The nearly 400-foot-tall turbines atop Mars Hill Mountain had been spinning for several months when, on March 27, 2007, the facility quietly marked a historic moment in Maine’s energy history by selling electricity into the power grid.
The Mars Hill project formally opened the door in Maine to a renewable energy industry that had been discussed for decades but, prior to that day, had never amounted to more than talk.
Five years later, Maine is the largest source of wind energy in New England. The 205 commercial wind turbines spinning on Maine mountaintops, ridgelines and coastal islands are rated to produce enough juice to light more than 6 million 60-watt bulbs.
But like most growth spurts, Maine’s rush into wind energy has not been pain-free.
Lawsuits, regulatory challenges and financial problems have slowed or snuffed out numerous projects. Alarmed by stories told by turbine neighbors elsewhere, voters in towns across Maine have banned commercial wind power near their homes.
Federal subsidies that fueled wind power’s dramatic national expansion are at risk of expiring amid the changing political environment in Washington, D.C. And in Augusta, the LePage administration wants lawmakers to revisit key policies written by their decidedly pro-wind predecessors — starting with dropping the state’s optimistic but symbolic goal of generating 2,000 megawatts from wind power by 2015. Turbines already installed in Maine can produce nearly 400 megawatts when operating at maximum capacity.
“Looking back five years, I think we all knew that [goal] was aggressive but we didn’t know if it was attainable,” said Ken Fletcher, director of the LePage administration’s Office of Energy Independence and Security. “We now have five years of experience so we think it is time to have the Legislature do a look-back at where we are, where we are going and what’s ahead.”
A $1 billion industry
Despite the rapid development of the industry during the past half-decade, wind energy represented just 6.6 percent of the total electricity generated in Maine in January 2012, according to figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Hydropower, by comparison, accounted for 25 percent of Maine’s total electricity generation.
Nationally, Maine’s wind farms generated less than 1 percent of the nation’s total wind energy production in January 2012. Production of wind power in Maine increased by roughly 59 percent between January 2011 and January 2012, roughly equal to the national average.
Yet Maine’s wind power sector has grown from almost nothing a decade ago into one that has funneled more than $1 billion and created thousands of jobs, according to an industry group, much of that during an economic downturn. And industry representatives insist Maine is poised not only to remain as New England’s top source for sought-after wind energy but potentially to become an international leader in the arena of offshore wind production. A 2010 survey found that 88 percent of Mainers support wind power in the state.
“That is an enormous investment that these companies are making in Maine and, quite frankly, in Maine people,” said Jeremy Payne, executive director of the Maine Renewable Energy Association, an industry trade group. “And it is important to recognize that a lot of these jobs are happening in rural parts of the state where there often aren’t a lot of job opportunities.”
Rural and economically challenged aptly describes Mars Hill, an Aroostook County town located about 15 miles south of Presque Isle on the Maine-Canada border. The 28 turbines operated by First Wind — New England’s largest wind power company — sit atop a 1,700-foot-tall mountain that dominates the horizon and, in winter, is a popular ski destination for locals.
The Mars Hill project may have paved the way for future wind farms but it also left a legacy that continues to haunt the industry in Maine.
Noise problems persist
Although the project has enjoyed strong support from Mars Hill officials and many town residents, some neighbors of the 28-turbine project were expressing concerns about the turbines as soon as they began spinning.
Upset residents accused First Wind of downplaying the potential noise created as the nearly 125-foot-long blades sliced through the air, especially at night and when atmospheric conditions were right for carrying the sound. Affected neighbors have complained about sleep deprivation, headaches and decreased financial and aesthetic values of their homes.
The noise problems at Mars Hill have come up at almost every regulatory proceeding on wind power since. And five years after Mars Hill became operational, First Wind only recently reached settlement agreements with more than a dozen homeowners who had pursued court action against the company.
Those settlements reportedly included payments from First Wind to the complainants in exchange for their agreement to drop all claims against the company. Peter Kelley, a Caribou attorney who represented the complainants, declined to discuss the settlements because the parties are bound by a confidentiality agreement.
‘Too close to houses’
Michael Gosselin is the sole complainant who has yet to settle with First Wind. A disabled Vietnam veteran who moved to Mars Hill 21 years ago from Rhode Island to escape noise, Gosselin claims the turbines affect his sensitive hearing and disturb his sleep even though his house is located nearly two miles away.
“I am for alternative energy but they made a major mistake when they put the turbines up here in Mars Hill,” said Gosselin, who is constructing a soundproof bedroom in his garage. “It is too close to houses.”
First Wind officials point out that the town of Mars Hill receives $500,000 a year in tax payments for 20 years from the project and that the facility employs nine people full time plus additional temporary workers throughout the year. But they also acknowledge that, as the first wind energy project in Maine, Mars Hill was a learning experience for all.
“I think one of the things that First Wind is doing better now than we did back then is when we are going into towns to propose [a project] we ask the towns to make trips to come and see Mars Hill,” said Bruce Chapman, who manages the company’s operations east of the Mississippi River from the Mars Hill facility. “We don’t want to catch anybody by surprise.”
While the Mars Hill controversy has undoubtedly influenced debate over wind power in Maine, it has not had a major impact on the success or failure of subsequent permit applications for new wind farms.
Only three major projects — in Redington/Wyman Townships, Highland Plantation and Carroll Plantation-Kossuth Township — have been turned down by regulators, withdrawn or have requested withdrawal in the face of likely rejection since March 2007. And the latter two may be refiled with modifications.
