1. It has nothing to do with GamesaSomething to say wrote:Give us a clue Rick !!!!
2. It has nothing to do with any other thread or topic on our forum
3. It's for the kids (young adults)...
Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
-
Rick
- Administrator
- Posts: 595
- Joined: Sat Jun 22, 2002 9:35 pm
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 7
- Location: Tyrone, PA
- Contact:
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
2. It has nothing to do with any other thread or topic on our forum
3. It's for the kids (young adults)...
New to the boards? Welcome aboard, and please be sure to read the rules.
Be sure to check out our Frequently Asked Questions area too!
Thank you
Be sure to check out our Frequently Asked Questions area too!
Thank you
-
sandstone
- MVP Member
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 am
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Sinking Valley
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Many municipalities are very protective of their drinking water. Not only can degradation of the water supply result in the loss of drinking water, but it can be VERY expensive to fix.
The City of New York had this dilemma a decade ago when degradation of its water supply in the Hudson Valley could have led to the requirement to install filtration systems costing billions of dollars. In lieu of this, the EPA allowed the City to purchase land for watershed protection (saving the city billions of dollars!):
"With the MOA in place, EPA issued a 5-year Filtration Avoidance Determination [PDF 39 KB, 25 pp] on May 6, 1997. The determination requires New York City to acquire environmentally-sensitive land in the watershed, adopt strong watershed rules and regulations and institute and maintain a comprehensive watershed protection program." http://www.epa.gov/region2/water/nycshed/filtad.htm
As a matter of fact, this need for the protection of land in its drinking water watersheds led New York, as early as a century ago, to purchase the Catskill and Adirondack Park, both of which are covered by the New York State Constitution's "forever wild" clause which prohibits even logging in these water supply areas:
The Adirondack Park was created in 1892 by the State of New York amid concerns for the water and timber resources of the region. Today the Park is the largest publicly protected area in the contiguous United States, greater in size than Yellowstone, Everglades, Glacier, and Grand Canyon National Park combined. The boundary of the Park encompasses approximately 6 million acres, nearly half of which belongs to all the people of New York State and is constitutionally protected to remain “forever wild” forest preserve. http://www.apa.state.ny.us/About_Park/index.html
In 1885, legislation declared that the land in the Adirondack State Park and the Catskill State Park was to be conserved and never put up for sale or lease. The park was established in 1892, due to the activities of Colvin and other conservationists. The park was given state constitutional protection in 1894, so that the state-owned lands within its bounds would be protected forever ("forever wild"). The part of the Adirondack State Park under government control is referred to as the Adirondack Forest Preserve. Further, this became a National Historic Landmark in 1963. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adirondack_Park
In 1894, a state constitutional convention agreed to an amendment to Article XIV of the New York State Constitution that established the “Forever Wild” clause.” This clause protects the state-owned Forest Preserve in the Adirondack Park. It reads, “The lands of the state, now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law, shall be forever kept as wild forest lands. They shall not be leased, sold or exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed, or destroyed.” http://www.adirondackcouncil.org/constamendments2.html
Prohibiting any kind of development in municipal water supply watersheds is a time-proven method of assuring high water quality.
Here's an interesting press release from Pennsylvania's own Stroud Center:
September 13, 2004
ARLINGTON, Va.—A team of researchers led by scientists from the Stroud Water Research Center in Avondale, Pa., has discovered that streamside (or riparian) forests play a critical – and previously unacknowledged – role in protecting the world’s fresh water.
Their findings, funded jointly by the National Science Foundation and Environmental Protection Agency and published online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, have significant implications for a world that is facing a huge and growing freshwater crisis, in which 20 percent of the world population lacks access to clean drinking water and more than 2.2 million people die each year from diseases transmitted by contaminated drinking water and poor sanitation.
"Policies aimed at providing sufficient and clean fresh water have historically focused on massive and expensive engineering projects, such as dams and filtration plants," said scientist Bernard Sweeney of the Stroud Center and lead author of the paper. "In doing so, they have often overlooked the substantial benefits that natural ecosystems provide."
Recent studies, however, have begun to document the considerable value of the services that nature delivers free of charge. "Perhaps nowhere is that value more evident than in streams and rivers, where hundreds of trillions of tiny organisms work constantly to clean the water," said Sweeney.
