Plans for Maine’s first offshore wind turbine moving quickly

The world’s first large-scale floating wind turbine, installed by StatoilHydro and Siemens, is located approximately 7 miles off the southwest coast of Norway at a water depth of about 220 meters.
Statoil
The world’s first large-scale floating wind turbine, installed by StatoilHydro and Siemens, is located approximately 7 miles off the southwest coast of Norway at a water depth of about 220 meters.
Posted Dec. 08, 2011, at 10:50 a.m.
Last modified Dec. 08, 2011, at 7:30 p.m.
Print this   E-mail this    Facebook this   Tweet this     

View Hywind Maine wind pilot project in a larger map

SOUTH PORTLAND, Maine — A deep water wind farm off Maine’s coast moved closer to reality Thursday as state and federal officials got a more detailed look at a Norwegian energy company’s proposal.

Statoil North America Inc., a division of the Norwegian company Statoil ASA, submitted an application in October for a commercial lease to the federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for an area of ocean that’s about 22 square miles for full assessment of environmental impacts, sea bed conditions and wind speeds. The lease area is about 12 nautical miles offshore of the Boothbay area.

The eventual size of the “Hywind Maine” project would be narrowed down to an area of between 2.32 and 3.86 square miles.

Ned Farquhar, deputy assistant secretary at the Department of the Interior, talked Thursday about the Obama administration’s goals to reduce dependence on foreign energy sources.

“Opportunities like Atlantic wind, where there is significant potential, don’t come along every generation,” said Farquhar. “This is a huge opportunity to develop clean energy sources responsibly.”

The official interest by a major industry player in offshore wind immediately accelerates the potential development of the sector in Maine. The state, largely through the efforts of private industry and the University of Maine, has been developing prototypes, studying environmental and commercial issues off the coast and setting up the process for approving such projects.

“The proposal galvanizes the commercial deep-water development in Maine and the United States,” said Habib Dagher, the UMaine professor who has been at the forefront of offshore wind research in the state. “It’s currently an international race to deep water, and Maine is in the middle of that race.”

Farquhar confirmed Dagher’s assessment: “Deep water has not been implemented very much around the world. It’s got tremendous potential and Maine is at the vanguard.”

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, has been involved with the offshore wind effort in Maine for years, sending members of her staff with former Gov. John Baldacci to Norway in 2009. She noted in a statement Thursday that Interior Secretary Ken Salazar toured the new deep-water offshore wind laboratory at UMaine during the summer at her invitation to learn more about the work being done in the state.

“I am very pleased to see the department take this next step in convening the BOEM Maine Renewable Energy Task Force today, and I thank Secretary Salazar for his commitment to work with other federal agencies in pursuing the most efficient path forward to establish deep-water, offshore wind as a viable energy source,” Collins said.

The federal agency has reviewed and approved the legal aspects of the application. It still has to review the technical and financial merits of the program.

The project would be in water from 460 to 520 feet deep. Because of the depth, the wind turbines would be floating, tethered to anchors on the sea floor — not embedded in the ocean bed.

Aditi Mirani, the bureau’s project manager for Maine, said the initial project Statoil has proposed is a pilot plan. It would include four 3-megawatt turbines, she said. The company is proposing a similar deep-sea pilot program off the coast of Scotland.

“What they’re proposing here is a test facility, a small-scale project. They just want to demonstrate the commercial potential of that floating turbine technology,” said Marini.

Ken Fletcher, head of Gov. Paul LePage’s Office of Energy Independence, noted the development of offshore wind in Maine was still in the very early stages.

The administration is keeping an open mind regarding the different energy opportunities that exist, he said, and ocean energy is “one of those great potentials.”

“The real test will be how well we can implement and achieve that potential with minimal impact,” said Fletcher.

Marini said Statoil plans to submit construction plans and operations plans by the end of next year, with the bureau making a decision on the lease request and approval of those plans by 2014. The plan is to start installation of the turbines in summer 2016, she said.

Statoil has responded to a request for proposals from the Maine Public Utilities Commission for companies that wanted to produce offshore energy, and the company also has applied to the New England electric grid to connect at the Boothbay substation.

Sen. Christopher Rector, R-Thomaston, head of the Legislature’s Labor, Commerce, Research and Economic Development Committee, said he saw great potential for Maine companies like Bath Iron Works, Cianbro Corp., Reed & Reed Construction and others.

“We’ve been focused on jobs for as long as I’ve been in the Legislature. What’s exciting about this is the opportunity for jobs in areas where we have some levels of native skill,” Rector said. “Saltwater runs in our veins.”

Rector said he was thinking of not only jobs making the turbine towers and parts, but also the installation and continuing maintenance of the wind farm.