By comparison, state or local officials have approved 13 separate commercial wind power projects since 2007, representing 274 additional turbines and 627 megawatts of electricity. Eighty-six of those yet-to-be-built turbines have been approved under Republican Gov. Paul LePage’s watch despite perceptions that the current administration is l ess supportive of the wind industry than Democratic Gov. John Baldacci.
“At the end of the day, projects continue to be proposed, continue to be permitted and continue to be built, so that says there hasn’t been a lot of change,” Payne said.
Time for another look at regulations
There have, of course, been notable changes to Maine’s regulations during the past five years, some intended to facilitate the development of wind power and others attempting to address concerns raised at Mars Hill and other sites.
From the pro-development side, the most significant was a Baldacci administration policy that streamlined the permitting process and reduced the importance of scenic impacts for any projects proposed throughout much of rural Maine. The LePage administration said this week that they hope to revisit aspects of the so-called “expedited permitting” process, including scenic impacts.
“It’s not that we are going to change it,” said Fletcher of the state’s energy office. “But after five years of experience, it is time to take another look at that.”
The Legislature also recently endorsed a Board of Environmental Protection decision to lower the maximum nighttime noise level as measured from nearby houses from 45 decibels to 42 decibels. The change came after neighbors of two smaller wind energy facilities — in Freedom and Vinalhaven — also complained about noise disturbances.
Although less aggressive than some had desired, the three-decibel reduction was interpreted as a small victory for the small but increasingly vocal and well-organized critics of commercial wind power in Maine.
“I feel a little bit better,” said Lynne Williams, a Bar Harbor attorney who has represented wind power project opponents in regulatory hearings and in court. “I think the people who have raised issues with projects are being listened to more seriously now than they were in the beginning.”
In addition to noise, opponents of commercial wind projects claim the facilities produce far less electricity than their megawatt ratings suggest, requiring fossil fuel power plants to remain online as backup. They also are heavily subsidized, change the landscape, can be deadly to birds and bats and require mountaintop areas to be cleared for roads and turbine pads.
Williams later added this caveat, however: “Our views being heard doesn’t necessarily mean that we win.”
An uncertain future
So where is Maine’s wind power industry headed? Will hundreds more 400-foot-tall turbines dot the landscape of rural Maine in 2017?
Two projects — an eight-turbine proposal for Canton in Oxford County and a 14-turbine proposal for Grand Falls Township in Penobscot County — are pending with state regulators. Four more in Dixfield, rural Washington County, Bingham and an area west of Bridgewater in Aroostook County are under development.
How many of those projects, if any, become reality likely depends on a host of factors, including: whether Congress reauthorizes federal tax incentives for wind power, the political climate in Maine toward renewable energy and the price of the fossil fuels that largely dictate electricity costs.
On the federal front, action appears stalled on the so-called “production tax credits” that help wind power compete with cheaper fossil fuel-derived electricity generation. And observers suggest that Washington may punt the issue until after the November election.
“It will change the pace of development if it goes away,” said Matt Kearns, First Wind’s vice president for development in the Northeast.
The LePage administration has made clear that their top energy priority is lowering costs, regardless of the source of that electricity. As part of that campaign, LePage and Fletcher have been urging lawmakers to loosen requirements that power suppliers increase the amount of electricity derived from renewable sources, a policy regarded as a key incentive to the wind industry.
The administration also has signaled that state utility regulators should not enter into long-term contracts with wind-power producers — as happened with First Wind’s Rollins Mountain facility — unless those contracts promote lowering the costs of electricity.
Other New England states still can enter into long-term contracts with wind-power producers in order to meet their renewable energy goals, Fletcher said.
“But this administration would not be in favor of asking ratepayers to pay more than they should have to pay just to support an industry,” Fletcher said.
Fletcher added, however, that this should not be interpreted as the administration looking askance at wind power. Offshore wind energy, although likely a decade or more from commercial reality, stands to be a major potential source of renewable energy and University of Maine researchers could help produce the “breakthrough technology” that might make Maine’s heavy manufacturing industry a global leader.
Wind power’s critics, meanwhile, are hoping the combination of the modest victories on noise regulations, uncertainty over federal tax credits and the LePage administration’s less-friendly relationship with the industry could signal a shift away from large-scale projects.
“I don’t think we are going to have a lot more wind farms,” Williams said. “We may have more windmills, but the people I talk to around the state are more inclined to [support] regional projects where the local town or county gets the power” rather than feeding into the New England grid.
Not surprisingly, Jeremy Payne, executive director of the Maine Renewable Energy Association, disagrees about the immediate prospects for an industry he describes as one of the only “bright spots” in Maine during the recession.
“There is still substantial interest in wind in Maine and, quite frankly, I don’t see that slowing down,” Payne said.
Five years after successfully launching Maine’s first commercial wind farm, officials at First Wind are watching the federal subsidies debate closely. Meanwhile, the company is moving forward — albeit perhaps at a slightly slower pace — with construction plans for a 50-turbine wind farm in the Aroostook County town of Oakfield and a 19-turbine facility near Eastbrook in Hancock County.
Additionally, First Wind is developing plans for a wind energy facility in Bingham that could have more than 50 turbines and plans to continue exploring opportunities in Aroostook and Washington counties, both of which have been receptive to past projects.
“We are positioned to do more,” said Don Theriault, senior asset manager in the Northeast for First Wind. “Maine has learned how to do wind power and Mars Hill really started it.”



The answer my friend
ain’t blowin in the wind,
the answer is a
Romney/Rubio ’12 win.
