Lake County Illinois is considering a good strategy to help them move forward with wind power projects. The idea may help other areas that want to embrace wind projects but have been struggling with wind energy regulations.

Wrestling for two years with wind project regulations, Lake County Board members are now looking to separate regulations for large wind farm proposals from smaller turbine requests from homeowners, schools and businesses. Separating the two would allow the County Board to vote separately on these widely different aspects of the country’s proposed regulations.  

By separating the types of projects being considered, regulations for smaller turbines would have a better chance of being approved. This would allow schools and unincorporated land owners the opportunity to move forward with requests while larger wind farm regulations continue to be developed.

Since several board members disfavor larger turbine farms in Lake County, and local residents have come out in droves against a proposed 10 turbine wind farm project in the area, focusing first on small wind project regulations could support the development of wind power but on a scale that satisfies everyone involved. It’s a kind of Win-Win for all.

To read more click here. To find out more about Lake County Illinois click here.

The Somers claim that’s much too close – “at 500 feet from the turbine (at a location they visited) we couldn’t hear each other talk” they claim. The couple says BNE ignored their location’s historic status when it proposed erecting wind turbines half a mile away.

Under state law, the nine-member Connecticut Siting Council will review BNE’s petition. It has sole jurisdiction over construction of any type of electric-generating facilities. The council’s executive director notes that concerns of local residents are taken into account as are a project’s impact on the environment and public safety.

The Somers have petitioned the council to participate in the hearings claiming BNE ignored their historic location when siting its wind farm a half a mile away.

In turn, BNE Energy counter filed a petition to deny the Somers’ request saying that the couple’s claims are irrelevant under the Siting Council’s guidelines. “BNE need only establish that the proposed project complies with air and water quality standards of the Department of Environmental Protection.”

To add to the conflict, the Somers’ property was not added to the National Register of Historic Places until last July. It was too late for BNE’s consultants to include that fact in the company’s proposal.

This will be the first time the council reviews a commercial wind farm proposal and its decision will affect the future of commercial wind development in the state. To read more, click here.

The 3.4 kW Falcon turbine was installed on an 18′ pole on Williams’ property by Joe Moore Construction, an authorized WePOWER dealer. To read more and see more photos, click here.

In an earlier post – Wind Power and Property Values - on this site, I provided an executive brief on the 2003 study, the Renewable Energy Policy Project (REEP). In essence, researchers assembled a database covering every US wind development project between 1998 and 2002 and more than 25,000 property transactions before and after the projects came on line.

The 81 page REPP Analytical Report was published In May 2003. The Report concluded that for the ten major wind project locations analyzed, property values increased faster in the view shed in eight of the ten projects. And, in nine of the ten cases property values increased faster after the project came on line than they did before. Finally, after projects came on-line, property values increased faster in the view shed than they did in the comparable community. Voila! Positive impact!

In her blog post on property values – What is the impact of wind turbines on house values? –  Vicky Portwain, director in a wind farm development company in the UK, points us to a 2007 project in the UK that claims just the opposite. In this study, property values appeared to be negatively affected by the development of a wind farm nearby.

Which study is correct? First, to compare two very different time frames raises caution. And, to try to compare the results of two very different studies would also be a mistake. But, more importantly, are we sure that the relationship between the presence/absence of a wind farm nearby is the only, or even most important variable affecting land values? This is a point that Vicky raises nicely in her blog post.

Every student of research design knows that outside of an extremely well controlled laboratory experiment, statistical results are always at risk from unknown or unsuspected other variables not included in the study – some other elements that could actually be having a great impact on your study results. Further, every student of statistical analysis knows that just because two variables appear to impact each other (correlation), does not in any way prove that one variable really does change the other (causation).

So back to the conflicting results of the two property value studies here.

The REPP project researchers acknowledge that their report was not an attempt to explain all the influences on property values. Their analysis “is an empirical review of the changes in property values over time…done solely to determine whether the existing data could be interpreted as supporting the claim that wind development harms property values.”