"This study has revealed new dimensions of the ecosystem services that forests and small streams provide," says Penny Firth, program director in NSF's division of environmental biology, which funded the research. "It clearly shows that a comprehensive understanding of ecological patterns and processes is key to forecasting as well as maximizing benefits."
For some time, scientists and policy makers have recognized the role that riparian forests play in filtering pollutants before they enter the stream. This new research shows that such forests also play a vital role in protecting the health of the stream itself by enhancing the ability of its ecosystem to process organic matter and pollutants such as nitrogen. Conversely, the deforestation of riparian lands compromises both the quantity and the quality of a stream's ecosystem, thereby reducing its ability to deliver important services to humans.
In their study of 16 streams in eastern North America, the scientists found that stream sections flowing through forested areas are wider and shallower than those in meadowlands, their beds are rougher and have more habitat, and water moves more slowly through them. Those factors, along with other riparian forest benefits such as a greater variety of organic food and more-natural temperature patterns, produce a richer and more-natural ecosystem than do deforested streams, and the increased abundance of bacteria, algae, invertebrates and fish enables them to better process certain pollutants.
Because the study was conducted on small streams, which comprise more than 90 percent of all streams in the United States, the implications for improving water quality by planting trees along stream banks are enormous, says Sweeney: forested streams will deliver cleaner water to downstream rivers, estuaries and, ultimately, oceans. "While these findings are based on detailed studies in eastern North America, there is a growing body of independent data that suggests they are applicable on a global scale," Sweeney says.
The City of New York had this dilemma a decade ago when degradation of its water supply in the Hudson Valley could have led to the requirement to install filtration systems costing billions of dollars. In lieu of this, the EPA allowed the City to purchase land for watershed protection (saving the city billions of dollars!):
"With the MOA in place, EPA issued a 5-year Filtration Avoidance Determination [PDF 39 KB, 25 pp] on May 6, 1997. The determination requires New York City to acquire environmentally-sensitive land in the watershed, adopt strong watershed rules and regulations and institute and maintain a comprehensive watershed protection program." http://www.epa.gov/region2/water/nycshed/filtad.htm
As a matter of fact, this need for the protection of land in its drinking water watersheds led New York, as early as a century ago, to purchase the Catskill and Adirondack Park, both of which are covered by the New York State Constitution's "forever wild" clause which prohibits even logging in these water supply areas:
The Adirondack Park was created in 1892 by the State of New York amid concerns for the water and timber resources of the region. Today the Park is the largest publicly protected area in the contiguous United States, greater in size than Yellowstone, Everglades, Glacier, and Grand Canyon National Park combined. The boundary of the Park encompasses approximately 6 million acres, nearly half of which belongs to all the people of New York State and is constitutionally protected to remain “forever wild” forest preserve. http://www.apa.state.ny.us/About_Park/index.html
In 1885, legislation declared that the land in the Adirondack State Park and the Catskill State Park was to be conserved and never put up for sale or lease. The park was established in 1892, due to the activities of Colvin and other conservationists. The park was given state constitutional protection in 1894, so that the state-owned lands within its bounds would be protected forever ("forever wild"). The part of the Adirondack State Park under government control is referred to as the Adirondack Forest Preserve. Further, this became a National Historic Landmark in 1963. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adirondack_Park
In 1894, a state constitutional convention agreed to an amendment to Article XIV of the New York State Constitution that established the “Forever Wild” clause.” This clause protects the state-owned Forest Preserve in the Adirondack Park. It reads, “The lands of the state, now owned or hereafter acquired, constituting the forest preserve as now fixed by law, shall be forever kept as wild forest lands. They shall not be leased, sold or exchanged, or be taken by any corporation, public or private, nor shall the timber thereon be sold, removed, or destroyed.” http://www.adirondackcouncil.org/constamendments2.html
Prohibiting any kind of development in municipal water supply watersheds is a time-proven method of assuring high water quality.
Here's an interesting press release from Pennsylvania's own Stroud Center:
September 13, 2004
ARLINGTON, Va.—A team of researchers led by scientists from the Stroud Water Research Center in Avondale, Pa., has discovered that streamside (or riparian) forests play a critical – and previously unacknowledged – role in protecting the world’s fresh water.