In a few years when fuel is $20.00 a gallon, and electric cars are better, you will be changing your tune… Until then, the GOP supported by Big Oil, will tell you wind is bad for you like FREE Health Care…
Wind power is so much better than Big Oil, which supports corrupt dictators and US-hating monarchies all over the world.
50% prevarication/50% pandering
100% pathetic
I concur.
I guess you have a beanie cap and it is hooked up to the battery in your car. I guess I can put a 400 foot tower in my back yard.
if that tower would power my house and get off hydro, I have a spot for it, but sure can not afford it.
Like the wind blowing through your empty head; the point of who controls ‘BIG WIND’, i.e. an oil emirate, obviously never stayed in it long enough to affect your propaganda.
Other sticking points made by other commentators are:
>>Nature-deprived eco-tourists may begin to avoid parts of Maine where the wind farms are; I doubt if cruise ship operators are going to advertise side trips to wind farms.
>>Access roads to wind farms have opened the door to flooding from run offs and development at the base of the mountains. A snowmobile run up an access road might be music to people who are investors, but for the rest of us it is just more noise and intrusion into the former wilderness.
>>Maine doesn’t and never did ‘need’ the electricity generated from wind farming. Given Maine’s dire economic straits, it is sheer elitism by the 1% to impose the expense and irregularity of wind generated power on a relatively poor state whose economy demands inexpensive power.
>>Like oil pipelines, transmission line clear cuts to switches and load centers, are the other half of wind farming no-one wants to talk about. Distant, above ground transmission of electricity is subject to a variety of interruptions. No where have I seen how clear-cutting forestland that can heal the atmosphere by converting CO2 into oxygen and sequestered carbon is ‘good’ for global warming mitigation. Nor have I seen any move to replace the removed forest with comparable bio-mass.
>>The recent spate of tornadoes in the Midwest damaged several wind farms and took them off line, further demonstrating the need for coal fired backup. Maine uses little fossil fired generation, and has enough hydro power to export it. And if that isn’t enough, HYDRO QUEBEC is willing to provide us reliable power for decades at the lowest cost in N. America!
Wind power is spreading all over the country and all over the world, despite your flawed arguments and your servitude and addiction to oil.
Actually the Danes have just banned land-based wind power.
What is spreading all over the world is rejection of this subsidy dependent taxpayer scam that is a worthless energy source.
Right. Next you’ll be telling us that CO2 is a pollutant. Tell that to the plants you profess to love so much and listen to them laugh in your face.
Your comparison is like telling a drowning man to drink 8 glasses of water a day because it’s good for his complexion.
Just two things missing from a scenario like that: context and scale.
Thank you. I will take it under consideration. Hmmmm. Context and scale…Good one. Thanks again.
Thankfully you’ve finally arrived on the scene of this post so you can enlighten us with all your knowledge on this subject ….right!
and somehow your hyperbole and personal attack is enlightening?
*yawn*
another NIMBY
Should persons not fight to defend their backyards, or their frontyards? If not them, then who will?
Thank you, that’s a very just question. But if that is in deed the case, then those affected should please premise the argument ‘I don’t want that darn thing in my backyard’ and not ‘wind is bad’.
Wind is bad for so many more reasons than NIAYA (Not In Any Yard Anywhere). Wind is a huge scam. It is bad science, bad economics, bad public policy, bad impact on mountain ecosystems, bad for humans and wildlife, and so on.
You are probably 100% right. but i think it’s a ‘lesser of many evils’ scenario.
Wind. We may not want it in the backyard but it beats the tar out a pipeline.
Almost any substance can be and is, a pollutant, if that substance is presented in such artificially high quantities that it interferes and alters present ecosystem functions.
“Pollution is the introduction of contaminants into a natural environment that causes instability, disorder, harm or discomfort to the ecosystem i.e. physical systems or living organisms.[1] Pollution can take the form of chemical substances or energy,
such as noise, heat or light. Pollutants, the components of pollution,
can be either foreign substances/energies or naturally occurring
contaminants.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution
Your point being?
My point? Ask all the people that “liked” my comment, as opposed to your comment.
Use Wikipedia as your source, lose all credibility. Besides, there is no factual evidence that wind turbines have offset any carbon because they are so ineffective.
If wind power and solar power were priced so the average Mainer could afford it the average Mainer would be using it. I have about 100 feet of southern exposed roof for solar, would cost about 40k to install, looked into wind to run the whole house and that would cost about 60k. my car gets 40mpg, cost 11k, the volt cost 40k 29k will buy a lot of gas no savings in buying a volt.
good point
Please define “Free”.
When gasolene goes to $20 per gallon it will have no affect on electricity prices. The US gets less than 1% of all its electricity from oil generation and most of those are peaking units. Wind and solar electricity are no threat to Big Oil but are a huge threat to ratepayers.
Electric cars in Maine are better? Who are you kidding?
Because of their rather short lifespan (12-18 years) the turbines being built today throughout Maine will be rusting inoperative eyesores long before gas hits $20 a gallon. And yes, those electric cars with their 30-45 mile range before you have to recharge for 6-12 hours are real pracitcal here in Maine. Let’s see, it would only take me 3 days to get to Bangor, whereas now I get there in 90 minutes.
Why don’t you look beyond all the sound bite PR campaigns and hyperbole and see what the real story here is. Of course that would require you to actually do some reading and research rather than just shooting from the hip with you BS.
Gas will only be 20 bucks if you libs stay in power. havent you learned nothing in life is free?
