by jboullion | Feb 10, 2011 | Uncategorized
John Backus, owner of St Croix Valley Sustainability Solutions LLC, Somerset, submitted the following testimony during a public hearing of the Joint Committee on Review of Administrative Rules on February 9, 2011:
Committee Members,
To start, let me thank the committee for entertaining my testimony as it relates to the committees consideration of Uniform Wind Siting Rules in Wisconsin. If not for a wind conference in the state of Illinois, coupled with business meetings related to wind projects, I would be meeting with you today. Assuming the business climate in Wisconsin is supportive of renewable energy development I hope to expand my business in Wisconsin by partnering with a third party turbine supplier to expand the scope of renewable energy options available to Wisconsin: homeowners, commercial businesses, agricultural operations, and educational entities.
Outside of ready capital no single hurdle is greater for my business then the uncertainty related to the myriad of zoning rules and regulations that are currently promulgated by different cities and counties across the state of Wisconsin. In 2009 I welcomed Wisconsin Act 40 knowing full well the benefits of certainty in how wind energy systems, both large and small, could be installed in this state. I also welcomed accountabilities that would require, among other things, that non-functional, or abandoned wind energy systems, would be taken down in a timely fashion.
While it is certain that the PSC rules do not meet all of my expectations they are none-the-less a carefully considered balance of concerns, needs, and requirements. The PSC advisory board represented a broad array of interests and provided ample opportunity for public comment. To stop the implementation of the March 1, 2011 PSC Uniform Wind Siting Rules would damage my business interests, and no doubt the business interests of many others in this state. As I see this decision, the committee is presented with an opportunity to promote: private capital expenditures, job creation, and stability in an economy that is not expanding fast enough for the average Wisconsin worker.
Assuming the adoption of the PSC Uniform Wind Siting Rules, the benefits to this state are significant. First, the rules will reward the risk taking entrepreneurs in Wisconsin that are only asking for certainty in opportunity. Second, wind energy in this state is too valuable a natural resource to not be tapped in a responsible and transparent fashion. Third, now is the time for Wisconsin’s legislative leaders to demonstrate that they will create, through their actions, a business climate in Wisconsin that is Open for “All” Businesses. In closing, I ask that the committee allow implementation of the PSC Uniform Wind Siting Rules on March 1, 2011.
by jboullion | Feb 8, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Jim Dulzo on the Web site of Michigan Land Use Institute:
. . . when they could not find an independent organization willing to underwrite such a study, they paid for it themselves. AWEA [American Wind Energy Association] and CanWEA [Canada Wind Energy Associaiton] assembled eight scientists and doctors to survey the available scientific literature on the known health effects of living near wind turbines.
Collectively, the eight have strong research or clinical experience in public health, otolaryngology, noise-induced hearing loss, balance and hearing disorders, clinical medicine, audiology, infrasound acoustics, industrial sound pathology, wind and turbine physics, and turbine sound measurement and siting.
Their review of 140 different studies and papers issued in 2009, largely from Europe, where wind farms are common and located quite close to residential areas, is called Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects; An Expert Panel Review.
The panel points out that the environment and our bodies are awash in infrasound, much of it naturally occurring. It finds Dr. Pierpont’s list of maladies too poorly characterized to be medically useful. It finds a markedly stronger correlation between subjects’ claimed turbine syndrome symptoms and their initial attitudes toward turbines than between their symptoms and their level of exposure to turbine sounds.
Windpower opponents quickly attacked the industry funded findings as biased, something that Mike Klepinger, who formerly worked at Michigan State University Extension Service, where he wrote the agency’s wind turbine siting guidelines, says is not surprising.
“Of course, whenever you invite industry into a panel, the whole panel becomes suspect,” Mr. Klepinger said in an interview with Great Lakes Bulletin News Service. “They say, ‘It couldn’t possibly be operating scientifically.’ But you look at the who’s who on the [panel] list, and you kind of have to give the industry an A-plus for trying to make the panel objective.”
Their three major conclusions:
- “There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects.
- “The ground-borne vibrations from wind turbines are too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans.
- “The sounds emitted by wind turbines are not unique. There is no reason to believe, based on the levels and frequencies of the sounds and the panel’s experience with sound exposures in occupational settings, that sounds from wind turbines could plausibly have direct adverse health consequences.”
by jboullion | Feb 8, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Jim Dulzo on the Web site of Michigan Land Use Institute:
. . . when they could not find an independent organization willing to underwrite such a study, they paid for it themselves. AWEA [American Wind Energy Association] and CanWEA [Canada Wind Energy Associaiton] assembled eight scientists and doctors to survey the available scientific literature on the known health effects of living near wind turbines.
