by jboullion | Apr 6, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article on North American Windpower:
Seventy-nine percent of Americans do not believe a large wind farm project is detrimental to their health and welfare, according to the 2009 Saint Index survey of attitudes toward real estate development projects.
Slightly more than one in 10 adults, 11%, say a large wind project could diminish health and welfare.
The fourth annual Saint Index survey involved interviews with 1,000 adults nationwide. The study is conducted by The Saint Consulting Group, which tracks the politics of land use in the U.S, Canada and U.K.
Eighty-two percent of Americans support a wind farm project in their hometown – an increase from 76% a year ago. Opposition to a local wind project dropped to 15%, which is down 5 percentage points from last year, according to the survey.
Forty-three percent of Americans say they support a local power project, an increase from the 38% who expressed support a year ago, and just 23% in 2006.
However, America’s not-in-my-back-yard attitude toward local development remains strong. Nearly three out of four Americans, 74%, stated that they do not want new development in their communities, saying their hometown is fine the way it is or is already over-developed.
by jboullion | Apr 6, 2009 | Uncategorized
From an article by Craig Reber in the Telegraph Herald (Dubuque, Iowa):
SMELSER, Wis. — The fate of a proposed southwest Wisconsin wind farm could be decided Tuesday at the polls, where supporters of the controversial plan face off with opponents.
Wind Capital Group, headquartered in St. Louis, wants to build about 61 towers — 400feet high from the base to tip of blade — in portions of three townships: Smelser, Paris and Hazel Green. The proposed White Oak Wind Farm would have a total capacity of 100 megawatts.
Opponents of the White Oak Wind Farm proposal cite safety and health issues with the siting of the wind turbines. They seek a one-half mile setback minimum requirement (as opposed to the proposed 1,000 feet) to minimize what they call the “noise, safety and health risks” to families and their houses.
They say the shipment of the wind turbine components — tower sections, blades and the hub — would require large trucks that would “likely” damage the area’s roadways. They question what happens to the wind turbines after they have served their “useful” lives. They say the “risk” is that the turbines will never get torn down after they are abandoned.
Foes want an ordinance enacted by the Smelser Town Board of Supervisors that they say would “protect” the township’s residents. There are five people on the Tuesday ballot challenging three incumbent supervisors, the township clerk and treasurer. The incumbent chairman and supervisors have been in support of the wind farm.
A town board could adopt a moratorium on a wind farm development by passing an ordinance. However, such an ordinance still could be subject to a legal challenge since no state statute specifically gives townships such authority. Several state Assembly members plan to reintroduce legislation that will provide the state Public Service Commission the authority to establish state standards for wind turbine setbacks and acceptable noise levels.
Also on the state level, Gov. Jim Doyle has a goal of generating 25 percent of the state’s electricity and 25 percent of transportation fuel from renewable fuels (including wind power) by 2025.
RENEW Wisconsin, a statewide nonprofit organization, advocates for public policies and private initiatives to support renewable energy. It supports the project. RENEW Wisconsin Executive Director Michael Vickerman said wind farms are an important source of revenue to local governments, in terms of payments and taxes — not to mention the supplemental income to the host landowners.
Grant County could collect $400,000 annually for the next 25 years, with an option of 10 additional years. As mandated by state law, the county would distribute 40 percent of the revenue to the townships that host the turbines. Smelser Township would have half of the turbines and receive $80,000. Paris and Hazel Green townships, hosting a quarter of the turbines each, $40,000.
Wind farm proponents offer their views on Smelsertownship.com.
by jboullion | Apr 3, 2009 | Uncategorized
An editorial in The Tomah Journal:
One of these days, the world will no longer have access to fossil fuels. Oil and coal are finite resources, and while they might last well into the 22nd, 23rd or 24th centuries, they will be depleted at some time in our history. And long before they run out, they will become more difficult and expensive to extract. Remember the oil that John McCain wants to get from the Atlantic Coast? Drilling there can’t be sustained until oil hits $60 per barrel and stays there, which translates into at least $2.50 for a gallon of gas.
Renewable energy must replace fossil fuels sometime, and the process may as well start now. Part of the solution is wind energy. Unfortunately, it has proven to be a contentious issue in Wisconsin. It’s almost impossible for a private-property owner to put a wind turbine on his or her property without the threat of a lawsuit. Wind projects in the Monroe County townships of Ridgeville and Wilton have been halted by ordinances that, in effect, outlaw wind-generated power.