Paul Williamson, director of the Maine Wind Energy Initiative, said his group has been working with Statoil to determine what parts of the supply chain exist here in Maine and where there are gaps.

The company’s interest in Maine waters takes his group’s efforts to a different level, he noted.

“This is beyond tire-kicking,” he said.

Statoil developed the first deep-water floating turbine off the coast of Norway in 2009. Former Gov. John Baldacci, University of Maine researchers and others visited the site that year, signing an agreement to cooperate in exploring the technology’s potential.

The company has operations in 34 countries and is valued at $85 billion. Company officials visited Maine after the gubernatorial mission to Norway and said at the time they were exploring numerous deep-water sites around the globe for their first commercial wind farm.

About 100 state and federal officials, as well as members of the public and interested parties, gathered Thursday for the meeting in South Portland.

Expected to last for much of the day, the session included numerous comments from agencies including the Coast Guard, Department of Defense and National Marine Fisheries Service on how they plan to study the proposal and what problems may exist.

Several officials gave initial assessments while describing the additional studies and tests they would undertake concerning the feasibility of the Maine Hywind project.

“Statoil picked a fairly decent location as far as traffic goes,” said George Detweiller, a marine transportation specialist with the Coast Guard.

Coast Guard data show relatively light traffic in that area, he said, though they don’t necessarily track smaller fishing vessels or recreation craft.

Representatives from the DOD said they would need more studies to determine possible impact on radar, and noted the area was in the general vicinity of pathways used by BIW and the Navy to test new destroyers, as well as submarine routes for vessels being serviced by Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.

A fisheries officials said they would study impacts on habitat, marine mammals, fish stocks and others.

Linda Welch, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologist who works with the Maine Coastal Islands National Wildlife Refuge, raised a number of concerns regarding offshore turbines and their potential impact on birds and bats.

Both the roseate tern and the piping plover are endangered species and migrate from Nova Scotia to Maine using unknown routes. They could be affected by a wind farm, she noted.

Maine has about 4,600 coastal islands and 382 are nationally significant seabird nesting islands, she said.

For example, 96 percent of the Arctic terns in the lower 48 states breed on four islands in the Gulf of Maine. Ninety percent of Atlantic puffins breed on three of Maine’s islands, she said.

Bald eagles congregate on the coast in the winter, feasting on seabirds, traveling to islands up to 20 miles off the coast, Welch said.

She suggested that in-depth studies would be needed to address potential impacts.

Rep. Bruce MacDonald, D-Boothbay, a member of the task force, said he was a proponent of wind energy, but added that a lot more study and information was needed.

“We have to look at a complete picture — can you do it without hurting the fishermen?” he said.

After the presentations, the task force took comments and questions from members of the audience. Some, including Dagher and Beth Nagusky of Environment Northeast, urged an expedited process for approving the pilot project lease.

A number of others with questions represented Maine’s fishing community, including Chris Weiner, a senior fishery analyst with the American Bluefin Tuna Association.

Weiner said the area eyed by Statoil is a “hot spot” for tuna, as well as for groundfish, lobsters and whale watchers.

“There are much better places to put something like this,” said Weiner. “You’re never going to please everybody, but don’t pick a hot spot.”

Similar articles:

Marketplace News

Marketplace

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

In brief:

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.

The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    Hopefully the electricity will go to Maine residents first instead of Massachusetts.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds promising, but looking at our history Maine will find a way to say NO to this. The Island Institute will convince the lobstermen that the blades harmonic resonance will drive away the lobsters.

    NO LNG, NO LPG, NO Hydro (unless it’s in Quebec), No Nukes, No Wind Turbines. Let’s just continue to poison our waters with mercury from midwest coal plants.

  • Anonymous

    Agreed.  Jim Freeman will definitely have to rally the troops and protest this one.

  • Anonymous

    As long as these technologies can stand alone and are not funded by you and I, bring it on. More times than not ie, mountain wind power,  there is so much “funny” money that investors find this govt’ money and b/c of that there is little or no risk.

  • Anonymous

    Right in The Kettle.

  • Anonymous

    MF Global was a derivatives trading company that recently filed for bankruptcy losing over a billion dollars which cannot be found. Renewable energy derivatives are increasingly being used to mange risk.

    http://www.risk.net/energy-risk/news/2129252/renewable-energy-companies-increase-derivatives-survey

    This morning, Karl Denninger at The Market Ticker, published an eye opening article which pointed out something very important with respect to derivatives and the UK (europe).

    http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=198790

    excerpt:

    “But there’s a difference between earning on your funds and securities (which brokerages do all the time) and stealing your assets. The latter occurs when the law is circumvented — whether legal or not.And it appears that it was — UK laws appear to contain no limits on the amount of hypothecation or re-hypothecation that can take place. MF Global thus appears to have transferred client assets outside of US jurisdiction where they were then subject to much looser — effectively zero — in the way of risk controls!But the underlying means by which this escaped surveillance is the same means by which both Lehman and Enron blew up — the use of off-balance-sheet vehicles to hide total risk exposure…”

  • Anonymous

    The Norwegians probably didn’t want to come any closer to this contentious place than 12 miles out.  As it is multitudes will have their shorts in a knot and their hair on fire, because that’s what passes for discourse and that’s what they do best.

