windmill vote

[RyanMyers]

do you approve of the windmills???

[RyanMyers]

i approve

[Ice Man]

i approve

Why?

[sandstone]

do you approve of the windmills???

No. Not on Ice Mountain, a site identified by the Blair County Natural Heritage Inventory as being "unique" and "of exceptional conservation value" because of its large tracts of forest uninterrupted by signifcant infrastructure such as heavy-duty roads, clearings for turbines, accessory buildings, substations, and transmission line corridors. It's impossible to develop this site with this kind of infrastructure and still retain the attributes that led to Ice Mountain being designated a Landscape Conservation Area and County Natural Heritage Area.

[hot toddy1]

No windmills on ice mountain - that's my vote.
I've read alot about the negatives in a number of places, and after reading the article about Gamesa being afraid of a meeting with an open forum, I guess there can't be too many positives. - I've always been of the opinion that if someone is afraid to say something in public there must not be much truth in it.

[Bill Latchford]

- I've always been of the opinion that if someone is afraid to say something in public there must not be much truth in it.

Hot toddy1...I would agree with you 100% on that statement. That is why my name is out here. I just received a message from Gamesa verifying that format and was not happy. I always like to hear it from the source. Another point for the CONS for sure. The thing that has to be remembered is just because I put my name on it doesn't make it right. I have learned a lot from this whole windmill topic.

[tdoran]

do you approve of the windmills???

Dear Sirs,

I noticed that one of the Tyrone supervisors stated that he would vote "yes" if he knew that the wind turbines would eliminate coal fired plants. There is no evidence that anything but thousands of wind turbines would eliminate one coal fired plant. Wind turbines are inefficient in PA and provide expensive electricity at taxpayer expense. Wind in PA is unreliable and gnerates the least electricity at times of greatest demand. It is a "dream" to believe that wind turbines in PA will decrease our use of coal fired plants.

Finally, it amazes me that Gamesa will not permit a forum but wants a one on one discussion.

Dr.T. Doran

[Bill Latchford]

do you approve of the windmills???

Dear Sirs,

I noticed that one of the Tyrone supervisors stated that he would vote "yes" if he knew that the wind turbines would eliminate coal fired plants. There is no evidence that anything but thousands of wind turbines would eliminate one coal fired plant. Wind turbines are inefficient in PA and provide expensive electricity at taxpayer expense. Wind in PA is unreliable and gnerates the least electricity at times of greatest demand. It is a "dream" to believe that wind turbines in PA will decrease our use of coal fired plants.

Finally, it amazes me that Gamesa will not permit a forum but wants a one on one discussion.

Dr.T. Doran

TDoran - From what I have gathered thus far, from some who have been tolerant of my inexperience with this topic, that it would take a lot of turbines to make any type of a significant dent at all in the way electricity is produced in Pa. and your amazement about Gamesa and the public forum is shared by many to include myself.

[Ice Man]

This might make some people want to change their vote!:

Re: Windmills on Ice Mountain - Gamesa Wind Turbines
by Bill Latchford on Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:08 pm

As much as I didn't want to pop back in here I just had to....I spent 5 hours today walking through snow and knocking on doors up in the Portage / Blue Knob area. If my mind weren't already made up it is most certainly solidified now. At every stop of my ride through the Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm...There was not one point where I could not hear them. At some times ever so faint and at the worst of times it made me pity the people whom have to suffer with the Wind Turbines. I put around 12-18 miles on my car in just this area. I spoke to several people and did not ask their names. I wanted them to know what I was doing and did not want them to feel I would expose them to the media or the like. I will tell you that in some spots where I did not see the turbines because of the fog, I could hear them even better. Some people will say that you can hear them because you can see their movement, sort of a psychological thing. But guess what I could not see them because of the fog and the noise was there...My last stop was a very interesting and pleasant surprise. I introduced myself and the person said she knew me, because of the posts on here. I should add that before she answered the door, I was just amazed at how these things towered over the mountain in front of their home. Then to hear them was so surreal. It really does sound like a jet plane circling overhead. I thought it was an exaggeration, until I heard it myself. Then the blades start to pitch and turn into the wind again to make the best of the blowing winds and you can hear the metal to metal adjustments and then as the blades pitch and they thump through the air until they are in position. Then after all that you are back to the jet plane effect. Now while I was there I was expressing my pity that they have to put up with that, only to find out this was a calm day in comparison to how it can get. Even though the Turbine slated for Tyrone are decently far away from Tyrone proper, I feel it would be a serious disservice to our Snyder Township neighbors to let this go through. I was everywhere from 2000 feet to 1.2 miles maybe a touch further in some cases and could hear these giants. Though I am one who thinks they look majestic blowing in the wind. I for one will take this as a hindsight is 20/20 test and not put our citizens or Snyder Townships citizens through such an ordeal that these folks up in Portage / Blue knob area are going through. All is fine in our community now, let’s just leave things well alone and learn from other's misfortune. My many many heartfelt thanks to those who shared their day and time, and property with me today. I learned a great deal and will certainly ask all other Council Members here in Tyrone to make another trip to hear these Giants from a distance. I have an open invitation and I certainly hope I can get some of the other Council Members up there. Thanks "InMyBackYard"