Wind power won’t reach its full potential until the state establishes uniform standards for siting wind turbines. Obviously, health and safety concerns must be considered in any legislation. Opponents have legitimate concerns over noise, flicker and ice buildup. However, it’s an unavoidable reality that that energy generation must occur somewhere. Would wind-turbine opponents like an oil refinery in the township? How about a coal-fired power plant? A nuclear power plant? Even solar power creates controversy. A solar developer in California is stymied because he can’t get powerlines built across the desert.
While wind can’t come close to filling our energy needs, it certainly has a role to play in a diversified, renewable energy network. Somehow, we must resolve the tension between a public that wants all the conveniences of modern life but doesn’t want to live anywhere near a facility that makes those conveniences possible. An honest debate over statewide standards for wind turbines would be a good start.
by jboullion | Apr 3, 2009 | Uncategorized
An editorial in The Tomah Journal:
One of these days, the world will no longer have access to fossil fuels. Oil and coal are finite resources, and while they might last well into the 22nd, 23rd or 24th centuries, they will be depleted at some time in our history. And long before they run out, they will become more difficult and expensive to extract. Remember the oil that John McCain wants to get from the Atlantic Coast? Drilling there can’t be sustained until oil hits $60 per barrel and stays there, which translates into at least $2.50 for a gallon of gas.
Renewable energy must replace fossil fuels sometime, and the process may as well start now. Part of the solution is wind energy. Unfortunately, it has proven to be a contentious issue in Wisconsin. It’s almost impossible for a private-property owner to put a wind turbine on his or her property without the threat of a lawsuit. Wind projects in the Monroe County townships of Ridgeville and Wilton have been halted by ordinances that, in effect, outlaw wind-generated power.
Wind power won’t reach its full potential until the state establishes uniform standards for siting wind turbines. Obviously, health and safety concerns must be considered in any legislation. Opponents have legitimate concerns over noise, flicker and ice buildup. However, it’s an unavoidable reality that that energy generation must occur somewhere. Would wind-turbine opponents like an oil refinery in the township? How about a coal-fired power plant? A nuclear power plant? Even solar power creates controversy. A solar developer in California is stymied because he can’t get powerlines built across the desert.
While wind can’t come close to filling our energy needs, it certainly has a role to play in a diversified, renewable energy network. Somehow, we must resolve the tension between a public that wants all the conveniences of modern life but doesn’t want to live anywhere near a facility that makes those conveniences possible. An honest debate over statewide standards for wind turbines would be a good start.
by jboullion | Apr 3, 2009 | Uncategorized
An editorial in The Tomah Journal:
One of these days, the world will no longer have access to fossil fuels. Oil and coal are finite resources, and while they might last well into the 22nd, 23rd or 24th centuries, they will be depleted at some time in our history. And long before they run out, they will become more difficult and expensive to extract. Remember the oil that John McCain wants to get from the Atlantic Coast? Drilling there can’t be sustained until oil hits $60 per barrel and stays there, which translates into at least $2.50 for a gallon of gas.
Renewable energy must replace fossil fuels sometime, and the process may as well start now. Part of the solution is wind energy. Unfortunately, it has proven to be a contentious issue in Wisconsin. It’s almost impossible for a private-property owner to put a wind turbine on his or her property without the threat of a lawsuit. Wind projects in the Monroe County townships of Ridgeville and Wilton have been halted by ordinances that, in effect, outlaw wind-generated power.
Wind power won’t reach its full potential until the state establishes uniform standards for siting wind turbines. Obviously, health and safety concerns must be considered in any legislation. Opponents have legitimate concerns over noise, flicker and ice buildup. However, it’s an unavoidable reality that that energy generation must occur somewhere. Would wind-turbine opponents like an oil refinery in the township? How about a coal-fired power plant? A nuclear power plant? Even solar power creates controversy. A solar developer in California is stymied because he can’t get powerlines built across the desert.
While wind can’t come close to filling our energy needs, it certainly has a role to play in a diversified, renewable energy network. Somehow, we must resolve the tension between a public that wants all the conveniences of modern life but doesn’t want to live anywhere near a facility that makes those conveniences possible. An honest debate over statewide standards for wind turbines would be a good start.