  • hasacluemaine

    This is where wind power in Maine belongs, if it can sustain itself without tax and rate payer subsidies. Get them off our mountains and where people live.

  • Anonymous

    “Jim Freeman will definitely have to rally the troops to protest this one.”

    So how would you convince him that doing so is not  a good idea ? 
    I’m just asking, so I can use your politically correct approach, too.

    I need to know what it is, so you don’t get all confused when I post in support 
    of what I guess you support,  too. 

    Unless,  of course your only real point is not really about supporting sustainable
    alternative energy and being open for new good business opportunities that are as traditional as Maine men going down to the sea, and just  being  a snark, 
    trashing someone that you think is not political pure of thought for your tastes.

    So focus;  how would YOU convince him that doing so is not  a good idea , please? 

  • Anonymous

    I couldnt have said it better myself

  • Anonymous

    Dont bet on it

  • Anonymous

    What difference does it make, really ? 

    “going to Mass” is just voodoo bookkeeping, like mortgage backed securities.

    The power is fungible. 
    Once it goes into the grid, it is used where ever the wires go.   
    “the company has also applied to the New England electric grid to connect at the Boothbay substation.”

    The bookkeeping, ” where the power goes”  is about balancing the money for the right to draw X kilowatts off the grid for $ Y and use it or resell it. .

    As consumers what matters to us is  filling the grid, and balancing … matching …
     our demand. 

    Besides  isn’t energy a National issue, and isn’t Massachusetts  in the USA ? 
    What’s with you sounding so un-American ? 
    Is that how you usually are ?

  • Anonymous

    I have always thought that putting these turbines out to see beyond the horizon makes the most sense. They are out of sight, pretty much. That is where the most wind is.

  • Anonymous

    Your right. Government has a nasty habit of doing things that would be done by private groups if it was worthwhile to do so. Many times they are not worthwhile, that is why no private groups attempt to do them.

  • Anonymous

    No I’m not un-American. If the source is in Maine then Maine should come first! Then the excess could go elsewhere! Also the “investors” should use their money if the wind farm is such a good deal!

  • Anonymous

    Kinda like the Interstate Highway System.

  • Anonymous

    If they knew how contentious some of our  get  a horse, flat earth curmudgeons are they would demand to be twenty mile away, and well beyond the visible horizon, ending of any possible discussion about it.   

    As it is, at twelve miles offshore, on a few really clear calm days per year,  
    someone who knows where to l0ok and what they are looking for will see something like  blur on the horizon, with binoculars. .  

    I KNOW from experience that at twelve nautical offshore any talk of  visual pollution is nonsense. 

    See # 6,8,9, and 1o here, and you can decide for yourself. 

    http://www.bananawind.us/Seamans_Eye.htm

  • Anonymous

    “As long as these technologies can stand alone and are not funded by you and I …”

    Unlike oil, gas and nuclear power, right ?

  • Anonymous

    I believe that Interstate creation was a good thing. My example would be the State of Maine buying a Bankrupt Railroad and trying to operate it themselves or find a new operator.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7T3YNF6MG3FPEAVTFIJC44VQUI Dlbrt

    I agree!

    I am a NIMBY,

     N  ot
     I   n
    M  y
    B    ack
    Y   ard!

    Stay Off My Hill!

  • Anonymous

    Wonder what the nimby’s will have to say about this?

  • Anonymous

    Hey, if I have to look at them out my front window then the greenies living along the coast should have to look at these offshore platforms as well. Bring them in closer… That way the greens can feel better about themselves and all their doing for the environment and the State can save on maintenance costs. Just think of how many tons of green house gases we can save by shortening the trip for maintenance vessels!

  • Anonymous

    Remember Teddy and John Kerry-Hines having a fit when they tried to put these off of Hyannis? It would have messed with the sailing Feng Shui. They hurled in their Fois Gras at the mere mention of it. 

  • Anonymous

    Just lump everything together since this is what you do on these boards.
    LNG and LPG are not the same issue as wind and hydro.
    Same with nukes. Make them safe and let’s go forward.

  • Anonymous

    Yes, we don’t want to give wind power any government subsidies, we might have to take some money from the oil, gas and nuclear power subsidies we already provide! 

