D. Corrigan: Contesting benefits of wind power

There are so many flaws in the editorial about wind power (Feb. 5) that it is hard to know where to start. From the mischaracterization of the Massachusetts report and the belittling of the so-called "vocal minority" (who are actually forced against their will to live with the health and economic effects of turbines), to the quote about "$1 billion in investment," most of which (the editorial failed to mention), has been taxpayer money, filtered through the hands of politically-connected developers at a time when the country can't afford such handouts.

One quote may have some merit: “And what it amounts to is like a very small desk being placed on a football field.”

Like a desk on a football field, wind turbines may seem small and benign to some, but just try playing the Super Bowl on that field, and you quickly find that the desk is both an extreme physical danger, and an economic disaster. It is in the wrong place and worse than useless.

Maine's mountains are her football field, and the $10 billion per year tourism industry is her Super Bowl. The year-round and seasonal residents who live on and around that field are her sponsors, her chief players and her economic engine.

Please keep those 400-foot-tall desks off our field.

And before someone complains about NIMBY-ism, the truth is that the experts say more electric generation isn't needed in Maine. If the time comes when we actually do, then I will be happy to lease a corner of my land for a generator that can actually work, like say, maybe a new generation thorium reactor.

David P. Corrigan, Concord Township

Registered Maine Master Guide

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...

In order to make comments, you must verify your account.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. A member of our staff will call you to verify this information. To join in, fill out your user profile completely and check the box "please verify my status." We'll get back to you within one business day to verify your account.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned.

Advertisement

Displaying comments, from newest to oldest

windsprawl's picture
verified

More lipstick

for the pig known as windsprawl. The cement pad is not the problem. What gets bolted to the pad and sticks 500 ft. into the air is. What makes noise and emits infrasound is also the problem. To only mention the pad is misleading, a deliberate intention to bolster a losing argument. The oft repeated phrase that people favor wind power is also misleading. In that all inclusive grouping are 500 ft. towers and 50 ft. home size with every thing in between. Many who favor small residential size turbines do NOT favor the industrial size behemoths. It sounds better for a losing position to group less objectionable items into a large pool. It might be overlooked be some. That people favor wind power itself is debatable and many polls show increasing opposition. Maybe the pollsters could ask "Do you favor electricity" and politicize the results as supporting windsprawl. Hire the right lawyers whose specialty is wordplay and it might fly...to an uninformed public. Mainers are noticing the towers more and are increasingly alarmed that the fad is moving their way. Money could be saved by job retraining for the construction workers paid for with the subsidy money which would otherwise pad the rich companies Canary Island bank accounts. The bonus would be saving the mtns. and ridges and tourism dollars, along with the views Maine is famous for.

Woody's picture
verified

Hate to disagree...

...with a Maine Master Guide, I really do, but the editorial presented the facts in a logical, reasonable manner. You just didn't like it.

Blueyes1119's picture
verified

Right from the Windustry

What you see as "facts" are highly disputed and come right out of the Windustry play book. There is absolutely NO sound scientific basis or economic viability to the wind folly and the windustry is predatory to our beautiful state.

Woody's picture
verified

I would contend...

...that my facts are at least as good as your facts as well over a majority of folks in this state are in favor of wind power - something opponents seem to have an abundance of.

gempaint's picture
verified

sound bites

from Wind shills

Woody's picture
verified

Well said...

...by an anti-wind shill.

Blueyes1119's picture
verified

Shill

From Merriam-Webster: Shill:"to act as a spokesperson or promoter". You, Mr. Woodbury, are a shill. Ms. Barnett is a victim who is fighting for her rights and the rights of her neighbors to not have their health and well being injured by the noise impact of an industrial site being built on top of them.

Woody's picture
verified

Takes one...

...to know one.

Blueyes1119's picture
verified

10 year old???

"takes one to know one" taunt is what 10 year olds do. BTW, I have experienced wind turbine syndrome first hand, so I know what Ms. Barnett and her neighbors will experience. Try having respect for the well being of your fellow citizens of the state of Maine, or do you feel they should be sacrificed for the windunstry folly?

Woody's picture
verified

Nope.

