Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines

[My2Cents]

How can ALL the above be made, and explained, to the public, or, to those individuals who do not have computers and do not even know that this board exists ??? There is a lot of very valuable information being presented here. There are a lot of folks in our town who are completely oblivious and have no clue about these wind mills. There are some folks who have "heard" something about them and may have some idea as to what they look like. Some individuals automatically think that this is going to be the answer to their high electric bills. I would venture to guess that ninty percent of the residents in our community do not understand and/or realize the negative impact this will have on us, our mountains, our roads, and our wildlife, FOR YEARS,if we allow this to happen here. Right now, they are hearing a broken record, unaware, and really not paying much attention.
I would also venture to guess that some of the other communities that have these already installed, didn't do their homework beforehand, and suddenly folks began seeing these things sitting in their back yard, after the fact, when it was then too late.

Mayor Kilmartin has an article in todays Daily Herald (Wednesday, October 17, 2007). He is asking for community input on the proposed wind farm. Gamesa will be hoping to receive the borough's decision at the next council meeting November 13th. He too, has given an explanation as to what they plan to do over a period of time. One thing for sure, he is not keeping any of this from the public and he is asking us for our input. They could have decided something on this at the last council meeting but because we have good people on our council they did not make a rash decision without taking time to consider all the facts. Gamesa will not be coming thru our back door without our knowledge like they have in some other places. If they start sitting those things up on our mountain tops.. it's our own fault. Our Mayor is asking for our input, he needs our responses. He mentioned in the article that you can call him at 684-1330 or email him at jkilmartin@tyroneboropa.com

[Bill Latchford]

. Consequently, wind energy development of our region will not result in any appreciable reduction in the emissions of sulphur dioxide or nitrous oxides from powerplants - these are the main air pollutants which threaten human health (e.g., cause the formation of ozone).

Exactly Thank You George M.... The one thing these windmills will be good for is... if, and/or, when the wind is blowin', and these turbins are twistin', they will help in spreading around all those air pollutents, and fossil fuels... not to mention the other contaminates that are out there. Think about it.... what if the wind just happened to be blowing the right way and we had a chemical spill, or heaven forbid, some major disaster ??!!

I wish I didn't have to repeat this....maybe there is an engineer out there whom can back me up....But I am pretty sure the windmills do not create wind...It takes wind to drive them...which means you already have the wind pushing whatever chemical you might want to talk about around. The object of a windmill is to take a blowing wind and convert the blowing wind into energy by rotating the blades wich are connected to a generator which produces electricity to be pumped into the eletrical grid. Just like a fossil fuel plant does but on a smaller scale, without the polution. The fossil fuel plant can run as long as it has fuel to burn and the windmill will generate electricity as long as there is wind. I think I beat that one to death. If anything you might get a bit of wind disturbance off the leading edge of the blades to slow the wind down a bit.

[Bill Latchford]

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Herald a few weeks ago. I think that it makes some good points:

Tyrone area sportsmen should be made aware that State Game Lands 60 in Blair and Centre County, Sink Run, Decker Run, and Vanscoyoc Run are threatened by Gamesa's plans to construct the Ice Mountain/Sandy Ridge Wind Farm in Snyder Township, Blair County and Taylor Township, Centre County. This project will consist of 20 industrial-scale turbines in Snyder Township to the south of SGL 60 and 10 turbines in Taylor Township to the east of SGL 60. We believe that Gamesa will ask the Pennsylvania Game Commission to permit the construction of a permanent access road across SGL 60 for the construction and maintenance of these turbines. This would require the carving out of a mile-long section of permanent heavy-duty roadway through SGL 60 in the headwaters of Vanscoyoc Run, a Cold Water Fishery, as well as crossing Sink Run and impacting the headwaters of Decker Run.

Because of the problems of severe habitat fragmentation, direct mortality to birds and bats, and the inducement of avoidance behavior, industrial windfarms and the infrastructure associated with them are incompatible with the stewardship and conservation goals of State Game Lands. Each turbine requires the clearing and bulldozing of several acres of forest around it for construction, maintenance, and operational efficiency. In addition, a mile of permanent heavy-duty road is constructed for every 5-8 industrial turbines. Further carving of the forest takes place to accommodate transmission lines, substations, and other infrastructure.