As for the UK study, Vicky points out that when researchers interviewed local real estate agents in the research area, they found that they may have missed some other very important variables also affecting those lower property values.

I don’t believe there is a definitive answer on property values being impacted by wind farm or wind turbine development. Wind project supporters and resistors need to back away from this issue. Taking a stand on property value effect is too fraught with unknown variables to use it as an argument either for or against developing wind power in an area.

If you are trying to develop a community wind project, make sure you do your homework on this issue. Read these two reports.

You do not need to be a statistician to understand the findings of the REPP Report, nor the Cornwall study cited on the Wind Energy Planning site. And, both of these studies provide useful background if you are working on a wind project. Both studies will help you answer opponents who use the “plummeting property values” argument against your project.

After sharing the studies’ details with your project opponents, the strongest argument you can make is that there may be many other variables that have greater impact on property values than the presence or absence of wind turbines.

Click here to see the full REPP report.

Click here to read about the UK research on the Wind Energy Planning website.

In an early September post on my website – Wind Power Greed - I painted an ugly picture of wind energy lust. Some wind farm developers in upstate New York were bribing local officials to get permission to build wind towers, colluding among developers to avoid competitive wind option leases, and shutting down discussion in local town meetings looking for the quickest way possible to acquire enough land to make their wind farms a reality.

Thanks to the concerted efforts of a number of good folks and solid investigation by the NY Attorney General, New York State now has a Wind Power Code of Ethics that spells out quite clearly what must, and must not occur as developers and towns bring wind energy to the state.

Although subscription to the code is not mandatory, the code itself and the Task Force created to monitor wind development in the state, will ensure that towns and wind developers both keep an eye on how they do business.

In brief, the Code covers conflicts of interest by banning wind companies from:

• offering municipal officers bribes, gifts, compensation for services, contingent compensation, honoraria, or payment of legal fees and
• soliciting from municipal officers restrictions on easements/leases, or confidential information.

 The Code further spells out specific public disclosure publication requirements covering any and all financial interests of municipal officers in the project/company and all easements and leases.

The wind development company must provide specific education and training to its own employees and local municipal officers on how they need to conduct business within the Code of Ethics.

Click here to download a copy of the NY Wind Power Code of Ethics.

Or read it on line at the Wind Power Law Blog

Click here to go directly to the Code on their site.

Infrasound is sound with a frequency too low to be heard by the human ear – in general it is bass waves with a frequency below 20 Hz to 22 kHz.

We are surrounded by and have evolved within an environment of naturally occurring infrasound — ocean waves, wind, earthquakes, pounding surf, waterfalls, hurricanes, thunderstorms, and anything that produces a naturally occurring slow oscillation of the air.

And of course, there is a whole lot of human generated infrasound – from slow speed fans to engines, cars, buses, trains, motorcycles, airplanes, explosions, and machinery.

Yet the fuzzy connection between wind turbine infrasound and risk to human health continues. It hinges on the idea that high levels of low frequency noise excite the body to vibrate, most notably in the chest, and that profoundly deaf humans perceive noise through vibrations in their bodies. But the thinking is circular to claim that wind turbines generate inaudible infrasound that “can be felt but not heard” and that this infrasound vibrates the chest with dire health risks.

To begin with, the noise frequency levels that produce body vibrations are well above the hearing threshold. You would hear the explosion, crash, or band speakers cranked to their maximum loudness as well as feel them, unless you were profoundly deaf. So the idea that unperceived wind turbine infrasound is pounding your body and making you sick – is another one of those “we don’t want wind turbines” myths.

On the other hand the “problem noise” that does come from wind turbines is the fluctuating swish sound of the blades passing the tower, which does irritate some people who are highly sensitive to fluctuating sound.

The problem is that wind project objectors use acoustic terms like infrasound incorrectly. They indicate that ‘infrasound’ is a generalized health problem for all people living near a wind turbine. It is something they cannot hear, but they can all feel it and that their health is at risk.