  • hasacluemaine

    So you must be a YIMBY.

    Y es
    I n
    M y
    B ack
    Y ard

    Make sure you send the indusrial wind farm folks your home address!

  • hasacluemaine

    The subsidies for comparable sources of energy are far, far cheaper. Wind subsidies are ten times greater than the next closest energy producing ource and subsidy rates climb much higher from there.

  • Anonymous

    If I were a lobster fisherman, the first complaint would be anchors that might entangle a right whale. You got to remember that they can’t use float line. Surely 2 or 3 miles of anchor line would be a whale trap…….

  • Anonymous

    This is damage from 50 mph winds in Scotland yesterday. They are lucky the fire didn’t spread to the forests.

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/08/windsplode-in-scotland/

    http://edmitchelloutdoors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Gods-Country-watermark.jpg

  • Anonymous

    Then they drove off in their gas guzzling Cadillac Escalade.

  • Anonymous

    Lobsterman world wide would ashamed of your ignorance. 

    Static anchor arrays poise less threat to whales than  whale watching cruises. 

  • Anonymous

    No wonder the federal government is broke… I wish the fed gov  would buy me a toyota hybrid. it would save more energy then what one of these produce…  

  • Anonymous

    What electricity??? the payback on one of those things is eternity.. They are not able to pay for their own cost, before they become salvage..

  • Anonymous

    “No I’m not un-American. If the source is in Maine then Maine should come first!”
    LOL  

    You’re  not much of an electrician,  either. 

    So really, sometimes it’s just so hard to even try to pretend to respect some people on internet. 
    I’m  sure others  feel that way, too. 
    So what is the best thing do at times like that ? 

    I mean really, I just explained it to her as politely as possible.
    What she wants is exactly how it actually works anyway.
    Didn’t I say that ? 

    I’m  sincerely asking for advice. 

    (And looking  forward to seeing what the politics of the real mean people is, too.)

  • Anonymous

    Wind is about subsidy harvesting and nothing more. See:

    http://www.windtaskforce.org/page/unsustainable-subsidies

  • Anonymous

    Ocean wind is as huge a ripoff as onshore wind:

    http://www.windtaskforce.org/page/unsustainable-subsidies

  • Anonymous

    Start by looking at how well the University of Maine has done with the state’s only wind turbine electricity experiment to date:

    http://www.windtaskforce.org/page/maine-s-public-turbines

  • Anonymous

    Well they all are sources of energy, and we all agree that we consume energy in Maine (and to a larger degree in the US), so why shouldn’t they be lumped together?
    I agree that wind turbines are not as efficient as they need to be, but only by building them, and using them can we advance the technology and make it better.
    We have become the State of NO! (kind of resembling the Republican congress), you must agree that we have to work on developing new technologies for energy production amd refining the ones we cuurently use

  • MaineHiker

    They do not fill the bill for our energy needs, All they are good for is chopping migratory birds out of the sky.  Push for LNG, LPG, and hydro. At least they are not useless for our energy needs. And, NONE of the energy should leave the state until the disparity between the foolishly rich and the rest of us is leveled out.

  • Anonymous

    The midwest has a lot more wind turbines – and a lot more wind – than Maine.  So, why is it that we’re still getting poisoned by  midwest coal plants?  Aren’t the turbines displacing the coal?  I thought that was the point. 

    And since we’re not getting electricity from the midwest, how do turbines in Maine save us from the effects of midwest coal plants?

    Just curious.

  • Anonymous

    Is that thing still broken down?

  • MaineHiker

    They don’t fill the energy needs we have and they murder off migratory bids. Stick with pushing for LNG,LPG, and Hydro. Maine is coming to the point where it will not tolerate wind mill discussion seriously in the conversation about energy production and will start seeking the decommissioning of those windmills that exist in Maine. They have no place in Maine and their proponents likewise.

  • Anonymous

    Take away all energy subsidies and wind still loses.  

  • MaineHiker

    So, what’s American? Sending our children off to war telling them it’s to save America when in fact it is to fight for oil and other commodities to make the 1% richer? No out of state investors should be allowed any involvement in Maine’s power production. They will only take advantage of us and laugh all the way to their bank with our money.

  • Anonymous

    Hurry hurry the money is gonna dry up

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, all that,too,  but not wanting to share “our power”  with Mass when we enjoy their sports teams and , share the same power grid anyway, is is not the best of American values, is it ?  

  • MaineHiker

    K  eep
    4  00′
    G  rimm
    r  eapers
    o ff
    a  ll
    M  aine’s
    h  ills
    r  egardless
    o  f
    o  wnership

    Wind-power is black

  • Anonymous

    You got spread sheets supporting that ? 