GOP supported by ‘big oil’…you real or what?:
“According to the Center for Responsive Politics and financial disclosures, over the last twenty years of oil-giant BP’s political action committee, the largest recipient has been President Obama.Erika Lovely from Politico reports:BP and its employees have given more than $3.5 million to federal candidates over the past 20 years, with the largest chunk of their money going to Obama, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Donations come from a mix of employees and the company’s political action committees — $2.89 million flowed to campaigns from BP-related PACs and about $638,000 came from individualRead more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/05/obama-top-recipient-of-bp-contributions-last-20-yrs/#ixzz1qh5qX5Kd
“the answer is a
Romney/Rubio ’12 win.”
I call.
How is that the answer to the energy issue ?
Rubio? That guy from the Minnesota Timberwolves?
Wasn’t Rubio in one of those movies?
ROTHLMFNO!
I hear your excitement. But please don’t ignore your job.
Rubio? He lied about his family immigrating to America before Castro took over Cuba. Sad Rubio can’t count, yeah his family came 2 years before Castro even started the Revolution. Just more Republican lies. Romney lies so much he doesn’t even have positions any longer. Etch A Sketch.
Maine has no energy future. When Canadian and Spanish electric companies own all of the electric utilities and electric production and the Grid, Maine has no future. These are “For Profit “, “Foreign Corporations”. Not some local electric coop. Give it up Maine, you sold your future many years ago.
Ownership of both transmission and generation in Maine is prohibited by state Law. But if you knew what you were talking about you would know that already.
So then why does most of the generation come from high cost Canadian Nuclear facilities and sold to Maine at outrageous pricing. Get your facts straight.
Current EIA data shows generation of power from within Maine was 15,778 million megawatt hours in 2011 and sales within Maine were 11,411 megawatt hours which means Maine was a net exporter of power. ISO New England reports the average wholesale price of power was less than $40 megawatt hour in 2011. Your claim has no support unless you can back it up with authoritative sources.
Excuse me. Do I detect a defeatist attitude here?
Many Towns have passed wind ordinances, because the State Legislature has failed in their duty to protect citizens. The Legisltaure’s Energy Committee has people like Rep. Fitts, who works for a company deeply involved in the wind industry, to thank for the lack protection from wind turbines.
If Maine had tighter ethics laws and wasn’t ranked in the cellar on ethics, if Fitts did his shilling for the wind industry killing all citizen bills as chair of the Energy and Utilities Committee while working for Kleinschmidt, he’d be likely looking at a very long time in prison.
For evidence of what every almost other state in America would call a conflict of interest:
http://www.windtaskforce.org/photo/eut-chair-conflict-of-interest?context=latest
I’d suggest a four bed cell. You can add Hinck, Barlett, and Du Houx to your list of ethically challenged members of the EUT committee. Of course sleeping with those three might be a step up for Hinck!
Ya think that I might get my money back from investing in Tidal power 25 years ago ? Or was I just too progressive, too soon? Or what happened to fuel cells that were going to save the planet apparently by taking my money invested in them!
Why doesn’t the BDN get Dick Hill to do an objective article on the wind with Tom Gosze.. ?
……………………………………..________
………………………………,.-’”……………….“~.,
………………………..,.-”……………………………..”-.,
…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,
…………………,?………………………………………………,
………………./…………………………………………………..,}
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}
……………/……………………………………………,:”………/
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../
…………./__.(…..”~-,_…………………………,:`………./
………../(_….”~,_……..”~,_………………..,:`…….._/
……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….”-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}
………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……”;,,./`…./”…………../
…,,,___.`~,……”~.,………………..`…..}…………../
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”
…………/.`~,……`-………………………….……/
………….`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..,__
,,_……….}.>-._……………………………..|…………..`=~-,
…..`=~-,__……`,……………………………
……………….`=~-,,.,………………………….
…………………………..`:,,………………………`…………..__
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“
…………………………………._……….._,-%…….`
……………………………..,<`.._|_,-&“…………….`
rrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaggggggeeeeeee
Love the picture….
Nice etch-a-sketch n there.
What happened to tidal power? Or fuel cells that would save us?
I am a strong alternative energy advocate and wind power is among the technologies that help us get away from using fossil fuels; however, I believe that there should be mitigation for those negatively affected by the wind towers. Those affected the most should get the most benefits. Those living closest and within sound range get the most. Communities affected by the loss of pristine landscape views and tourism should get something. and the residents further away but still within the vicinity (say, maybe within 15 miles) should also get some offset benefits. Finally, the citizens of Maine should also benefit somewhat.
What benefits, you ask? why electricity of course. Reduced rates or direct power feed. Maine needs to insure that companies like First Wind build some distribution and storage facilities within Maine so that Mainers get “significant” direct benefits from these projects (storage meaning perhaps reservoirs that are pumped up using excess power and drawn down as needed). These requirements should be laid out and agreed to prior to allowing a company to start a project.
In the 30 years I have lived here, the electric rates have NEVER gone down.
Mike, you have got to be kidding! You think I would trade a good night’s sleep and the enjoyment of my property for saving a few bucks on my electric bill??!! Get REAL! These huge machines cause serious health effects, reduce property values, and ruin people’s lives! Saving a few bucks on one’s electric bill won’t make up for the thousands of dollars, as in $100,000 and UP, way up!, some of us have lost in property values. Some of us can not even SELL our homes. The only thing that will help is to have reasonable setbacks, over a mile and more, and adequate noise regulations that keep the turbine noise at 5 over ambient sound or in the 30 to 35 dBA range at the property line. In Denmark, home of the industrial sized wind turbines, noise regulations are 20 dBA nighttime and 25 daytime. In Maine, we have 42 nighttime and 55 daytime in a QUIET zone. Now, does this make any sense at all?