Collectively, the eight have strong research or clinical experience in public health, otolaryngology, noise-induced hearing loss, balance and hearing disorders, clinical medicine, audiology, infrasound acoustics, industrial sound pathology, wind and turbine physics, and turbine sound measurement and siting.
Their review of 140 different studies and papers issued in 2009, largely from Europe, where wind farms are common and located quite close to residential areas, is called Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects; An Expert Panel Review.
The panel points out that the environment and our bodies are awash in infrasound, much of it naturally occurring. It finds Dr. Pierpont’s list of maladies too poorly characterized to be medically useful. It finds a markedly stronger correlation between subjects’ claimed turbine syndrome symptoms and their initial attitudes toward turbines than between their symptoms and their level of exposure to turbine sounds.
Windpower opponents quickly attacked the industry funded findings as biased, something that Mike Klepinger, who formerly worked at Michigan State University Extension Service, where he wrote the agency’s wind turbine siting guidelines, says is not surprising.
“Of course, whenever you invite industry into a panel, the whole panel becomes suspect,” Mr. Klepinger said in an interview with Great Lakes Bulletin News Service. “They say, ‘It couldn’t possibly be operating scientifically.’ But you look at the who’s who on the [panel] list, and you kind of have to give the industry an A-plus for trying to make the panel objective.”
Their three major conclusions:
- “There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects.
- “The ground-borne vibrations from wind turbines are too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans.
- “The sounds emitted by wind turbines are not unique. There is no reason to believe, based on the levels and frequencies of the sounds and the panel’s experience with sound exposures in occupational settings, that sounds from wind turbines could plausibly have direct adverse health consequences.”
by jboullion | Feb 8, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Joe Cadotte on BusinessNorth.com:
An idea sketched on a napkin inside an Ashland restaurant 27 years ago has transformed the Memorial Medical Center into one of only two or three hospitals nationally that runs off of waste wood.
With 99 percent of the hospital’s energy needs coming from wood that might otherwise have been discarded, the Ashland hospital is many steps ahead of the biomass trend we’re seeing today.
In 1984, MMC administrators were looking for ways to restrain health care costs. Their plan was to use a wood burning boiler to supplement three gas boilers that were installed in 1972 when the facility was built. . . .
During its design phase, MMC Vice President Les Whiteaker was in charge of assessing the cost effectiveness of the boiler. “I thought it would take three to four years for the boiler to pay for itself,” he said. To his surprise, energy savings were sufficient to offset the $468,000 investment in just 30 months.
Over the years those savings have amounted to more than $6 million. By burning wood, the hospital annually saves $400,000, making medical services 22 percent less than the state average.
by jboullion | Feb 7, 2011 | Uncategorized
Custer, WI – The Midwest Renewable Energy Association, an ISPQ Accredited renewable energy education provider, has just released their 2011 workshop schedule.
Solar electric, solar water heating and wind electric are now forms of energy that can be installed at a residence to supply a portion or all the energy needs of a home and still be connected to the utility grid in the traditional manner.
MREA courses walk consumers and installers though basics to the installation.
To get find more information on how you can participate in this energy form, check out the MREA’s web site for a course near you or call 715-592-6595.
by jboullion | Feb 7, 2011 | Uncategorized
From an article by Heidi Clausen in The Country Today:
TURTLE LAKE – After some setbacks, ground will be broken this spring for an anaerobic cogeneration facility aimed at solving a growing dilemma for northwestern Wisconsin dairy plants.
GreenWhey Energy Inc. is on target to begin construction in late March or early April on a 70,000-square-foot digester plant in Turtle Lake that will recycle wastewater from dairy and food processing, turning it into renewable energy and fertilizer.
The plant, scheduled to be operating by Nov. 1, will employ eight to 10 people.
Along with helping the dairy industry turn a liability into a commodity, the plant is designed to reduce the load on Turtle Lake’s wastewater treatment plant.
GreenWhey is a privately held company spearheaded by Tom Ludy, who founded Lake Country Dairy in Turtle Lake in 2001.
Ludy outlined the company’s plans in a public meeting Jan. 25 attended by about 50 people in Turtle Lake. Ludy said the meeting was held to address any concerns about the project before construction begins.
GreenWhey would be the second project of its kind in Wisconsin and is unique in its number of investors, Ludy said. A similar whey digester facility at Kraft Foods in Beaver Dam is owned by the municipality.
State officials and dairy companies across Wisconsin are watching the GreenWhey project closely in hopes that this type of project could help the dairy industry manage wastewater more sustainably.
The approximately $15 million project is being financed by private investors, grants and low-interest government loans.