And I think you need to loosen up a little. Just sayin'.

gempaint's picture
verified

students

Maine's mountains are her football field, and the $10 billion per year tourism industry is her Super Bowl.

The year-round and seasonal residents who live on and around that field are her sponsors, her chief players and her economic engine.

Please keep those 400-foot-tall desks off our field.

gempaint's picture
verified

sound

The solutions are expensive to polluters.

1) Require fair market price buy-outs or property value guarantees for property owners within two and a half miles of turbines,

2) apply Rural (20-25) dbA limits to nighttime operations immediately,

3) require the wind turbine industry to pay for the costs of noise monitoring and make all data available through web sites in real time, and

4) develop metrics that capture and regulations that protect against low frequency noise.

the fact that people, property values, and natural quiet are collateral damage

penny gray's picture
verified

Thorium energy

At seven billion and climbing, the human population on this planet will require REAL energy sources. Industrial wind turbines will never cut the mustard. Intermittent wind can never be a base load energy source on the grid, and it is very expensive. Thorium energy is green, cheap and powerful. Thank you for bringing up the subject, Mr. Corrigan. Here is link to those who might not have heard of this energy source.
http://energyfromthorium.com/2011/10/29/nuclear-ammonia/#more-2691

Blueyes1119's picture
verified

I Agree, But What About?

I agree with Ms. Gray pointing out the alternative of thorium. However, her reference to world population brings me to three of my favorite alternatives to wasting money on useless wind turbines. First, investment in smarter ways to use existing energy and conserve far more than we do, world-wide. The $4 million average cost of a single industrial trubine can purchase and install a huge number of energy saving sensors, switches,computer programs to save energy. Second, there can be no talk about global climate change without talk of serious, cost-effective world population control. Third, more carbon can be sequestered and water conserved by re-vegetating the world by planting trees and regional appropriate vegetation than miles upon miles of useless wind turbines.