I’m a strong alternative energy advocate, too. However, electricity is not our MAJOR energy expense in Maine. Heating oil is. And, as the most rural state in the nation, gas for our cars is second. For example, we drive miles to get groceries, go to the doctor, and take kids to after school events. I fail to see how ruining our visual landscape and the environment are tradeoffs for electricity when it is an alternative for oil that we need.
According to the blue dot on the map it identifies Number 9 Mountain. Not Mars Hill Mountin. So where is the Tubines. I thought I heard they were on Mars Hill Mountain not Number 9.
the blue dot is a project under construction. the green dot next to the blue dot is the finished project on Mars Hill.
You expect accuracy from Mr. Miller? What color is the sky in your world! He’s been a schill for the wind industry for quite some time now. He never met a wind power project he didn’t like. The real issue here is that in the face of such blatant transparency of his bias, why does he still have a job here?
The picture says it all.
Actually, the picture doesn’t say it all. It shows how sprawling is the Rollins project. It doesn’t show the blasted away, scalped landscape, the destruction of Rollins Mt. & the ridges of Rocky Dundee. To see these, go to http://www.windtaskforce.org, click on the Photos tab, then enter Rollins in the search function. There are the photos. While at the site, read more about the Citizens’ perspective on wind power development in Maine.
I like any energy source that doesn’t ask me to go to the middle east and die so that a handful of fat cats can enjoy the good life.
Agreed. Except we could have solved our energy issues years ago by drilling for some of the oil off our own shores and on our own land….but NO the environmental lefties won’t allow us to do that…so who is really to blame for all those deaths in the lefts so called wars for oil?
The US has more oil and gas wells drilled into its territory than the rest of the world combined. We are still a major oil and gas producer. The trouble is, we use so much more than we produce.
Mark my words, the US will never be self-sufficient in oil ever again, regardless of who controls Congress and the White House.
Nations such as China and India are putting several million new cars and drivers on the road every year now and they are bidding for some of that oil we in the US have been burning, including our own, domestic oil (oil being the ultimate, fungible world commodity.)
Google up “Peak Oil” sometime. It’s just too much to go into here.
That said, only about 1 percent of the US’ electrical production comes from oil (mainly due to Hawaii.)
Discussing oil, Peak or otherwise, in a story about electric wind power is tangential at best.
Yes the invisable oil that can only be found on Fox news. :)
I belive that the USA get 13% of its oil from the Middle East…and that is Saudi oil
For better or worse, it’s a global economy now so what effects one nation effects everyone.
The top two oil exporting nations to the USA are Canada and Mexico. Last time I looked, they shared borders with us and were friendly to us in spite of all we do to pissem off. Of the top 5 oil exporting nations to the USA, only one, Saudi Arabia, is in the middle east. The other two are Venezuela and Nigeria.
You obviously haven’t been paying attention to the debate about wind power. It is a source of electricity (albeit a low capacity, unreliable, and costly one). Less than one percent of electricity generated in the USA is derived from oil. Thus, there is absolutely NO connection between fighting in the mid east or getting oil from the mid east and generating electricity in the USA. That is a tiresome red herring. As far as a handful of fat cats enjoying a good life, that has no connection, unless you are talking about wind developer Angus King!
“I think one of the things that First Wind is doing better now than we did back then is when we are going into towns to propose [a project] we ask the towns to make trips to come and see Mars Hill,” said Bruce Chapman, who manages the company’s operations east of the Mississippi River from the Mars Hill facility. “We don’t want to catch anybody by surprise.”
Now Mr Chapman, you should also tell the folks that you typically take visitors up close near the base of the turbines where there is very little noise, or to upwind locations where only local wind noise is heard.
Have you ever considered an honest approach by taking visitors downwind of the operating turbines to distances of 0.5 to 1.5 miles, especially on days when wind shear conditions exist and turbine noise is akin to a flight of helicopters overhead?
turbines to distances of 0.5 to 1.5 miles, especially on days when wind shear conditions exist and turbine noise is akin to a flight of helicopters overhead?
Yeah, right. Another lie. When Friends of Lincoln Lakes did a Freedom of Access Act filing regarding the Rollins Project, Town of Lincoln documents revealed that First Wind was in cahoots with town officials SIX YEARS before First Wind announced its plans on an unknowing local population. Surprise! You are getting turbines throughout the ridges of Lincoln Lakes! Folks, if you live in any town that has ridges with much undeveloped area, you can be sure these conniving wind thieves are working behind the scenes to get at them for a sprawling, ugly, destructive industrial wind site.
One law that should be passed is a requirement that whenever a permit for a “Met Tower” is given, a public announcement of an intent to gather information for the purpose of developing a commercial scale wind power site be published in any local paper and in the regional daily newspaper serving the area and prominantly posted at the Town Offices of every local town that might be affected. Part of the problem with wind power development is the assumption that citizens should be disenfranchised in the process. Citizens have a right to know immediately! Its our towns and our lives, not they prey of wind power developers!
Extract the resources that exist w/o the guilt that the Church of Climatology attempts to inflict on her acolytes and pols.
An electric car…please, the toy. pious plugs into coal,nuclear,oil, hydro. And those seats,dash,headliner,airbags,tires,brakes,glass are not made from algae.
The future belongs to atomic energy, whether we embrace it or not.