Their findings, funded jointly by the National Science Foundation and Environmental Protection Agency and published online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, have significant implications for a world that is facing a huge and growing freshwater crisis, in which 20 percent of the world population lacks access to clean drinking water and more than 2.2 million people die each year from diseases transmitted by contaminated drinking water and poor sanitation.
"Policies aimed at providing sufficient and clean fresh water have historically focused on massive and expensive engineering projects, such as dams and filtration plants," said scientist Bernard Sweeney of the Stroud Center and lead author of the paper. "In doing so, they have often overlooked the substantial benefits that natural ecosystems provide."
Recent studies, however, have begun to document the considerable value of the services that nature delivers free of charge. "Perhaps nowhere is that value more evident than in streams and rivers, where hundreds of trillions of tiny organisms work constantly to clean the water," said Sweeney.
"This study has revealed new dimensions of the ecosystem services that forests and small streams provide," says Penny Firth, program director in NSF's division of environmental biology, which funded the research. "It clearly shows that a comprehensive understanding of ecological patterns and processes is key to forecasting as well as maximizing benefits."
For some time, scientists and policy makers have recognized the role that riparian forests play in filtering pollutants before they enter the stream. This new research shows that such forests also play a vital role in protecting the health of the stream itself by enhancing the ability of its ecosystem to process organic matter and pollutants such as nitrogen. Conversely, the deforestation of riparian lands compromises both the quantity and the quality of a stream's ecosystem, thereby reducing its ability to deliver important services to humans.
In their study of 16 streams in eastern North America, the scientists found that stream sections flowing through forested areas are wider and shallower than those in meadowlands, their beds are rougher and have more habitat, and water moves more slowly through them. Those factors, along with other riparian forest benefits such as a greater variety of organic food and more-natural temperature patterns, produce a richer and more-natural ecosystem than do deforested streams, and the increased abundance of bacteria, algae, invertebrates and fish enables them to better process certain pollutants.
Because the study was conducted on small streams, which comprise more than 90 percent of all streams in the United States, the implications for improving water quality by planting trees along stream banks are enormous, says Sweeney: forested streams will deliver cleaner water to downstream rivers, estuaries and, ultimately, oceans. "While these findings are based on detailed studies in eastern North America, there is a growing body of independent data that suggests they are applicable on a global scale," Sweeney says.
-
sandstone
- MVP Member
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 am
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Sinking Valley
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Gamesa likes to throw out "numbers of homes served" as a measure of its windplant's power. Here are some numbers to chew on:
The proposed 30 turbine Sandy Ridge Wind Farm (aka Ice Mt windplant) will serve 15,000 homes according to Gamesa. This number assumes a capacity factor of 45%. No windplant east of the Mississippi has ever exceeded a capacity factor greater than 30% on an annualized basis.
The 2,300 MegaWatt Limerick Nuclear Power Plant in the suburbs of Philadelphia serves 1,500,000 homes 24/7 365 days a year. Since it began operations in the early 1980s, it has operated at an annualized capacity factor of 97.5%
The proposed 30 turbine Sandy Ridge Wind Farm (aka Ice Mt windplant) will serve 15,000 homes according to Gamesa. This number assumes a capacity factor of 45%. No windplant east of the Mississippi has ever exceeded a capacity factor greater than 30% on an annualized basis.
The 2,300 MegaWatt Limerick Nuclear Power Plant in the suburbs of Philadelphia serves 1,500,000 homes 24/7 365 days a year. Since it began operations in the early 1980s, it has operated at an annualized capacity factor of 97.5%
-
sandstone
- MVP Member
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 am
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Sinking Valley
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
From the Tyrone Daily Herald 12/13/07:
Q. Kris Yaniello: What is your main concern right now with a wind farm on Ice Mountain?
A. Tyrone Borough Council Vice President Latchford: My main concern would be the noise levels of the wind mills, based on the noise problem at the Allegheny Ridge project right now. Gamesa doesn't say there's not a problem, they admit there is a problem and they're working on it, but until they get that problem fixed, I'm pretty much a "no" until I hear that.
I just got off the phone with some people living near the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm. The noise problem is as bad as, or worse than, ever.
At Gamesa's open house in Tyrone a month ago, Gamesa Mid Atlantic Director of Development Ellen Lutz stated that the noise problem was to be investigated by Gamesa's engineers the next day and that the problem would be corrected within 48 hours.