    But I would think if you take into account condemning whole cities, it would be nuclear power. But if your limits are more  short sighted and just in N.America, given we don’t know the cost of finally storing nuclear wastes, yet, I still have to question your contentions. 

  • Anonymous

    Migratory birds use the jet stream because it blows 500 mph. We’re not sticking any windmills in the jet stream because it moves. We lose more migratory birds to commercial air traffic than we’d ever lose to windmills. 

  • Anonymous

    “What she wants is exactly how it actually works anyway. Didn’t I say that ?”

    Actually, you really didn’t and you also sound clueless.  Electrical engineers will design the power delivery systems and linemen will build the infrastructure…electricians work on the wiring in your bathroom.  The grid may sound simple, but when you throw in Power Purchase Agreements and the laborious process of working with ISO New England and NEPOOL, it’s a little more tricky than a simple accounting matter.  Claiming that individual citizens of the several states are in some way unpatriotic for voicing a concern regarding their personal well being when it comes to energy costs is simply an irrational statement.  Our federalist system, as outlined in our republic’s constitution,  includes local, state, and national governments.  Thus, claiming that we should simply focus on energy issues only at the national level, pretty much takes the cake in terms of who is “unpatriotic”.  And it also indicates your complete lack of understanding energy and power supply issues on a regional scale.  Unless you know what you are talking about, stop berating people and acting like you have a clue…you don’t.

  • Patten_Pete

    Extreme Weather Causes Floating Wind Turbine Prototype To Sink
    http://www.nawindpower.com/naw/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.8992

  • Anonymous

    Who shall pay for the sky high cost of the new transmission lines this wholly unpredictable sputtering source will require?
    http://www.windtaskforce.org/page/transmission-lines

  • http://twitter.com/Sewallhouse Sewall House

    no risk on their part with all that federal money- baldacci and angus king should be called out on this for ruining what maine stands for,,,

  • Anonymous

    Why is the Interstate system a good thing?  Because you say so?  I happen to think that the reason the private railroads such as the Bangor and Aroostook went under is exactly because of the huge, huge, HUGE federal subsidies that were given to the railroad’s competitors – the highways. 

    Railroads used to pay taxes on their rights of way, on their stations, on their equipment, all while roads were being built, at taxpayer expense, roads that payed no taxes. 

    Fact:  Railroads were taxed in the 50s and 60s to help pay for their competition (roads and airports) to get built out.

    Here, take a trip back into the Wayback Machine to December, 1956, check out this article from the Saturday Evening Post and see how government destroyed private business (RR’s) with subsidies:

    http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/so_you_dont_ride_the_trains_any_more.pdf 

    Is it any wonder why the government then had to buy out the railroads via last year’s Aroostook buyout, never mind all the $$$ tossed at Amtrak over the years?  — After what government did to the railroads, all through the 50s, 60s, and 70s, government takeover of the rails was the only alternative left.

    Ever try to move a few million tons of steel or concrete by truck? 

    There’s a reason we still use and need railroads, government subsidies to roads be damned.

  • Anonymous

    I find the beginning of your post extremely combative. Nothing is because I say so, just like nothing you say is because so. I am expressing my opinon and that is my right just like it is yours.
    I am of the opinion that government should not be picking losers and winners. Amtrak should have gone away long ago.
    You refer to road subsidies. I think what you are trying to say is that these roads were built with private and corporate tax payer dollars and then funded additionly by toll fees, fuel and excise taxes while railroads had to compete and somehow exist by adhering to the laws of supply and demand and maintaining expenses at a level to ensure sustainability and perhaps make profit. Again that was government picking a winner and picking a loser.
    I wonder if those highways would have been built in due time by a private company who saw the need for them and who knew they would have to compete on the same level with railroads for freight and passenger traffic? Perhaps. Air travel was starting to kill rail travel before the highways were built.
    A private company could not make that railine in Aroostock County work. Im sure governmental policy had something to do with it in part. However I am very certain that the government organizations that destroyed railroads have no business in trying to run one and bring it back into a profitable existence. What they should do is correct past mistakes and work to make rail freight service viable.

  • Anonymous

    Electric cars run on midwest coal plants.

  • Anonymous

    sorry, but I’m not aware of any jet stream under 1000 feet…and most birds, including seabirds, raptors, waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, and songbirds, fly along coastal areas well under 1000 feet, with most at or below 600 ft.  Further, if, as you say, ‘we lose more migratory birds to commercial air traffic than we’d ever lose to windmills’, I doubt we’d have any planes aloft.  One wind farm alone has been responsible for the deaths of several thousands birds a year.    When we refer to ‘migratory birds’, we refer to all birds, not just the waterfowl, and a few starlings, that are involved with airstrikes.  Seems like you need to do a little reading of the real literature, SourdPuss, in order to get some fact behind your statements!  Let’s try to make decisions based on science and facts and not wild statements, regardless of which side of the issue you’re on.  These are serious issues we have to face in our region.