Juniata Valley Audubon cannot approve of the destruction of unique areas of exceptional conservation value for the construction of industrial wind facilities. The proposed Ice Mountain/Sandy Ridge Wind Farm site has very strong scientific certification from the Blair County Natural Heritage Inventory and the Pennsylvania Biological Survey as being a unique area of exceptional conservation value.

Juniata Valley Audubon asks that landowners considering leasing their property to Gamesa respect the scientific certification of the Sandy Ridge/Ice Mountain site as a Landscape Conservation Area and a County Natural Heritage Area as well as an Important Bird Area and a Greenway and reject any proposal by the industrial windplant developer to construct industrial wind turbines or carve access roads for the construction and maintenance of turbines for the Sandy Ridge Wind Farm. At this site, the huge ecological costs of an industrial wind farm will far exceed the tiny environmental benefit that such a facility could provide.

Sincerely,

Stan Kotala, M.D., President, Juniata Valley Audubon

I am going up to Portage this weekend to see how much residual damage there is. It really looked like Gamasa was very eco friendly in their process. I am very curious to see these roads and hear these things spin. fingers crossed for some wind that day. This is an important enviromental subject, I want to be as educated in both the Pros and the Cons of this before I commit my vote to the project.

[Bill Latchford]

I can say that I am very appreciative of this forum so I can hear from people about such important topics. The people are the ones who voted the Council in and we should try our best to listen to them. They are hoping we do what is best for the community. I personally want to thank you all for your valuable input.
As i said I am going up to Portage this Saturday morning with a few other Council Members so we can get a first hand look at these things and what the close to finished or finished product looks like and is capable of.
I know it would probably be beneficial if Stan Kotala would go up since he seems to be the resident expert on the Con's side of this topic. All viewpoints are being taken seriously whether Pro or Con by me, This is to important to not listen to both sides. Again Thanks.

[George M.]

Sorry Watcher, but if you check the timeline you'll notice that your follow-up posting occured only a few minutes prior to my last message, which was somewhat lengthy and required considerable thought and editing. So, I didn't see you previous reply before I posted.

Also, I didn't mean to accuse you of supporting multi-national corporate interests - and instead only meant to suggest that your "devil's-advocacy" could be construed as being on their behalf ("devil" is an apt term).

As for your request that I suggest an alternative to wind turbines, I submit that such a discussion would be interesting but probably should be taken up by starting a different forum. I believe this forum (Windmills on Ice Mountain) was established to address a different though perhaps related concern than you now want to pursue.

However, I believe that a "supply-side" solution to our energy woes shouldn't be a priority, and that we can easily grow accustomed to using far less electricity. That said, we've been preaching "conservation and energy efficiency" since the days of Jimmy Carter (remember the "sweater speech") but by any objective measure our society has not been pursuaded to curtail its demand. Consequently, I now believe that only measures which raise the cost of energy or activities are likely to result in the much-desired "conservation". For example, we should have national legislation that requires all aluminum cans either be returned for recycling or purchasers forfeit the 5-cent (or whatever) "deposit fee" that is imposed when the can and its contents are purchased. It's incredible that we annually allow half of all aluminum cans sold in the US to be thrown away - we're tossing into landfills roughly 100,000 cans per hour x 24 hours x 365 days per year. The amount of electricity which we could "save" by recycling each aluminum can is equivalent to the energy used to power your TV for 3 hours (according to the Can Manufacturer's Institute - see: http://www.cancentral.com/funFacts.cfm). If we recycled the billion or so aluminum cans that currently are "land-filled" each year, we would save enough energy to run our personal computers that year.

But, alas...that is the problem, isn't it? We can always rationalize ways to use more electricity or other sources of energy.

[George M.]

Bill Latchford is absolutely correct in pointing out the error of My2Cents' suggestion that wind turbines will operate like a fan. If they have any effect, the wind turbines would act to retard the speed of the wind on the "down wind" side of their location. They work by capturing the energy contained in air currents moving over the earth, which involves having the wind hit the blades and thus causing them to rotate (spinning a generator). The wind hitting the blades is moving faster (i.e., has more energy) than the wind which has passed through and behind the wind turbines blades (aka, the wind turbine "rotor"). Essentially, the difference in wind speed in front of and behind a wind turbine represents the potential amount of energy which was captured by the turbine.