Now lets talk about potable water around the world.
A blight on our beautiful landscape. A very high cost per KW hr. Unknowen maintenance costs. Lets see what a deal it is 10 years from now!
We should think more about atomic energy. Enriched urainium and water to generate steam for steam tutbines. It’s the best deal going. We just need to work out the details.
Let’s go with small thorium reactors this time around. Much safer and cheaper.
This was a reply to Lord Whiteman.
My friend, just know that the $1.5 billion CMP upgrade is putting $100 million a year in the pockets of Iberdrola, a Spanish company part owned by Qatar and largely controlled by the United Arab Emirates oil consortium.
How about the fact that it is 100% required so that Baldacci could let his wind cronies get their electricity to Boston and it is otherwise totally unneeded. How about the fact that there are $30 billion in similar lefty-green inspired projects in planning in the northeast and Maine will fund 8% of each one, its share in the New England grid. That is $2.4 billion or over $4,000 per ratepaying home that Baldacci slipped by us under the TOTALLY false pretense that our transmission lines were old and needed replacing. A Baldacci-faced LIE.
How about the fact that his former chief counsel and PUC chair KURT ADAMS greased the skids for the CMP upgrade while PUC commisioner and then months before he left the PUC actively interviewed with wind interloper First Wind, from whom he took over $1 million in stock options before joining First Wind as their DIRECTOR OF TRANSMISSION.
Baldacci’s Attorney General, Janet Mills, was asked to investigate the conflict and after a kangaroo investigation ruled that what Adams did was perfectly fine.
Just like her sister, Dora Mills, the state’s CDC director who laughed at citizens who complained about the jet engine roars of turbines and denied that there was peer-reviewed evidence that the noise and infrasound was bad for her citizenry’s health.
JAIL. JAIL. JAIL for all and throw away the keys.
See:
PUC chairman took equity stake in wind company
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2010/05/06/puc-chairman-took-equity-stake-in-wind-company/
and
First Wind SEC filing change questioned
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2010/07/18/first-wind-sec-filing-change-questioned/
and
Group asks AG to probe official of First Wind
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2010/07/18/group-asks-ag-to-probe-official-of-first-wind/
Hear, hear. Encore!
Given the world’s demographics, autogas prices can only go in one direction. Given the globalization of all fossil fuel markets the differential between oil and NG will narrow considerably over the coming years. Any country or state that doesn’t explore available alternative energy options and the technological development that comes with them isn’t dealing with obvious economic realities. Wind turbines may not be suitable everywhere but, at least for the time being, they clearly belong in our nation’s mix of energy options.
You display outright ignorance of wind’s current and future potential. Research before spewing party dogma.
WIND has already been explored. Germany Experience.
“Activity in Europe’s offshore wind sector continues to increase, as European government and industry continue to follow through on plans to make the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Offshore wind installations are a big part of Germany’s groundbreaking plans to phase out [all] nuclear power”. See: http://cleantechnica.com/2012/03/23/germany-denmarks-renewable-energy-transition-empowering-offshore-wind/ Alternative energy technologies continue to evolve, wind included. Unless you are happy with fossil fuel and nuclear energy pollution, what’s your solution?
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/germany/Germany_Study_-_FINAL.pdf
Second, numerous empirical studies have consistently shown the net employment
balance to be zero or even negative in the long run, a consequence of the high
opportunity cost of supporting renewable energy technologies. Indeed, it is most
likely that whatever jobs are created by renewable energy promotion would vanish
as soon as government support is terminated, leaving only Germany’s export sector
to benefit from the possible continuation of renewables support in other countries
such as the US. Third, rather than promoting energy security, the need for backup
power from fossil fuels means that renewables increase Germany’s dependence on
gas imports, most of which come from Russia. And finally, the system of feed-in
tariffs stifles competition among renewable energy producers and creates perverse
incentives to lock into existing technologies.
Again, what is your solution, apart from more fossil fuel or nuclear pollution? You ignore Norway’s hydro-power for wind energy balancing. Germany has been cutting back on Russian gas contracts both for political and energy policy related reasons. My only point, all along, is that ultimately we ignore alternative energy solutions at our own peril. If nothing else, Maine’s
wind turbines drive home the point that we are almost totally dependent on
imported energy, with the related environmental consequences largely falling on other countries and populations. How convenient and how hypocritical.
buy hydro from canada for you folks on the Grid. I myself have lived off the GRId for 12 years. No generators, just solar…thank you.
“But they [First Wind Officials] also acknowledge that, as the first wind energy project in Maine, Mars Hill was a learning experience for all.”
Larger and 2.5dba noisier turbines have been permitted by Maine DEP for First Wind’s Oakfield project and setback distances from homes are hauntingly similar to Mars Hill, where there was 17 lawsuits relating to excessive turbine noise.
Where is the evidence of anything having been learned?
Mr. Miller – I can only hope that much of the rest of the information contained here is more accurate than what you’ve reported about the Bowers Mt./Kossuth proposed project by First Wind. You report the status of that project to be:
“withdrawn while facing rejection, re-filing with modifications possible”
What is the source of your information? First Wind? Or fellow reporter Nick Sambides who also has falsely reported that this project has been withdrawn? The applicant has requested to withdraw the project, but that request was tabled by the LURC Commissioners. The applicant pleaded for an extension to the 270 day decision rule asking the Commissioners to let them have extra time to try to reconfigure the project. I would also note that their request to withdraw came weeks after the Commissioners had voted unanimously to have staff draft a “denial document”.