What we do need to note is that the turbine swish noise might be problematic for some people and when those affected by fluctuating sounds appear, we do need to pay attention. But if scores of people in an area start claiming that the blade swish sound is affecting them negatively – be skeptical. Intermittent sound fluctuation really only affects some very sensitive people – not everyone. It is a real problem – just not a really pervasive one.

For more on the infrasound and turbine issue, click here:
Infrasound from Wind Turbines – Fact, Fiction or Deception by Geoff Leventhall.

And click here for:
Do wind turbines produce significant low frequency sound levels?  by G.P. van den Berg

Click here for information on tubine noise assessments in other posts on my site:
A sound by any other name…

Special thanks to Appalachian State University for publishing the Leventhall and van den Berg papers in the Reports section of its very informative website.

Then along came SWIFT.

“The SWIFT Wind Turbine design solves many of the challenges of previous residential and commercial scale wind turbines: it registers as a whisper on decibel charts, it’s efficient, it’s safe and it’s clean,” states Cascade Engineering’s Michael Ford, on their new SWIFT Wind Turbine system.

Available in the US and Canada, the SWIFT Wind Turbine system provides businesses and homeowners an effective solution to lower energy bills and reduce carbon emissions. The unique design of the SWIFT system lies in the outer ring that connects to the turbine blades. As the wind travels down the blades and is dispersed along the outer ring, the outer ring acts as a diffuser eliminating noise and keeping the turbine quiet.

It is the first very quiet rooftop mounted wind turbine for domestic, community and industrial use. And it generates electricity by harnessing wind energy both quietly and safely. The SWIFT Wind Turbine incorporates safety features that meet IEEE safety standards and has achieved the Underwriter Laboratories (UL) certification by MET Laboratories, Inc., a global symbol of safety.

Optimally sited this turbine will produce approximately 2000 kWh of electricity per year in a good wind location. This is about 20% of an average home’s needs. The initial cost of $10,000 to $12,000 per system can generally pay for itself in about 3 years and multiple units can be used at one location to supplement industrial and commercial needs. The SWIFT system has a 5 year manufacturer’s warranty and is designed for a 20 year life.

Click here for more information.

The SWIFT Wind Turbine has been designed to be environmentally sustainable. The product produces more energy in its lifetime than is incorporated in the material and processes used to manufacture it – it is therefore “harm neutral.”

Over the past 20 years a lot has been written about wind turbines killing birds. The Altamont Pass wind farm in California has become the poster child of “bad wind turbines” and is pointed to again and again as a key case on turbines causing the death of birds and bats.

Mick Sagrillo’s article on birds and turbines is a really good piece to kick off your project homework on the avian issue. Birds are killed by so many things in our world – wind turbines are only one of them. Read this article. It’s amazing that there are any birds left to visit your yard and bird feeders.

Click here to take a deeper look into this very hot wind power issue.

Researchers from Newcastle University conducted bird surveys of 33 different species on farmlands around two large wind farms in East Anglia to assess the impact of wind turbines on the distribution of birds normally found in the area.

Contrary to vocal resistance to wind turbines by conservationists, these researchers found that wind turbines had no effect on the distribution of most farmland birds. The largest and least maneuverable species were the only birds whose distribution was affected by the turbines.

Published in the British Ecological Society’s Journal of Applied Ecology, the study concludes that wind farms “can help meet tough sustainable energy targets without threatening biodiversity on European farmland.”

Yet out on the coast where sea eagles reside, the bird-turbine issue finds more dire conclusions.

Over the past 30 years, a concerted effort to re-establish the dwindling sea eagle population in Britain has been thwarted by the ill conceived placement of wind farms in the very places this raptor resides.

Historically, the sea eagle was widely found throughout the British Isles. But their 8 foot wing span limits their maneuverability in the air and makes them vulnerable to wind farms today. They do not have the ability to duck and weave in order to avoid moving turbine blades.

The warning signs for birds like the sea eagle that can’t adapt to sharing space with wind farms have been vividly demonstrated in Norway where the sea eagle still thrives.