[My2Cents]

Bill Latchford is absolutely correct in pointing out the error of My2Cents' suggestion that wind turbines will operate like a fan. If they have any effect, the wind turbines would act to retard the speed of the wind on the "down wind" side of their location. They work by capturing the energy contained in air currents moving over the earth, which involves having the wind hit the blades and thus causing them to rotate (spinning a generator). The wind hitting the blades is moving faster (i.e., has more energy) than the wind which has passed through and behind the wind turbines blades (aka, the wind turbine "rotor"). Essentially, the difference in wind speed in front of and behind a wind turbine represents the potential amount of energy which was captured by the turbine.

:hail: Thank You so very much George M., I will stand corrected and I do apologize. I was, as you mentioned above, thinking of it as operating like a fan. I don't portend to know all there is to know about these things... I just know it's not good to have them around here... all the previous (as Bill calls them) "broken record" statements attest to that fact. Going to Portage to see these things will be nothing more than a sales pitch.

[watcher]

Dear George M,

Thanks for your thought-provoking response...I liked your suggestion about recyclying and cans. I didn't realize so few were recycled. I have been under the assumption that most communities were required to recycle, but I'm realizing that isn't really the case. Certainly it would be a great aspiration to use less energy and recycle, along with finding better alternatives. I probably should have started that discussion under another thread, but thinking back on it, I think I was really getting slightly bored and wanted to shake things up slightly...please forgive my temporary insanity. Although, I am still interested in the subject of alternatives, and in a way, this does make me want to check along with Bill Latchford, how exactly all this works...it's certainly a larger undertaking than I realized... :thumb:

[sandstone]

Here's some more information to consider, from the Harrisburg Patriot-News:

AS I SEE IT DAN BOONE
Smokestacks will persist, despite wind turbines
Friday, August 24, 2007
Proponents of industrial wind energy facilities often argue that the electric ity they generate will improve the air quality -- thereby alleviating human health impacts associated with air pollution. The air quality benefits of wind energy are often heralded by developers and boosters, but such claims are supported by wishful thinking and not reality.

These false notions indicate a lack of understanding of the programs and success of the Clean Air Act -- perhaps the toughest and most effective environmental law enacted by Congress. It also reveals a lack of appreciation as to how little electricity is generated by wind farms during the summer months, when the demand for electricity is greatest and when "code red" air pollution alerts mainly occur.

The alerts are due to ozone, formed on hot days mainly from nitrous oxides (NOx) -- pollutants which are emitted by power plants but spewed more abundantly from automobile exhaust. Under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency has long maintained a cap-and-trade program to put a ceiling on and regulate power plant emissions of NOx, as well as another major pollutant responsible for "acid rain" -- sulfur dioxide (SO2). EPA determines how many pounds of NOx and SO2 can be emitted annually by power plants in our region (i.e., the "cap"), and then divides up the total quantity allowed for each into "pollution credits." EPA then apportions these credits amongst the power plants -- allowing owners to buy or sell the "credits" via an established market system (i.e., the "trade") in which their value is set by demand and supply.

EPA's cap-and-trade strategy uses market forces to limit and curtail air pollution emissions of power plants, and it has been amazingly effective. A report by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group documented that power plants operating within Pennsylvania reduced their emissions of NOx by 26 percent between 1995 and 2003, and they also had an 8 percent decrease in SO2 emissions during the same period. The cap-and-trade program of EPA created economic incentives for power plant owners to operate their facilities at higher efficiencies (getting more BTUs per unit of fuel) and to burn cleaner fuels (e.g., natural gas vs. coal).

There is a widespread belief that the electricity generated by wind turbines will back down a commensurate amount of generation from other power plants in the grid, thereby saving some fossil-fuel from being burned -- thus preventing some air pollution which otherwise would be emitted due to combustion of the "saved" fuel. While logical, this scenario doesn't reflect reality and ignores EPA's successful cap-and-trade program.