Q. Kris Yaniello: What is your main concern right now with a wind farm on Ice Mountain?
A. Tyrone Borough Council Vice President Latchford: My main concern would be the noise levels of the wind mills, based on the noise problem at the Allegheny Ridge project right now. Gamesa doesn't say there's not a problem, they admit there is a problem and they're working on it, but until they get that problem fixed, I'm pretty much a "no" until I hear that.
I just got off the phone with some people living near the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm. The noise problem is as bad as, or worse than, ever.
At Gamesa's open house in Tyrone a month ago, Gamesa Mid Atlantic Director of Development Ellen Lutz stated that the noise problem was to be investigated by Gamesa's engineers the next day and that the problem would be corrected within 48 hours.
-
My2Cents
- MVP Member
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 2:49 pm
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Tyrone, PA
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Other things to consider in the read between the lines phase of this whole idea of tearing up our mountain to install a wind farm... Unless I missed it somewhere along the way, nothing, absolutely nothing, has been mentioned in any of Gamesa's few and far between statements to the general public concerning the SUBSTATION(S) that will also be needed. Not too far back someone mentioned in one of their posts that a single substation may take up as much as 5 acres!!! With the size of this wind farm that they are wanting to bring in here... it may take 2 substations !!!
2 substations = 10 acres !!! This too, can be added onto the deforestation that's in store!!! Even one substation is 5 acres too many !!! Also, where do they plan on building the substation(s) ??? These substations will eventually be owned by a power company and we the people will be paying for their operation.... if anything, our utility bills will increase. If I am thinking wrong, and I hope I am, please correct me.
Another area that we are still not hearing much about is the road(s). "9 miles of existing roads and 5 miles of new roads to haul the materials." Exactly where are the 9 miles of existing roads that they are talking about... from where to where ??? Exactly where do they plan to build 5 miles of new roads... from where to where??? Keep in mind, these roads have to be somewhere in the area of 30 to 50 feet wide. Does anyone know of roads that wide around here that lead up to the Ice Mountain area ??? Along with many other things that should be known beforehand, I believe these facts should also be known, before any lease is signed.
2 substations = 10 acres !!! This too, can be added onto the deforestation that's in store!!! Even one substation is 5 acres too many !!! Also, where do they plan on building the substation(s) ??? These substations will eventually be owned by a power company and we the people will be paying for their operation.... if anything, our utility bills will increase. If I am thinking wrong, and I hope I am, please correct me.
Another area that we are still not hearing much about is the road(s). "9 miles of existing roads and 5 miles of new roads to haul the materials." Exactly where are the 9 miles of existing roads that they are talking about... from where to where ??? Exactly where do they plan to build 5 miles of new roads... from where to where??? Keep in mind, these roads have to be somewhere in the area of 30 to 50 feet wide. Does anyone know of roads that wide around here that lead up to the Ice Mountain area ??? Along with many other things that should be known beforehand, I believe these facts should also be known, before any lease is signed.
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
To fully understand the impact of a windplant such as that proposed for Ice Mountain, you really should have visited the site of the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm before and after construction. I did, and the difference is dramatic. I used to mountain-bike along Lilly Mountain Road. I don't go there anymore because of the visual blight, noise, increased ATV and 4x4 traffic, and because I prefer riding in the forest over riding wide gravel roads.My2Cents wrote:Other things to consider in the read between the lines phase of this whole idea of tearing up our mountain to install a wind farm... Unless I missed it somewhere along the way, nothing, absolutely nothing, has been mentioned in any of Gamesa's few and far between statements to the general public concerning the SUBSTATION(S) that will also be needed. Not too far back someone mentioned in one of their posts that a single substation may take up as much as 5 acres!!! With the size of this wind farm that they are wanting to bring in here... it may take 2 substations !!!
2 substations = 10 acres !!! This too, can be added onto the deforestation that's in store!!! Even one substation is 5 acres too many !!! Also, where do they plan on building the substation(s) ??? These substations will eventually be owned by a power company and we the people will be paying for their operation.... if anything, our utility bills will increase. If I am thinking wrong, and I hope I am, please correct me.