verified

The Hidden Factors

Woodstock Site Plan Review
Page 15 , Number 18
Noise: the proposed development shall not raise noise levels to the extent that abutting and/or nearby residents are adversely affect.
A) The maximum permissible sound pressure level of any continuous, regular or frequent or an intermittent source of sound produced by any activity shall be limited by the time period and land use which it abuts listed below. Sound levels shall be measured at 4 feet above the ground at the property boundary of the source.
Sound pressure level limits using the sound equivalent level of one hour (leq 60 measured in dB(a) scale)
7:00 am to 10:00pm, residential 55 dB(a)
10:00pm to 7:00am residential 45 dB(a)
B) Noise shall be measured by a meter set on the A-weight response scale, fast response. The meter shall meet the American National Standards (ANSA SI-4-1961) American standard specification for general purpose sound meters.
My name is Leola Ballweber, I live in Woodstock, Maine. The town of Woodstock Planning board used the DEP guide lines for sound, yet, approved a waiver to raise the sound levels.
The wind project was appealed at the town level, DEP level, which Warren Brown suggested a NRO for 3 turbines starting at 7pm and adding 3 more from 10pm till 7am, 6 of 10 turbines would be restricted during this time and then it was off to the BEP. After the Supreme Court case was dropped, only 20% chance in the citizen’s favor. Patriot Renewable petitioned for the NRO to be removed. My understanding is that it was granted and the NRO was removed.
What was learned was that the state does not have regulations in place to protect the citizens from the unique infra-sound projected by industrial wind turbines.
The science is there to prove it exists, yet it is the citizens who are left to protect themselves.
The wind industry does and will not admit that these machines on top of Maine’s mountains make noise.
The sound maps that are computer generated are flawed and incorrect in these projects.
Bayroot, LLC owns land that is part of the Spruce Mount Wind Project, leases were giving. As soon as the Spruce mountain wind project began construction, Bayroot, LLC began removing timber between abutting properties and the wind project. If, the abutters had taken some consolation in the filtering of sound through the trees, it was made clear, it was not to be. The Logging Company came in and literally stripped the land. They paid the fines for their actions and continued to strip the 1000’s of acres around the Spruce Mountain Wind Project.
It is clear that the wind company, land owners of the logging properties, walk hand in hand on these wind projects.
There is no consideration for the ECHO Effect from the surrounding ridges and sound traveling down into the valleys.
It has been made clear that this is not a time for emotions. It is clear that the distress felt by the victims of these projects will not be considered.
I present to you some facts from Woodstock:
There are over 90 abutting properties to the Spruce Mountain wind project. Most of those are seasonal residents. The figures that I am submitting to you are taken from the Woodstock Map/Lot Index dated Tuesday, January 2008. I checked with the town manager and he assured me that this was the latest, up to date version.
Concord Pond Area-
• 75 properties,
• Towns value for buildings and land, $4,316,090.
• 1 local household considered year round resident of Woodstock
Shagg Pond Area-
• 67 properties,
• Towns value for buildings and land $4,507,390.
• 3 local households considered year round residents of Woodstock
Cushman and Perkins Valley Road-
• 54 properties,
Town’s value for buildings and land, $$3,241,030.
• 29 residents considered year round residents of Woodstock.
The Combined total,
• properties within 1.5 miles, 196
• property values to the town- $12,064,510.00
• The number of residential property owners considered year round residents- 33
It is clear that the properties involved are mostly seasonal owners who pay taxes and buy groceries when they come to Woodstock. They may be considered seasonal citizens, yet, spend summers, go skiing, snowmobiling or just get away from their busy lives on weekends, year round. They have no vote at town meetings and could not participate in the decision of this wind project coming to their neighbor. Now they live with the blade flicker and the Whooosh Whooosh of industrial wind turbines. The wind turbines came to them and they are given a short list of alternatives in dealing with the noise. Please consider the impact this will have on the other small towns, who have or will have wind projects come to their town. Our small townships are now being put in the position no matter what they decide, for or against a wind ordinance; they can expect challenges from both sides of the issue. Law suits are costly, timely and can at times be indecisive in the outcome. (Moot) When the industrial wind projects are built in Canton, Carthage, Dixfield, Peru, Sumner and phase two of The Spruce Mountain Wind Project is put into motion, these figures, one town at a time, will add up.
I believe that the Maine Legislature put us in this position of Fight or Flee and I believe the legislation should send a strong message to the wind industry. It is time for educating yourselves on the dangers of infra sound and making regulations that protect the citizens of Maine. Distance is the only control factor when dealing with this industry. I believe that the BEP’s intents are good, but feel that the 42 dB(a) is still too high, yet, it is a beginning.
Industrial wind turbines have a unique sound, they are a unique industry and the citizens of Maine deserve to be protected to the fullest from industrial wind’s noise pollution. I have been following the PUC with First Wind and see a pattern with the challenge to ethics, along with morals. Business is business and we should all go by the same rules, with the same penalties. They say that Enron is dead, yet, we are still dealing with the ghost of Enron,
There are other alternatives to choose from and Maine is already 30% renewable energy. Remove the cap on hydro and let the waters run. In these economic times, we should be consolidating, rather than wasting federal dollars on rich man’s projects. The down fall is that until someone tells the rich guy, he can’t walk all over the little guy, there will be casualties. The seasonal residents, tax payers and abutters to the Spruce Mountain Wind project are caught in the cross fire of this warring power for dominance on Maine’s mountains.

use less's picture
verified

Over supply of electric generation

In the northeast and much of the US there's an oversupply of generation. Demand is down due to conservation, efficiency and the recession. We don't need to be building new generation; especially expensive, intermittent, environmentally destructive industrial scale wind projects.
The folly of wind power is apparent when one looks at the
transmission gridlock in Orrington, ME. First Wind built the Stetson projects and then a 40 mile transmission line to Orrington. Two base load generators, a pooling hydro and a gas plant, are also transmitting power to the grid from Orrington resulting in an over supply on the transmission line to the NE grid from Orrington. Wind power, when available, is given transmission preference and the base load generators, who sold their output in the day ahead market, are backed down or curtailed, but they are still paid for the power they contracted to provide in the day ahead market even though they are not putting that power on the grid. So the ratepayers are paying for the surplus, unneeded, wind power as well as the power the base load generators are paid for but not generating.
These costs and the costs of transmission built for wind projects are going to soon be felt by ratepayers.

gempaint's picture
verified

energy that works

wood energy
on-site solar
hydro
using less

tell us of the thorium reactor.

Advertisement