[tammy]

wow..Thank you for that realism..
I no longer live in Tyrone but to hear this..
My vote is No
Council Members..
Invitation??
Please reconsider..Listen

[sandstone]

For the benefit of newcomers to the battle to save Ice Mountain, here's Juniata Valley Audubon's original statement, given at a Tyrone Borough Council meeting by Dr. Stan Kotala in the summer of 2006:

Juniata Valley Audubon, a wildlife conservation organization with more than 450 members in Blair County is opposed to the construction of wind turbine installations on forested ridgetops in Blair County, particularly those with exceptional conservation value, such as Tyrone Borough land on Ice Mountain.

Ice Mountain and its surrounding area were designated as a Landscape Conservation Area (Allegheny Front #1 LCA) and County Natural Heritage Area of Exceptional Significance in the Blair County Natural Heritage Inventory which was conducted under the direction of the Blair County Planning Commission in 2003-2005. It was so designated because Ice Mountain represents a large block of unfragmented forest habitat important to forest-interior species, such as the bobcat, the fisher, the black-throated blue warbler, the black-throated green warbler, the scarlet tanager, and the hermit thrush. Industrial windplant construction requires extensive forest fragmentation through the construction of heavy-duty roads to accommodate the 400-foot tall turbines, 120-foot long blades, 60 ton nacelle, and extensive excavation for the turbine pad.

The Executive Summary of the Blair County Natural Heritage Inventory describes Landscape Conservation Areas as “large contiguous areas that are important because of their size, open space, habitats, and/or inclusion of one or more Biological Diversity Areas.” It goes on to say;

“These large regions in relatively natural condition can be viewed as regional assets; they improve quality of life by providing a landscape imbued with a sense of beauty and wilderness, they provide a sustainable economic base, and their high ecological integrity offers unique capacity to support biodiversity and human health. Planning and stewardship efforts can preserve these functions of the landscape by limiting the overall amount of land converted to other uses, thereby minimizing fragmentation of these areas.”

Ice Mountain and its surrounding area were also designated as Greenways in the revision of the Blair County Comprehensive Plan; which was based on public comments received in 2002-2005 (please see the attached map and text). Greenways are areas where the preservation of the natural landscape should be given first priority. The Areawide Comprehensive Plan for Blair County (adopted by the Blair County Commissioners last year) states;

“The ridge tops in Blair County are one of its defining characteristics. As one looks in any direction, the mountain ridges dominate the landscape. They demonstrate the power and constancy of the natural forces that shaped them. Development along ridge tops should be discouraged so that their imposing beauty is preserved. Ridge lines that should be conserved are the Allegheny Front and Dunning, Short, Loop, Lock, Brush, Bald Eagle, Canoe, and Tussey Mountains.”

Were a “wind farm” to be built on Ice Mountain then the “wind farm,” not the mountain, would dominate the landscape. It is hard to imagine a more shocking and obtrusive feature on the mountain than a 400-foot tall tower with 120-foot long whirling blades.