Another area that we are still not hearing much about is the road(s). "9 miles of existing roads and 5 miles of new roads to haul the materials." Exactly where are the 9 miles of existing roads that they are talking about... from where to where ??? Exactly where do they plan to build 5 miles of new roads... from where to where??? Keep in mind, these roads have to be somewhere in the area of 30 to 50 feet wide. Does anyone know of roads that wide around here that lead up to the Ice Mountain area ??? Along with many other things that should be known beforehand, I believe these facts should also be known, before any lease is signed.
When considering the Sandy Ridge project (Ice Mt), you need to divide it into 2 parts: Snyder Township and Taylor Township, because the two are divided by the deep Vanscoyoc Run hollow. The Snyder Township portion, consisting of 20 turbines, will be accessed by a widened and lengthened Hoover Road, alongside which transmission lines will run to a substation somewhere on the mountain. The Taylor Township portion, consisting of 10 turbines, will be accessed by a 2 mile long road paralleling Big Fill Run (Rt 350) that will turn abruptly south to climb the ridge. A substation may be necessary on that ridge as well. The "existing road" in Taylor Township is an abandoned and overgrown railroad bed.
-
sandstone
- MVP Member
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 am
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Sinking Valley
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
I posted pictures of a substation at Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm on page 7 of this forum. The same page also has before and after shots.Ice Man wrote:To fully understand the impact of a windplant such as that proposed for Ice Mountain, you really should have visited the site of the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm before and after construction. I did, and the difference is dramatic. I used to mountain-bike along Lilly Mountain Road. I don't go there anymore because of the visual blight, noise, increased ATV and 4x4 traffic, and because I prefer riding in the forest over riding wide gravel roads.My2Cents wrote:Other things to consider in the read between the lines phase of this whole idea of tearing up our mountain to install a wind farm... Unless I missed it somewhere along the way, nothing, absolutely nothing, has been mentioned in any of Gamesa's few and far between statements to the general public concerning the SUBSTATION(S) that will also be needed. Not too far back someone mentioned in one of their posts that a single substation may take up as much as 5 acres!!! With the size of this wind farm that they are wanting to bring in here... it may take 2 substations !!!
2 substations = 10 acres !!! This too, can be added onto the deforestation that's in store!!! Even one substation is 5 acres too many !!! Also, where do they plan on building the substation(s) ??? These substations will eventually be owned by a power company and we the people will be paying for their operation.... if anything, our utility bills will increase. If I am thinking wrong, and I hope I am, please correct me.
Another area that we are still not hearing much about is the road(s). "9 miles of existing roads and 5 miles of new roads to haul the materials." Exactly where are the 9 miles of existing roads that they are talking about... from where to where ??? Exactly where do they plan to build 5 miles of new roads... from where to where??? Keep in mind, these roads have to be somewhere in the area of 30 to 50 feet wide. Does anyone know of roads that wide around here that lead up to the Ice Mountain area ??? Along with many other things that should be known beforehand, I believe these facts should also be known, before any lease is signed.
When considering the Sandy Ridge project (Ice Mt), you need to divide it into 2 parts: Snyder Township and Taylor Township, because the two are divided by the deep Vanscoyoc Run hollow. The Snyder Township portion, consisting of 20 turbines, will be accessed by a widened and lengthened Hoover Road, alongside which transmission lines will run to a substation somewhere on the mountain. The Taylor Township portion, consisting of 10 turbines, will be accessed by a 2 mile long road paralleling Big Fill Run (Rt 350) that will turn abruptly south to climb the ridge. A substation may be necessary on that ridge as well. The "existing road" in Taylor Township is an abandoned and overgrown railroad bed.
-
My2Cents
- MVP Member
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 2:49 pm
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Tyrone, PA
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Ice Man/sandstone... thank you !!!
-
sandstone
- MVP Member
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 am
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Sinking Valley
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Republican Iowa Caucus winner Governer Mike Huckabee on nuclear energy:
Q: Do you think we need to expand the role of nuclear power in the U.S.?
A: Absolutely. France is almost completely nuclear, and it's not like they're a nation given to risky behaviors. There's been a real bias against nuclear energy in the United States, going all the way back to Three Mile Island in 1979, but I think most of it is unfounded. I mean, we've been running nuclear submarines for 60 years without accidents.
http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/02/huckabee/
Q: Do you think we need to expand the role of nuclear power in the U.S.?