So it was only with the project’s certain denial that all of a sudden they wanted to reconfigure the project. LURC agreed to give them an additonal 90+ days at the December LURC meeting. They also set down some very firm expectations as to what they expected the applicant to come back with at the end of the 90 day extension period. At 4:40 on the very last day of the extension, First Wind filed a response that said they were unable to reconfigure the project at this time.
So the final arguments and a decision will occur at this coming Friday’s (April 6th) LURC Meeting in Lincoln. So the application has in fact NOT been withdrawn, and based on the response filed by the applicant on 3/9 which did not meet any of the Commission’s stated objectives, it is highly unlikely that they will vote to approve a withdrawal, which then would automatically require the process to continue with the decision to deny the application.
You and Sambides do the public a great disservice by publishing inaccurate, false information on this subject. How about a published correction Mr. Miller?
Poor birdies
Interesting that this article lists only the “rated power”, the existing wind project’s nameplate production, which is but a fraction of the real production. These machines have been running long enough to provide real numbers. The fact that these production figures are being called “proprietary information” by the developers should raise a big red flag. If they were actually powering thousands and thousands of 60 watt lightbulbs all across Maine, wind developers would be trumpeting this to the newspapers on a daily basis. Are TransCanada’s Kibby turbines still off-line due to internal problems caused by gusting mountain winds? No doubt this is proprietary information, too. I hope the Canadians aren’t all living in darkness beause their Maine source of wind energy is broken. How many local residents (jobs, jobs, jobs!) are currently being employed full time by these existing projects once they’re up and running? How much energy has actually been CONSUMED (drawn off the grid) by these tubines which require “winter cold weather modifications” (heaters) and flashing lights when the wind isn’t blowing between 28 and 40 miles an hour, which it rarely is here in Maine? If we taxpayers are funding a big part of these projects, that makes us stakeholders. We deserve some real answers. The REAL science based cost/benefit analysis of industrial wind needs to be brought to light. The Bentek study proved that CO2 levels weren’t reduced by industrial wind turbines. Wind isn’t going to wean us off foreign oil; how many of us drive electric cars or heat with electricity, or would want to do so given Maine’s poor wind quality? A moratorium should be placed on all projects until the real facts are known. Maine’s tourism based economy trumps anything these multi-national wind developers (carpet baggers) can possibly offer in both jobs (170,000 full time) and dollars (ten billion annually). We don’t need the electricity. We do need tourism. Let’s keep Maine beautiful.
These are the kind of replies I like to see on this site. Informative, not ignorant or finger pointing towards the right or left. Well done.
Using paragraphs would make your copy and paste efforts more readable.
I too found the lack of actual generation information disappointing, particularly when the info necessary was apparently at the authors fingertips. I could not find the statistics for January 2012 cited by Mr. Miller however; please do provide that link if you see this Mr. Miller.
For 2010, there was an average of 263 MW installed capacity, and generation of 499,000 MWhrs ( http://205.254.135.7/renewable/state/maine/ ), leading me to calculate about 22% generation efficiency of installed capacity on average year round and all sites. This is perhaps not as bad as detractors claim, but very different from what proponents advertise. And I’d assume that the best sites are used first, so the efficiency of sites built after 2010 is likely lower. (and I believe these numbers are net of the energy consumption by the windmills mentioned above).
I personally am in favor at least of requiring fund set-asides to pay for eventual dismantling/remediation if the windmills are mothballed, as is required for most other energy production facilities in the US. In this way maybe we can avoid the fate of rural India, which has thousands of rusting unused windmills across the country.
We are wasting huge amounts of taxpayer money in subsidizing these projects. The NREL maps indicating Maine has poor to marginal wind potential are being proven accurate. We are destroying huge swaths of our uplands and ruining Maine’s Quality of Place with this unnecessary source of power. 22% capacity factor does not make it worthwhile, especially consodering it is a highly unpredictable, unreliable source of power that cannot contribute to base load or base load following needs for the ISO.
For an excellent comprehensive article on Maine wind that broke in the Press-Herald and Sun-Journal today, please see:
Meeting land-based wind goals not likely, say two state studies
By NAOMI SCHALIT AND JOHN CHRISTIE
Senior ReportersMarch 29, 2012 © Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2010/07/18/group-asks-ag-to-probe-official-of-first-wind/
This is from the highly regarded and incredibly well credentialed non-partisan Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting.
Maine – breaking wind…again. (Humor in the face of disaster).
I would like Kevin Miller to provide the references he used for some of his ‘facts’. There are many discrepancies and it sounds as if he got his ‘data’ from the major wind lobbying firm in the state, Maine Renewable Energy Association. Even Angus King publicly admits, now, that $1Billion has been SPENT on Maine wind (the majority of it having been paid by the American tax-payer) but less than $400 Million of that has been spent IN Maine. And “created thousands of jobs”?? Please show proof. I believe, at last count, there were a few hundred “new” jobs created in Maine that were specific to wind.
This statement is also very misleading: “voters in towns across Maine have banned commercial wind power near their homes.” To be clear–towns have not BANNED wind development. What many have done is pass restrictive wind ordinances with set-backs designed to protect residents from the harmful effects of wind’s high, low and ultra-low frequency noises and ‘short duration repetitive sounds’. And this is not specific to Maine. Towns, states–even countries all around the globe are doing the same thing as more research about these massive turbines and their emissions comes to light. It is far more ethical and common-sensical to zone for this type of industry than it is to have it get built arbitrarily, and then have to deal with the problems incurred after-the-fact.