Sea eagle deaths at a 68-turbine 20 square kilometer wind farm at Smøla, (a group of islands about 300 miles from Bergen) have been noted by local ornithologists but not publicly acknowledged by the Norwegian state-owned wind farm.

Overhead power lines to the mainland were one known cause of bird deaths. Those lines have since been replaced with ground cables. But there is no quick solution for birds crashing into rotor blades. And this is no surprise.

Long before the first turbine was constructed, environmentalists warned that the concentration of eagles at Smøla made it a totally inappropriate place for a wind farm. But those protests were ignored. As you might expect, the cost in eagles is priceless.

So what’s the lesson for community wind activists from these two studies on avian-turbine issues?

Once again, it’s do your homework! Make sure that wherever you plan to site your turbines does not share space with large birds of prey or other bird species that cannot easily maneuver. Listen carefully to environmental protestors to your project and then research fully your own location – well before you start construction.

Both the farmland bird and sea eagle protesters were vocally opposed to wind farms. But only one group had a valid complaint.

The bottom line on the avian-turbine issue: It is not that you build a wind farm…. it’s really about WHERE you put it in relationship to the local birds.

For the full story on farmland birds and wind farms click here.

For the full story on sea eagles and wind farms click here.

Maryland’s Legacy Hotel and Meeting Centre is the first hotel in Montgomery County, to be powered by 100% wind energy. Working closely with Clean Currents, LLC of Rockville, MD and the US Environmental Protection Agency, the Legacy is quickly bringing its carbon footprint to zero through a combination of Renewable Energy Credits and programs and services for going Green.

Clean Currents, LLC is helping the Legacy get on board with Green Your Stay agendas. The hotel is converting its cleaning products and detergents to more organic, biodegradable solutions and installing recycling baskets in each of the 160 plus guest rooms. That’s consistent with the Green Your Stay ideas. But wait, there’s more.

The Legacy Hotel has developed its own Turn On™ service. Through this innovative new service, at the hotel guest’s request guest room energy is turned off during the guest’s absence and turned back on thirty minutes prior to their return.

Guests can also purchase an eco-friendly t-shirt with the hotel’s environmental campaign slogan “I Got Turned On At The Legacy!” and the proceeds from sale of the t-shirt contribute to Renewable Energy Credits through Clean Currents’ REC program.

Clean Currents, LLC the Green Your Stay and wind power helper in the Legacy’s program, is a Rockville, Maryland-based clean energy broker/aggregator operating in Maryland, DC, Chicago, and Texas. They are committed to promoting solutions to global warming and air pollution. And they provide wind power advocates several routes to supporting wind power projects.

With an impressive list of businesses that have taken the Go Green challenge, their Chesapeake Green program for MD and DC residents, and a growing list of news items on their website this company is already making an impact on the Chesapeake region.

As for the Legacy Hotel’s commitment to wind power and zero environmental impact, Eric Siegel, Executive Vice President of Cohen Companies, the owner group of the Hotel states. “We are proud of our commitment to both traditional hospitality and contemporary environmental responsibility. We are introducing our 100% recycling policy and hope that our guests will join our efforts to greening their stay.”

For more on the Legacy Hotel story click here

And with thanks to the folks at Green Living Ideas, here are some ideas for you personally to help green your next stay away from home.
 

• Turn off the AC, heat, lights, TV, and radio when leaving the room.
• Use the hotel van instead of renting a car, or even better, use public transportation if you’re staying in an area that provides it.
• Take short showers and don’t request fresh towels and sheets each day.
• Participate in hotel recycling programs if the hotel offers one.
• If you have the option to check out electronically through the hotel TV, take advantage of this paperless system.
• Request that mini bottles of shampoo and soap not be replaced until they are empty. Some hotels even replace the soap every day with a new bar.
• If the hotel provides complimentary newspapers, pass yours on to someone else when you are finished or see if it can be recycled.
• Take advantage of hotel guest comment cards to suggest more energy efficient light bulbs, recycling programs, and an increase in energy efficient appliances such as toilets or mini bars.