A: Absolutely. France is almost completely nuclear, and it's not like they're a nation given to risky behaviors. There's been a real bias against nuclear energy in the United States, going all the way back to Three Mile Island in 1979, but I think most of it is unfounded. I mean, we've been running nuclear submarines for 60 years without accidents.
http://www.grist.org/feature/2007/10/02/huckabee/
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
I found a great site that all should visit. Lot of local stories concerning current events served with some levity.
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain
We'll see what happens on Monday.Bill Latchford wrote:We were voted in by the citizens of this town....If they all stood up and said they wanted this project then we as a council should vote it in...but same also goes for the other side of the coin. If we on Council wanted this project and voted in against the people who wished us not to then we would be remiss in our duties as duly elected officials of this great town.
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Tyrone Borough Council meeting Monday, Jan 7 at 7pm, Tyrone Municipal Building 1100 Logan Avenue.
Petitions will be presented to council by borough residents.
Petitions will be presented to council by borough residents.
-
Rick
- Administrator
- Posts: 595
- Joined: Sat Jun 22, 2002 9:35 pm
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 7
- Location: Tyrone, PA
- Contact:
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Voilà!!! (sorry to hijack the thread, I ask that any discussions of the following link be posted in the respective topic)Rick wrote:1. It has nothing to do with GamesaSomething to say wrote:Give us a clue Rick !!!!
2. It has nothing to do with any other thread or topic on our forum
3. It's for the kids (young adults)...
viewforum.php?f=24
New to the boards? Welcome aboard, and please be sure to read the rules.
Be sure to check out our Frequently Asked Questions area too!
Thank you
Be sure to check out our Frequently Asked Questions area too!
Thank you
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
by Bill Latchford on Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:28 pm
by Bill Latchford on Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:28 pm
Council meeting Monday!Bill Latchford wrote: I also try to stay a bit more positive, to the point I take offence to people saying that Council is not listening to them. I know I am listening and I truly believe the rest of Council is listening to the persons that are letting them have it over this issue. Not sure what else can be said...We are just people trying to do the right thing for the community that has put us here to be their voice. Like what has happened here when the issue is important enough and people are made aware of it...they come out and voice it and let us know. If we know what the majority wants, within reason, we certainly should vote their way, unless it is outright the wrong way for the Borough to go.
-
sandstone
- MVP Member
- Posts: 461
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 am
- If Mike has 13 apples, and gives six to Jane, how many does he have left?: 13
- Location: Sinking Valley
Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
From an email to me from energy analyst Dan Boone (you may remember Dan's op-ed in the Harrisburg Patriot-News a few months back):
We need to impress upon folks that wind energy is going to raise their electricity bills since there still will need to be new conventional powerplants added to the existing ones because wind energy cannot keep pace with rising demand for power. Essentially we will need to double-build the generating capacity - adding wind turbines in addition to conventional powerplants. All wind turbines will do is to offset (i.e., save) some of the fuel consumed by conventional powerplants, and not replace any of the existing or proposed facilities.
In addition, there will be huge costs associated with building new and expanding existing powerlines to accomodate the growth of MW of wind turbines within the grid region. Remember that the powerlines must have enough transmission capacity to transport the electricity produced by wind turbines operating at their maximum level, but of course wind turbines rarely are cranking out 100% of their nameplate capacity. So, expensive powerline upgrades and construction to facilitate the pending rapid expansion of the wind industry will be paid primarily by ratepayers.
We need to impress upon folks that wind energy is going to raise their electricity bills since there still will need to be new conventional powerplants added to the existing ones because wind energy cannot keep pace with rising demand for power. Essentially we will need to double-build the generating capacity - adding wind turbines in addition to conventional powerplants. All wind turbines will do is to offset (i.e., save) some of the fuel consumed by conventional powerplants, and not replace any of the existing or proposed facilities.
In addition, there will be huge costs associated with building new and expanding existing powerlines to accomodate the growth of MW of wind turbines within the grid region. Remember that the powerlines must have enough transmission capacity to transport the electricity produced by wind turbines operating at their maximum level, but of course wind turbines rarely are cranking out 100% of their nameplate capacity. So, expensive powerline upgrades and construction to facilitate the pending rapid expansion of the wind industry will be paid primarily by ratepayers.