Ice Mountain also is part of the Allegheny Front Important Bird Area identified by the Pennsylvania Biological Survey's Ornithological Technical Committee. During migration, approximately 2 million birds pass over the Allegheny Front each night. In summer, Ice Mountain is home to about 100 species of breeding birds, many of which are dependent upon large tracts of unbroken forest. Examples of such birds are the Scarlet Tanager, the Wood Thrush, the Black-throated Green Warbler, the Canada Warbler, the Black-throated Green Warbler, and the Ovenbird.

A “wind farm” on Ice Mountain would violate Federal guidelines regarding the siting of utility-scale wind turbines. The US Fish and Wildlife Service guidance document states that wind energy projects should: Avoid fragmenting large, contiguous tracts of wildlife habitat. Consequently, Gamesa’s intention to possibly site an industrial wind energy facility on Ice Mountain would conflict with Ice Mountain’s designation as a Landscape Conservation Area because large roads and clearings for project infrastructure would cause extensive fragmentation of forest habitat.

The Ice Mountain site is part of a protective forested buffer around the Tyrone Reservoirs, which supply water to area customers. Each wind turbine contains about 200 gallons of oil in its 60-ton nacelle, the center point of the rotating assembly. Oil and water don't mix. Each turbine will be vulnerable to lightning strikes, resulting in a high risk of fire in the forested reservoir watershed. The turbines to be built on Tyrone Borough property would require the construction of miles of new roads on Ice Mountain, resulting in increased runoff and sedimentation. Each turbine also requires the clearing and grading of several acres surrounding it for construction and maintenance. Because of the risk of ice and broken parts being thrown from the rotors, people will not be able to walk near the towers, locking up large portions of Ice Mountain that were previously available to the public for hiking and hunting.

Juniata Valley Audubon questions the ability of the wind power industry to police itself. Despite the above-mentioned publicly-accessible scientific evidence and county planning designations, Gamesa has targeted Ice Mountain to site an industrial windplant. Their action either ignores or dismisses this area’s long-standing designations, which corroborate Ice Mountain’s exceptional conservation value. Gamesa’s effort also disregards the public approval of Ice Mountain as a Greenway - essential for the preservation of our quality of life in Blair County.

Juniata Valley Audubon seeks a balanced approach to energy production. It is not unreasonable to recommend that lands designated to have exceptional conservation value be off limits to industrial wind energy development.
Juniata Valley Audubon hopes that the Snyder Township Planning Commission and the Borough of Tyrone will elect to follow the US Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines mentioned above as well as heeding the County Natural Heritage Area, Landscape Conservation Area and Greenway designations of Ice Mountain.

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

[exbellwoodian]

I approve 110%. Please explain to me your logic for NOT approving these? :nuts:

[Luke]

Reasons for not approving:

1. Loss of environmental integrity of site.
2. Loss of natural beauty of the mountain.
3. Too many unknowns.
4. Loss of serenity to surrounding residents.
5. Unknown impact on birds and other wildlife.
6. What happens if they expose acid rock during the construction....REMEMBER I99

Reasons for approving:

1. Financial gain by Gamesa
2. Financial gain by the property owner
3. Possible reduction in fuel fossil use.


I don't think the reasons for approving outweigh the reasons not to approve.

[Ice Man]

I approve 110%. Please explain to me your logic for NOT approving these? :nuts:

I don't think anyone can explain it more clearly than the Pennsylvania Biological Survey, an association of conservation professionals who provide our state resource agencies with impartial advice regarding the Commonwealth's natural resources:

Wind Power Development on Public Lands – It Isn’t Worth It

By the Pennsylvania Biological Survey

The Pennsylvania Biological Survey is a nonprofit organization whose purpose is to increase the knowledge of and foster the perpetuation of the natural biological diversity of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Our membership includes scientists, representatives of state and federal agencies concerned with natural resource management, and representatives of non-profit conservation organizations.
PABS technical committees serve as official advisory committees to several natural resource agencies in the state, including the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Game Commission, and Fish and Boat Commission.
After reviewing evidence on the environmental costs and benefits of wind energy, PABS is opposed to wind energy development on Pennsylvania natural resource agency lands.
We are aware of the serious environmental costs of fossil fuel energy sources, including the threats of global climate change to Pennsylvania’s natural biological diversity. We therefore support the responsible development of alternative energy sources, including properly sited wind energy development.
However, because wind energy development has associated environmental costs, wind energy development should only be instituted on state lands if the environmental benefits can be demonstrated to exceed the environmental costs.
Based on the available evidence, it is our conclusion that wind energy development is not suitable on state-owned lands where natural resource conservation is a major goal (i.e., primarily lands owned and managed by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and the Pennsylvania Game Commission).
The reason for our opposition is outlined below but can be summarized as follows:
The environmental benefits of wind energy development, in the mid-Atlantic area in general and on Pennsylvania state lands in particular, are small relative to the negative consequences, which include habitat fragmentation and mortality to birds and bats.
The primary environmental benefit of wind energy production is that it offsets the use of fossil fuels, thereby reducing emissions of carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas.
The Department of Energy projects that by 2020, wind power will meet 1.2 to 4.5 percent of the country’s electricity generation, and will thus offset emissions of carbon dioxide from electricity generation by 1.2 to 4.5 percent. Since electricity generation accounts for 39 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States, wind power will offset between 0.5 and 1.8 percent of total carbon dioxide emissions (National Research Council 2007).
The National Research Council (2007) concludes “Wind energy will contribute proportionately less to electricity generation in the mid-Atlantic region than in the United States as a whole, because a smaller portion of the region has high-quality wind resources than the portion of high-quality wind resources in the United States as a whole.”
Thus, it is apparent that wind energy development in the mid-Atlantic will offset a very minor portion of future carbon dioxide emissions.
Because Commonwealth Natural Resource Agency Lands make up only a fraction of land in Pennsylvania, the contribution of wind energy development on these lands to future energy needs, as well as any offset of carbon dioxide emissions, will be negligible.
Energy conservation, on the other hand, could considerably reduce the demand for energy and thus reduce carbon dioxide emissions. For example, residential home energy consumption in 2020 could be feasibly educed by over 1/3 using existing technologies (Bressand et al. 2007).
The environmental impacts of wind energy are considerable. Mortality to birds and bats has been of particular concern. Bat mortality from wind turbines has been particularly high, especially along forested ridge tops in the eastern United States.
Because bats generally have low reproductive rates, cumulative negative impacts of wind energy development on bat populations are likely (Kunz et al. 2007). Based on projections of installed wind capacity, it is estimated that by 2020 annual mortality in the mid-Atlantic highlands could be as high as 45,000 birds (National Research Council 2007) and 111,000 bats (Kunz et al. 2007).
With wind energy development expanding on private lands in Pennsylvania, the forested ridge tops of state-owned lands will become even more critical for birds, bats, and other species that utilize these habitats.
Another important, and often overlooked, impact of wind development is habitat fragmentation and its associated effects. These effects include reduced habitat area, habitat isolation and loss of species from an area, disruption of dispersal, increased edge effects and loss of core habitat, and facilitation of invasive species (Groom et al. 2006).
Due to their linearity, roads and transmission lines, both of which accompany wind energy development, have particularly pronounced fragmentation effects (Groom et al. 2006, Willyard et al. 2004).
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2003) recommends that wind energy development “avoid fragmenting large, contiguous tracts of wildlife habitat” and advises that wind turbines be placed “on lands already altered or cultivated, and away from areas of intact and healthy native habitats.”
Because natural resource agency lands are among the last remaining large blocks of unfragmented land in Pennsylvania, these lands are particularly in need of protection. A publication produced by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (Moyer 2003) emphasizes the importance of preserving these last remaining large blocks of unfragmented habitat in the state.
In conclusion, the environmental benefits wind energy development on natural resource agency lands in Pennsylvania are negligible compared with the environmental consequences. These lands should remain closed to wind energy development.
For more information on the position of the Pennsylvania Biological Survey, contact Dr. Tim Maret, Department of Biology, Shippensburg University, by calling 717-477-1170 or sending email to: tjmare@ship.edu .

[Ice Man]

I approve 110%. Please explain to me your logic for NOT approving these? :nuts:

How about you telling us why you think Ice Mountain should become an industrial windfarm?