The generation of electricity by wind farms will not significantly reduce the air pollution emissions from power plants because the cap-and-trade program allows any unused pollution credits resulting from the fuel savings due to wind-generated electricity to be traded -- enabling other power plants to burn more fuel and/or use cheaper but dirtier fuel.

Essentially, EPA's cap-and-trade program creates a "zero-sum" game which prevents wind farms from causing a meaningful decrease in the emissions of NOx and SO2 from power plants.

In addition, during summer months the wind farms installed in our region operate at only a fraction of their generating capacity due to the low average speed and intermittency of winds during this time of year. For example, from July through September of 2005, the 63 huge wind turbines (94.5-MW total) installed at the Waymart and Meyersdale wind plants generated so little electricity that their combined output could be matched by only 16-MW of a coal-fueled power plant or 14-MW of a typical nuclear power plant.

Even worse, the expected generating capacity of wind farms during heat waves -- when ozone alerts are more likely to occur and would be most serious -- is probably going to be far lower than their summertime average. AN OFTEN-POSED rhetorical question asks if "smokestacks" are preferable to wind farms -- a false choice. Thousands more wind turbines are coming, yet smokestacks will persist and likely increase in number. Wind turbines will not qualify as credible substitutes for building future power plants since they cannot be counted on to produce electricity when needed. They also will not result in the retirement of any existing power plant given the ever-increasing growth in demand for electricity in our region.

To match the commonwealth's rate of growth in electricity production via wind energy would require the annual construction of about 700 of Gamesa's 2-MW wind turbines -- resulting in the conversion of 100 miles of ridge top per year into industrial wind farms!

DAN BOONE of Bowie, Md. is a professional ecologist and natural resources policy analyst.

[sandstone]

Here's a photo of a substation and industrial wind turbine at the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm near Blue Knob:

[Bill Latchford]

I must say that the tour on Saturday was quite impressive. These things are massive. As for noise...if someone says they make none they need to have their ears checked. Now with that said...Is the noise offensive? Not for the two or so hours we were there. So I asked a few of the neighbors...some as close as 1700 feet and those 1/4 to 3/4 mile away. You could easily see the windmills from all these locations and they had not one bad thing to say about them. And just to answer the question...2 did own land that the windmills sat on and a few did not. Just wanted to disclose all information that I found. Now personally the footprint of these things looked fine. We saw some that were done and others getting ready to go up so we saw the worst and the best and the almost finished products looked great. Everything was seeded the roads were put back to about 15 or 16 feet. To me very eco friendly and considerate for the enviroment. All in All I would say that this was a good impression of the work Gamesa does and how much they care. Do they make money off these things...Of Course. It is bussiness, but bussiness that is good for all it seems. We will see what is in store. Just wanted to share my thoughts of the tour. Go ahead and start the stones being thrown....LOL

[sandstone]

Here's an article by local outdoor columnist Mark Nale from yesterday's Centre Daily Times:

Wind farm

Gamesa Energy USA is proposing to erect between 10-25 electricity-generating windmills on the Tyrone Borough watershed property on Sandy Ridge. The contract would run for nearly 30 years. Tyrone is not a wealthy community, and the prospect of $60,000 to $90,000 per year in revenue looks quite appealing.

I like the process being used to make the Tyrone wind farm decision. The proposal, in various stages, has been discussed at prior borough meetings and has been openly covered by the media. Mayor James Kilmartin went public last week, laying out the entire proposal and asking for public input. Gamesa has requested that a decision be made at the Nov. 13 borough meeting.

Clean energy, no greenhouse gases, less dependence on foreign oil, guaranteed revenue for Tyrone — what’s the catch?

Well, there are many definite and possible catches. Gamesa promises no negative impacts to Tyrone’s drinking water, but I wonder if they can really build all of those giant wind turbines without erosion taking place. There is always the possibility of an accident as well.

According to Stan Kotala, spokesperson for the Juniata Valley Audubon Society, the small environmental gain from building the windmills would be offset by a huge ecological cost. Sandy Ridge has been identified as an Important Bird Area and a greenway. The wind turbines threaten birds and building them causes forest fragmentation.