  • Anonymous

    not quite…while the final platform designs are not yet available for deepwater support, they are likely to involve multiple cabling from spar or platform (of some kind) that may have to be stabilized with horizontal lines.  Depending on how close each turbine is to the next (which will depend on spar height and blade length), the stabilizing lines may end up creating a ‘net’-like array.  Ground cables will connect and transmit electricity among the turbines and eventually on shore.  Not only may commercial, recreational, and military navigation be an issue in and around these turbine arrays, but certainly several types of fishing will be out of the picture.  There are concerns that, because each turbine nacelle (motor housing) contains 150-200 gallons of hydraulic fluids, they run the risk of chronic pollution (all motors leak oil) in the environment.  What effect will this have on shellfish and larval lobsters?  No one knows…..

  • Anonymous

    yes, but there are fish, marine mammals, seabirds, waterfowl, and, yes, migratory songbirds, out there.  Shouldn’t we care about the other animals in our ecosystem?  I think we have a responsibility to do so.  For economic, aesthetic, and moral reasons….

  • Anonymous

    How much fishing ground will this boondoggle  take up.. I would bet we (Maine)  will lose more in fishing revenue and fishing jobs then gain in power and power company  Jobs… When the federal Government is completly broke in 5 years everyone will be screaming and wondering what happened.. It should be criminal what is happening here.. what a waste… All I can say is I’m sorry kids and Grandkids we allowed the Government to pi$$ away all the money on a few politicans pipe dreams of getting rich on you’re backs..

  • Anonymous

    I’m not attacking you. Any bird so stupid it crashes into a windmill when the arms are so big and so far apart is in a sad situation. Birds have a skill I do not have: flight and navigation. Read up on the jet stream. The great educator said, “I don’t educate my students, rather I create the circumstances under which they might learn.” Have your reality checkers checked in with you around the current existence of living raptors?  This sounds nutty and makes no sense. I refuse to believe it because it is so rediculous to think a flying animal cant avoid a simple obstacle. Granted, a few clunk into my windows at home, but even most of them get up and fly away.

  • Anonymous

    > Electrical engineers will design the power delivery systems and linemen will build the infrastructure…electricians work on the wiring in your bathroom.  The grid may sound simple,

    Statoil has responded to a request for proposals from the Maine Public Utilities Commission for companies that wanted to produce offshore energy, and the company also has applied to the New England electric grid to connect at the Boothbay substation.

    Is the word “fungible” what is giving you trouble ? 

    > Claiming that individual citizens of the several states are in some way unpatriotic for voicing a concern regarding their personal well being when it comes to energy costs is simply an irrational statement.

    Who said she is not  Mainiac ?

  • Anonymous

    in News Departments > New & Noteworthy
    by NAW Staff on Thursday 01 December 2011

    Offshore wind energy company SWAY reports that extreme weather caused its floating wind tower test model to sink into the sea last weekend.

    The down-scaled 1:6 test model is located at a site outside Bergen, Norway, and has been surveyed by an ROV. According to SWAY, there were no visible structural damages, and the test model will be recovered soon, after which time the company will assess how long repairs will take.

    The direct cause leading to the sinking of the prototype was extreme weather exceeding the design parameters, SWAY says. Due to its size, the scale model was designed for a maximum wave height of four meters, which represents full-scale waves with a maximum wave height of 26 meters.

    Data collected by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory at the site shows a maximum wave height for the scale model of 6.3 meters, which would translate to 40.6 meters in full scale. These wave conditions are extreme – in comparison, the North Sea the “hundred year wave” is just 30 meters.

    This extreme wave height, combined with a storm surge, caused water to enter into the tower through the inlet pipe for the power cable (the J-tube), causing the tower to fill with water, SWAY explains. The J-tube will be extended to eliminate this risk before the 1:6 scale model is redeployed, the company adds.

    Even though the effect of the extreme storm would not be a problem for a full-scale turbine, the company says it has learned from this incident.”

    Extreme condition recently messed up  few full sized nuclear power plants in Japan, too, didn’t they ? 

    ROTFLOL

  • Anonymous

    Way too expensive~~~

  • Anonymous

    If thats the case then band whale watching, and let the fisherman use float line. Get with the program or stick to coments you know something about….

  • Anonymous

    It is well documented that domestic and feral housecats kill millions of songbirds per year simply for pleasure. If your true concern is the well being of wildlife, let’s look at the larger numbers.
    This fact is well known, hence the anti turbine crowd has started inserting “Raptors” in place of birds.

