I have compiled a list of groups that are battling industrial wind development.
Thanks. Vicki
Download: Organizations-anit wind.pdf
Recent events confirm that “Big Money” interests in the US and Europe have discovered the enormously generous tax breaks and subsidies that are now available in the US for producing electricity with wind turbines. These organizations are moving aggressively to build “wind farms” and to seek more subsidies. Meanwhile, as more wind turbines are proposed in the US and other countries, ordinary citizens have learned that “wind farms” are not environmentally benign. Instead, wind energy has high economic, environmental, ecological, scenic and property value costs. Wind turbines produce only small amounts of electricity and that electricity is unreliable and low in value. Quite likely, many members of Congress, state legislators, governors, regulators and local officials don’t yet realize that they have been misled about the true benefits and costs of wind energy – or the extent of their combined generosity to the wind industry. In the US, “wind farms” are now being built primarily for tax avoidance purposes, not because of their environmental, energy or economic benefits. The tax breaks and subsidies have more value to “wind farm” owners than the revenue from the sale of electricity they produce. These generous tax breaks and subsidies are at the expense of ordinary taxpayers and electric customers and are hidden in their tax bills and monthly electric bills. Government officials seem unaware or uncaring about either the large transfer of wealth to “wind farm” owners from ordinary citizens -- or the fact that large amounts of capital are being spent on projects that produce only small amounts of unreliable, low value electricity. As detailed below: · At least 10 large US and foreign companies are now working to build more “wind farms” in the US to take advantage of the exceedingly generous tax breaks and subsidies. · Facts demonstrate that advocates have consistently overstated the environmental benefits and understated the environmental, ecological and economic costs of wind energy. · The tax breaks and subsidies for “wind energy” already in place are providing huge benefits for a few companies but the wind industry is lobbying for even more. Despite the facts, it’s far from clear that legislators, local government officials and regulators will temper their enthusiasm for wind energy since so many have accepted as fact the false and misleading information distributed during the past decade by wind energy advocates. Also, they are well aware of wind industry lobbying power and campaign contributions.
Download: wind-tax-breaks.pdf
Download:
Critical review of the 2003 analytical report entitles "The Effect of Wind Development on Local Property Values" prepared by Renewable Energy Policy Project.
Download: Schleede REPP.pdf
A necessary step in any attempt to understand the outlook for US energy supply and demand. Comments for the owners and members of Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc at their 2004 Annual Meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, by Glenn R. Schleede, June 24, 2004"
Download: Schleede\'s best 6_04.PDF
Questions and Answers about the proposed wind facility and the variance application before the Zoning Board of Adjustment
Download: GardnerQA.pdf
If you have ever wondered whether many people participated in utility programs that offer customers the "opportunity" to pay a premium price for "green" electricity, please check out this just released EIA 3-page report: Green Pricing and Net Metering Programs 2003 (11/29) This report provides an overview of green pricing and net metering programs.
Download:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/greenprice/grnprc.html
Status letter and example of some of the stuff delivered to our town hall during the last year or so.
Download: SardiniaNYresearch.pdf
Here are some more very interesting facts on the Danish windpower situation -- provided by John Etherington (UK). This information, together with that provided by Dr. Mason, should give you lots of ammunition that can be used when wind advocates make claims about the situation in Denmark.
Download: MoreOnDanishWindpower.pdf
Attached is a review of the REPP Study that I did last year. Like the other studies, it suffers from several flaws and limited resources. It is difficult to isolate the effect of wind turbine on property values alone since several other factors (interest rates, local economy, population trends, etc..) also have significant effects on property values. You would think that the government could support a more comprehensive look at the subject. Perhaps they are concerned about the outcome.
Download: Hewson REPP Review.pdf
Slide presentation made by Mr. Ed Feo of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLC to the American Bar Association, "Renewable Energy" Committee. Financial details of debt/equity and other financing models of wind projects.
Download:
http://www.abanet.org/environ/committees/renewableenergy/teleconarchives/121504/feoppt.pdf
Note: One of interesting points he makes (4th slide) is that Tax Benefits provide "2/3rd of value" of wind energy projects. Isn't it just great what our political leaders have done to the taxpayers (and electric customers) of America?
Background Denmark (pop. 5.4 million) is a leading pioneer in the field of renewable energy. Since 1985 it has erected about 3,100 MW of wind turbine capacity. Of this 420 MW are sited offshore (Nielsen, 2004), and more is planned for the near future (Bendtsen and Hedegaard, 2004). Over the same period many small gas- or bio-fuelled CHP plants were deployed for local district heating and/or electricity production. Interest in solar power is also considerable. The Danish Wind Turbine Industry is particularly important to the economy of this small country, currently supplying about 40% of the world market and employing about 20,000 Danes (Nielsen, 2004).
Download: Wind-Mason-Danishexperience.pdf
In summary, there are serious problems with the draft Programmatic Environmental Impact statement (PEIS). The comments that follow are focused primarily on the portions of the draft that deal with the economics of wind energy development. The data and conclusions reflected in those parts of the draft are invalid because: · Major elements of the true costs of producing and delivering electricity from wind energy have not been taken into account. · The “economic model” underlying the economic analysis is defective. It is important that Department of the Interior (DOI) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) officials recognize that much of the information relied on by those drafting the statement has come from organizations that promote wind energy development. This information is often biased and should not be relied on as a basis for BLM decisions. The net effect of the deficiencies is that the draft PEIS grossly overstates the potential benefits of wind energy while grossly understating the true costs. In fact, it is far from clear that the PEIS justifies any development of wind energy on BLM-administered lands. Any conclusions in that regard will have to await correction of the fundamental deficiencies in the economic analysis.
Download: 211 Wind BLM Draft EIS Comments.pdf
Note: As you probably know, the US Bureau of Land Management (US Department of the Interior) has been granting permission to build "wind farms" on US-owned, BLM-administered lands. Other proposed projects are now being considered. On September 10, 2004, BLM published a "Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DPEIS) in the Federal Register with a request for public comments -- which were due (or had to be postmarked) yesterday. My comments are attached. (The first few paragraphs are quoted below if you'd like to avoid reading all 9 pages.) There is a lot of useful information in the draft PEIS (which you can find at http://www.windeis.anl.gov ). However, key parts of the draft are bad. The way the draft PEIS was developed is also a sad commentary on the way "our" federal government operates. BLM apparently contracted with the US Department of Energy's Argonne National "Laboratory" (ANL) to prepare the draft PEIS. The people at Argonne then contracted with none other than DOE's National Renewable Energy "Laboratory" (NREL) for a significant part of the work, including a so-called "Economic Analysis." Both ANL and NREL are 99% (if not 100%) financed with our tax dollars. NREL, of course, is the organization that has, for years, been developing, supporting and/or distributing highly biased "analyses" and "reports" about wind energy and has played a major role in misleading the public, media and government officials about the costs and benefits of wind energy. As a result, the so-called "Economic Analysis" in the DPEIS is just what you would expect -- as summarized below. Isn't it fun to see your tax dollars spent in this way? Glenn Schleede
One of the false claims made by “wind energy” advocates is that greater use of this potential energy source would reduce US dependence on oil, including oil imports. In fact, adding more wind turbines will have no significant impact on US oil consumption. Unfortunately, many well-meaning people (including some prolific authors of letters to editors and reporters) have accepted the wind advocates’ claims about reductions in oil use. This brief paper explains why the reduced oil use claim is false.
Download: Wind Energy Will Not Reduce US Oil Dependence.pdf