Mayor Kilmartin points out in his analysis, “... the structures will take up the ridge tops that people so tremendously love about this community.”

And these are big structures, too. One can’t really comprehend their 450-foot height until you get close.

A recent item on Senator John Eichelberger’s Web page is worth noting.

“I made a trip up to Blue Knob today (Oct. 12), in response to a constituent complaint to hear and see the new wind turbines located along the mountain top,” Eichelberger wrote. “Although I have been given a lot of information about these things, I was startled at their size. It was a windy day and the blades were really moving. The complaint we received was about how disruptive the noise was. I agree after going to the site myself that the noise is disturbing and certainly carried to the home of the people who contacted me. I was also surprised at the ground area needed to facilitate the turbines, which includes a wide road cut into the woods. There needs to be more discussion on the placement of these structures and their effect not only on the environment but on the people who live close by. I’m sure the property values of this immediate area have been negatively [affected]. This hour-long excursion in the middle of my jammed up day was worth the time. Until you see this up close, you don’t understand the impact these turbines are having.”

I want to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, but do we really want to see rows of these things lining all of our beautiful ridge tops?

Informed citizen input is needed for all three of these important issues. The final decisions will have far-reaching effects on more than just the local residents. I only hope that what is best for the environment is part of the decision-making processes.

Mark Nale, who lives in the Bald Eagle Valley, is a member of the Pennsylvania Outdoors Writers Association. He can be reached at MarkAngler@aol.com.

[George M.]

I suppose "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" regarding the aesthetic evaluation of huge wind turbines or large road systems built inside remote forest tracts. However, it is inappropriate to describe the ecological impact resulting from the construction of dozens of miles of 50- to 70-foot-wind road corridors which have been re-seeded with non-native grasses as "very eco friendly and considerate for the enviro[n]ment". Forest fragmentation is a major ecological concern in PA and elsewhere - see: http://www.paconserve.org/e-conserve/winter-06/lh.htm. An ecologist or knowledgeable wildlife biologist would not consider as "eco friendly" the result of bulldozing a huge road network into a large tract of forest - especially if its very wide shoulders were planted in grass (which would serve to enhance and perpetuate the "edge" conditions that are so very deleterious to our wildlife and plants that are dependent on remote, forest-interior habitat conditons).

As for evaluating concerns regarding wind turbine noise, without knowing how far away the turbine[s] are and in what direction they occur from a neighboring resident - and also without knowing if interview subjects are related to or good friends with leasees - it would seem quite a stretch to draw any conclusions even if an otherwise credible effort was made to evaluate the noise impacts of Gamesa's Allegheny Ridge windplant. However, given Bill's limited effort to interview neighboring landowners - and the possible biased sample of neighbor's interviewed (it would be helpful to know who selected and/or arranged for the landowners to speak with Bill - Gamesa?) - his results are not likely representative of the potential extent of noise concerns among this wind energy project's neighbors.

I'm curious to know if Gamesa has initiated any wildlife mortality research at their Allegheny Ridge wind farm to estimate the numbers of birds and bats killed due to collision with its huge wind turbines. If so, is this research being conducted by independent researchers to ensure unbiased results?

[George M.]

It’s a false myth that “wind farms” will make US less dependent on oil.

Amory Lovins wrote in 2003 that:

"Only 3% of all U.S. oil consumption makes electricity. Five-sixths of that usage is tarry residual oil or coal-like petroleum coke — both otherwise almost useless byproducts of refining. Only 0.4% of U.S. oil is distilled products made into electricity."
Source: page 3 in: http://www.rmi.org/images/other/EnergyS ... SFtext.pdf

Dr. Lovins has amazingly “green” credentials – see: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti ... _B._Lovins.

The US actually EXPORTS about twice as much oil each year as powerplants use annually to generate electricity. Consequently, the move to fund and install wind turbines by some energy monopolies like BP and Shell is not going to cut into the demand for oil - which overwhelmingly is due to the transportation sector of our economy.

[sandstone]

Here are "before" and "after" photos of the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm near Blue Knob:

BEFORE:




AFTER