  • Anonymous

    All true, but be aware that we have “green oils” available to us now. We utilize clarity oil on my vessel, and while any leakage must be reported to the USCG (anything that causes a sheen on the water must be reported) The product is biodegradeable.
    Of more concern should be the unregulated fishing fleet that ply’s those waters. Ever seen a Jiffy Lube at the dock? You would be surprised how many fishermen dump their old oil in the bilge and wait for  a foggy day to pump it overboard.

  • Anonymous

    Migratory birds aside, has anyone done the math on these types of wind farms to prove they actually produce more energy than they consume? 

    It looks like a very large, expensive installation that requires several large boats. They have to be towed back to land for maintenance, which would seem to burn a lot of fuel. Then there’s the transmission lines. And what happens when there’s a hurricane? Are these things sturdy enough for that? I used to live in an area that got regular 75mph wind gusts, and they refused to build a wind project there because the wind would damage the turbines. 

    I would like to know the full story. It’s hard to say yay or nay when you don’t have all the facts. 

  • Anonymous

    you gotta be kidding, right? 

  • Anonymous

    If we took the attitude that we only focus on the 1-2 highest sources of mortality to human health issues, we’d fund research to combat only the #1 or #2 causes of cancer, leaving  to die the total number of people facing all of the other types of cancer  – that’s poor logic.  Yes, cats and collisions are the major sources of known mortality for birds, but does that justify killing more?  I’m not against wind power, but I do think it’s net benefits come from careful location.  Further, turbine manufacturing, transport, and siting is pretty fossil fuel consumptive and high CO2 productive.  Mining of metals, including rare minerals needed for the motors, transport, site prepping (cement is an extremely high producer of CO2) all contribute to pollution and greenhouse gas production.  Weisser’s 2007 paper in the peer-reviewed journal of Energy showed that wind energy is often worse in greenhouse gas production per electrical kw of energy produced compared to solar and hydro.  The DOE website for EIA (an independent think tank) has a state-by-state analysis for best economic and environmental options – for Maine, they say, it should be hydro and biomass, because both of these resources are within the state, and require little transport costs.  and both are efficient and among the lowest in greenhouse gas production.

  • Anonymous

    There has yet to be any illustration about how the US increase in wind energy production will even begin to counter the proposed 40-50% increase in coal use, projected by our own DOE (see the EIA pages on the DOE website), by China and other countries.  China is currently one of, if not the, largest manufacturer(s) of wind turbine components, which has a high net greenhouse gas production in and of itself.  Does this make sense?  Why are some countries going to INCREASE coal use?  (and recall that China does not have environmental regulations in place to produce ‘clean coal’ energy, which is why coal energy is ‘cheap’ for them.)  Seems like our proliferation of wind turbines is supporting China’s irresponsible choice of energy.  Recall how quickly it took airborne nuclear radiation from Japan to reach continental US – less than one week.  How much sulfur and other coal burning products reach the US?

  • Anonymous

    Yes, those things are everywhere. Mammals are on my property, there are birds in the trees out front. I dont live right on the water but have a right of way to the shore about 200 yards down the road.
    I have cut down trees on my property for firewood, an economic reason. I have cut them out to let in more sun, aesthitic reasons. I built a garage and a house on that property I own. Was it not moral of me to do so?

  • Tom Twitchell

    14,000  of these have been abandoned in the u.s. After the subsidies are gone so are they.

  • MaineHiker

    The new American executive war cry:       PONZI!

  • Anonymous

    Are Mainers ready to pay over 20 cents per kw for this power???

  • Anonymous

    Are Mainers ready to pay over .20 per kw for this power?? Who are you expecting to subsidize it?

  • Anonymous

    the republican  congress NO!  ? look at what the democrat YES has done to every states,and the U.S. budget. if the repubs acted like they did when clinton was prez., we would not have this debt. if the dems had kept control of the house and senate when clinton was prez., we’d be in much greater trouble than we are now. or much worse. at least the repubs. do what is right half of the time. the dems have never done whatis right.  the dems of today, are not the dms of the 60′s  jfk was the last good dem prez.after that it all started down for that party.the prez you have now, has nothing but hate for this country.DO NOT DOUBT THIS.

  • Anonymous

    Haven’t you noticed occasional V-formations rocketing by way up there?

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry I sounded so combative.

    Please read the Saturday Evening Post article I cited.  It goes into great detail how the roads and airports were built with public money – money at least in part taken from railroads against their will.  If nothing else, note how the article talks about Washington National Airport being built by the government while then privately built and owned Union Station across town was paying thousands of dollars *a day* in property taxes – and that in 1950s dollars.  http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/so_you_dont_ride_the_trains_any_more.pdf

    Edit: I should add to that the railroads were *prohibited* from buying airlines or starting their own airlines on antitrust grounds. Of course they saw the changing transportation world, but they weren’t allowed to participate in it. Instead, the government fought them tooth and nail as they wanted to abandon rights of way or change passenger or freight tarriffs (all controlled at the federal level.)

