and people can't get used to it. We can choose to believe the dozens of Maine families living withing a mile of these turbines who are experiencing major negative impacts and speaking out. Or we can choose to believe a computer program bought and paid for by a wind company that has no compassion for people living close to these machines.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1) Agree (7)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.20 decibels
but that is tha ambience of western Maine mountains most nights.
The wind as a spirit running through the trees; is a far cry from the mechanical sound of the turbine.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3) Agree (5)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.TEN CHEERS FOR PHILLIPS PLANNING BOARD!!!!
THREE CHEERS, NO MAKE IT TEN for the Phillips Planniing Board for bringing in an accoustical engineer and taking into consideration variances in turbines. This is the first time, other than the state process, where an experts have been brought in. It is so refreshing to see a town in Maine actually go to the effort to get educated about anything and make a informed decisions. Phillips may be on the way to being a town a business might consider an exception in the worst state in the country to do business.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1) Agree (4)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.There has been an acoustical
There has been an acoustical engineer who has studied Mars Hill and Freedom extensively who was at the last one or two forums held for the River Valley. You just didn't like what he said because just like in Phillips, the resulting ordinance would likely keep big wind out of Rumford.
Phillips did do a great job. They enacted a moratorium during the study and ordinance-writing phase, studied the subject in a very open way (multiple forums that anyone from the public could attend regardless of which town you live in), presented the ordinance for review, and then voted on it. They now have an ordinance which will protect their citizens. If you are a wind company, however, you're probably not going to find it inviting. MAYBE if the technology improves and the turbines are quieter, towns like Phillips will have more interest. But right now, it's buyer beware. They come in talking about one sized turbine and by the time they're done, the turbines could be quite a bit taller and noisier. It's about getting their foot in the door. Aside from the noise, there are the obvious asthetic issues and I don't blame a bucolic town like Phillips for wanting to protect their viewshed.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (2) Agree (3)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Have to disagree with your post
Litigants may have brought in accoustical engineers to Mars Hill and/or Freedom but it was after the fact and for litigation purposes not to prepare an ordinance before the fact. The only "accoustical" person to come to Rumford was with Karen Pease group and he came after the fact, had nothing to do with the town, the program was not sanctioned by the town and he did not work with the committee developing the ordinance. The "advisory committee" that has done zero advising besides delivering the permanent plus moratorium ordinance and threaten selectmen, the town manager, their families and business did not consult a single accoustical engineer or any other expert in any field related to the ordinance they produced, except maybe the local big oil company as to how they will benefit.
The second paragraph of your comment is the usual garbage not worthy of repeated reply, we have all heard it before and seen it discredited dozens if not hundreds of times.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (3)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hundreds? Really
Hmmmm. Robert Rand isn't "with" Karen Pease and he is the same engineer who presented to the residents of Phillips. I guess you're not gonna give ten cheers to Phillips anymore...
My second paragraph states how Phillips conducted themselves (not sure what can be disagreed with), how they worked to protect their town (again, it's all there in the ordinance), and how wind companies change the scale of their projects after they get a foot in the door. This is well established. They've done it in every town. Look it up.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1) Agree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Candicane is an expert on every topic
Has anyone else noticed how Candicane knows absolutely everything about every topic? She is an absolute genius.
If you don't believe me then just ask her. She'll be glad to tell you.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (5)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Highly Recommended Reading for Taxpayers and Ratepayers
Highly Recommended Reading for Taxpayers and Ratepayers
I read this great post today at the website of the Citizens Task Force on Wind Power in Maine. If you a re a taxpayer or ratepayer, this is highly recommended reading.
Feel great about what you are doing to help others...
TEN RATEPAYER AND TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES
The total cost of wind turbines and transmission upgrades, as envisioned by recently enacted Maine law, will be $7 billion. Via electric rates and taxes, Mainers will pay for this, but it will produce less than 700 megawatts of electricity.
Policymakers in the federal government have determined that certain energy sources are more desirable and less viable than others, so government incentives are granted to various energies. Here are the federal taxpayer subsidies paid by energy source in dollars per MW/Hour:
Natural Gas and Oil $.25
Geothermal $.92
Hydroelectric $.67
Coal $.44
Nuclear $1.59
Wind $23.37
1. Wind projects can take the “cash in lieu of investment tax credit” or the 1.9 cent production tax credit. For example, in 2009, First Wind, Maine’s most active wind developer, took over $100 million of federal taxpayer “cash in lieu” monies. In 2009 $849 million (or 84%) of US subsidies went to overseas companies.
Iberdrola of Spain took $545 million through its American subsidiary. Almost all of the billions of taxpayer dollars spent on US wind projects was for wind turbines, blades, and nacelles which were manufactured in foreign countries.
2. Wind developers also take a federal subsidy of 2.1 cents in renewable energy credit per kilowatt produced. Taxpayers bear this cost.
3. Despite creating imperceptible numbers of jobs, wind projects in Maine routinely get Tax Increment Financing and Community Benefit Arrangements which reduce their property tax obligations, thereby passing on tax burdens to other taxpayers.
4. Wind power is unpredictable, intermittent, and cannot be stored. So it must be used or lost as it is generated. The nature of this electricity requires an overbuilt grid that can handle these wild fluctuations and thermal stresses. Additionally, wind power is sited remotely, far from load (end users) so transmission costs are exacerbated even while electrons are lost in the distance traveled. Utilities build these unnecessary power lines and charge their ratepayers for the cost.
5. The only way that wind power can grow and still preserve system reliability is with grid expansion, like CMP’s $1.4 billion transmission upgrade (MPRP). Ratepayers will pay for this upgrade – as well as similar upgrades in the other New England states – through their electric bills.
6. In order to meet New England’s anticipated 12,000 MW of wind power buildup, the New England ISO forecasts building 4,320 new miles of transmission infrastructure with midrange costs between $19 and $25 billion. Ratepayers will get the bill.
7. Utilities are under pressure to acquire renewable energy (or credits) from wind farms in order to comply with the state Renewable Portfolio Standards. For each missing megawatt hour of renewable energy where the mandated percentages are not met, nearly every state in New England imposes a fee that is collected by each State's Public Utility Commission (PUC). The cost for either the renewable energy credit or the compliance fee is passed on to ratepayers in the form of higher electricity bills.
8. Current requirements mandate penalty payments for not meeting minimum renewable generating capacity levels. Penalties are currently 6 cents per Kw/Hr, escalating with inflation. Maine’s CMP & Bangor Hydro are presented with the incentive to sign with Maine wind generators to expensive long term contracts, or risk paying penalties with nothing to show for it. Maine ratepayers get the bill either way.
9. In the Pacific Northwest the Bonneville Power Authority overbuilt wind power for export to California, a state that mandated more renewable consumption. This critical mass of wind power is so difficult for the grid’s ISO to manage, it necessitated initiation of a surcharge on wind power which will be passed on to ratepayers. Maine’s buildup for Southern New England users could result in the same outcome.
10. Since Maine’s statutory wind generation goal will be intermittent and will largely produce off-peak and off-season, the ISO-NE will have to procure quick-start generation to back-up wind and to balance the grid. Not only does this require maintaining excess capacity in traditional generating plants like natural gas, it renders such traditional plants inefficient as they constantly start and stop, like city versus highway driving. Aside from increasing emissions, these combined capitol generation costs and inefficiency costs are shared among grid participants (socialized). They are not paid by the renewable generators, but by ratepayers.
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/10-ways-today-you-will-both
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1) Agree (13)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.