    Imagine if the railroads of the day had been able to buy airlines or start their own? We might have been able to travel seamlessly from a far flung rail station, straight to an airport, and onto a plane, with our luggage checked through all the way. But no, the feds said no, time and time again, to RRs getting into the airline business.

    Maybe at the very least, RRs and airlines could have gotten together and built airports on the cooperative, union model that was used to build the union stations. That way they’d be privately owned and operated and would have paid property taxes instead of what we have now, with huge government transportation agencies such as the Massachusetts Port Authority, Port Authority of NY, Maine Turnpike Authority, NHDOT, Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, etc., etc., with all the waste and patronage those buracracies entail.

    Transportation was a story of total domination by the government in the mid 20th Century. Government took the land and $$, built roads and airports at taxpayer expense, removing the real estate from tax roles, all while continuing to tax hundreds of railroad stations, rights of way, and equipment. They barred the RRs from getting into new forms of transport, and kept the RRs to antiquated tarriff rules far longer than they should have. RRs were required to keep up commuter rail, for example, in the suburbs south of Boston in the 50s and 60s, all while the government built the expressways, often right along the tracks (I-93 south and I-90.)

    That we now have a transportation fiasco, with crowded roads, airports run by expensive bureaucratic hacks such as the TSA, millions of $$$ a year being thrown at local commuter rail subsidies, Amtrak subsidies, and not to forget the Essential Air Service program where the govt. pays airlines to fly to places like Presque Isle <—- it's pretty much all the fault of government mucking up transportation for decades now.

  • Anonymous

    Ban driving , too ? 

    Why are you so ban happy, in the land of free ? 

  • Penny Gray

    Are US taxpayer dollars now going to be subsidizing Norway in addition to Spain (Iberdrola/CMP) and Portugal?

  • Anonymous

    ” The midwest has a lot more wind turbines – and a lot more wind – than Maine.  So, why is it that we’re still getting poisoned by  midwest coal plants?” 

    Crazy, irrational people object to wind power development ? 

  • Anonymous

    Not much. 

    And what little does is should be view as fish breeding preserves.  

    Next unfounded knee jerk objection, please 

  • Anonymous

    Could the Heritage Foundation be behind it ? 

  • Anonymous

    Who cares, the Gulf of Maine is not their backyard. 

  • Anonymous

    Armichka, we’re still getting poisoned by mid-western coal plants because the coal conglomerates are among the forces that rule America, with the tacit approval of folks like you, who will do absolutely anything to make sure that the status quo remains firmly in place.

  • Anonymous

    “experiment” being the operative word here….

  • Anonymous

    The anti-windys just can’t let go of their lie that wind subsidies grossly outweigh fossil fuel subsidies.  

  • Anonymous

    But the fire didn’t spread, and you are getting hysterical about it.

  • Anonymous

    It’s not your call as to what people do with the hills THEY own.  Get it?

  • Anonymous

    …unless you look at the trillion dollar subsidy that has kept the US armed forces in the middle east for the past decade to protect the oil supply….

  • Anonymous

    The engineering department at the University of Maine disagrees with you. 

  • Anonymous

    The federal government is broke, in part, because we just got done spending a trillion dollars over the last decade protecting the oil supply in the middle east.

  • Anonymous

    Plant, when are you going to get rid of your car, since cars kill  millions more birds per year than turbines do?  When are you going to get rid of the windows in your house, since windows kill millions more birds than turbines do?  When are you going to ban pets, which kill millions more birds than turbines do?  Sounds like your moral reasoning only goes so far….

  • Anonymous

    Most of the mountains they blab about aren’t their backyard either.

  • Anonymous

    You don’t seem to mind sending billions of US dollars out of our economy to subsidize the Canadian natural gas and hydro industries.  So why are you so bugged by trade with Norway and Spain?

  • Anonymous

    The transcontinental rail system never would have been attempted by private industry in the 19th century without massive government subsidies precisely because the risk would have been prohibitive otherwise.  Similar arguments could be made for aviation, steel-hulled ships, the Hoover Dam, nuclear power, and numerous other innovations.

  • Anonymous

    It  is not harvesting the wind ? 

  • MaineHiker

    There are zoning laws. Others do get to say “No you can’t do that with your hill.” Get it? Get over it.

ADVERTISEMENT | Grow your business

Marketplace Coupons

ADVERTISEMENT | Grow your business