There are other midleading statements and discrepancies and I would love to see Mr. Miller research this important topic more fully.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
Ah, more from Karen Pease, ringleader of the small minority of anti-wind, anti-Maine naysayers. You just won’t quit will you! People are starting to figure you out. They see right through you and laughed at your absurd, anti-Maine testimony in Augusta. They have educated themselves and don’t appreciate being talked down to. If you truly valued the rights and power of communities, you would stop mischaracterizing what the majority believes is in the best interest of Maine’s economy and Maine families. Your view of community is one that operates under your rules only, where the facts only apply to a few people who are making an obsessive attempt to stand in the way of the aspirations of communities across Maine. What you don’t seem to realize is by spewing misinformation, you continue to harm our communities and the gross exaggerations have forced people with legitimate concerns into silence. The Maine we grew up in would NOT have seen its citizens lied to repeatedly and misled publicly by a few angry, ‘getting to no’ naysayers. It would NOT see our our communities and good, hardworking Mainers threatened with law suits that are based on false claims and based on a self-interest that only ends up benefiting lawyers. The Maine we grew up is what is happening in our communities, the reality that you can’t seem to accept, that these communities have done their homework and have made the decision to support a future of wind energy as a vital part of Maine’s economy.
You couldn’t have said it better on your blog – “There’s a good chance I’ll also make a fool of myself many times over”. Sadly the fool you are repeatedly making here aims to hurt our state and our future dearly. Enough is enough.
Och, man…you wrote this comment almost verbatim last MAY, and it has less veracity now than it did back then. Your response to my comment isn’t even on topic. If you had said “I disagree with Karen. I DON’T think Kevin Miller should work harder to write factual information”…then at least I could respect you for being original.
Because you decided to make a personal attack last year, I saved the response I wrote to you. And I am pasting it below. Please–if you have pertinent facts to add to this debate, do so. I’ve never taken offense to someone who shares information or expresses an opinion. But if you are simply writing to continue your campaign of disrespect and of dividing communities and pitting Mainer against Mainer–don’t. Such actions aren;t productive or eduicational and have no place in this arena. We need to find a common-sense solution to this issue–one that is supported by real science and economics.
Here is my response to your comment from May of last year.
Ouch, Friends of Fox Island Wind.
You’re a little brutal, there.
I’m sorry you feel the need to resort to
insults and petty name-calling. Can’t we disagree without being disagreeable?
Fact: I’m not a leader– of a
ring, or of anything else. Not sure where you got that idea, but
it’s incorrect. Whether you want to believe it or not, there are many, many
people having the courage to take leadership positions for a cause they believe
in, though. Please don’t belittle others’ participation in something about
which they feel great conviction.
Fact: I DO believe that
communities should have the right to decide what type of development they want
within their borders. I am a staunch supporter of home rule. If you
listened to any of my testimony in Augusta, you would know
that. Why does it bother you if townspeople take the time
to research all the facts about industrial wind, before voting on something
which will impact those in the vicinity of the developments, as well as affecting
every tax-payer in town? It only seems prudent for citizens to avail
themselves of the necessary time to ‘do it right’, especially when so many
problems relating to industrial wind turbines have come to light. To
not take advantage of the experiences and knowledge of others would be
careless, in my opinion.
Fact: Those of us who live in
UT’s do not have the right to approve or deny an industrial development in our
neighborhood. Surely, since you are an advocate for ‘communities’, you
can understand why many Mainers are distressed at having something foisted on
them which is as impactful as large-scale wind developments. Vinalhaven’s
small development consists of 3 turbines. Three turbines have harmed the
health of some of your neighbors and detracted from their quality of
life. Some of us in UT’s are looking at being surrounded by hundreds of
them. Do you not think we have the right to ‘have a say’?
Fact: I don’t know of anyone opposing
industrial wind facilities who is ‘anti-Maine’. On the contrary. Just because we might not agree with your
vision for this state, that does not mean we do not love it. It does not
mean we are against jobs for Mainers. It doesn’t mean we don’t care about
pollution, or energy independence. You are way off base.
I can’t speak for anyone else. Nor
would I want to. I want EACH Mainer– each American– to ‘have a
say’. That includes you. And– I
want the truth. When the wind industry says ‘wind’ will ‘reduce Maine’s
dependence on foreign oil’, I want them to prove it. When the wind industry
says ‘wind’ will counter the effects of global warming– I’d love to see proof
of that, too. When the wind lobby tells people that their product will
reduce electric rates– is it beyond reason to question how that will
happen? To ask for proof? Especially when all CMPC ratepayers will
have to pick up a portion of the $1.4Billion cost of the MPRP, needed to
transmit wind to the New England grid? Doesn’t it make sense to require
proof before so many hundreds of miles of Maine’s rural areas are altered to
built an energy generation system which will have a massive footprint in this
state, but which produces unreliable and intermittent power–power which Maine
does not currently need?
And what about the people? Mainers are
being affected by the unique sounds, vibrations and shadow flicker caused
by wind turbines. Some folks who supported projects within their
communities were completely caught off guard once the turbines went
online. These people– fellow Mainers– didn’t have an agenda. All
they wanted was relief. They wanted to be able to enjoy their homes,
wanted to sleep at night, wanted to maintain the value of their
investments. You don’t begrudge them that, do you? If so… why do you?
This is about giving Maine people the facts
about these industrial developments.
This is about sharing what we’ve learned as we’ve studied this issue. You have that same right… that same
responsibility. If you can PROVE the
wind industry’s claims, I urge you to share those scientific and economic facts
with your fellow Mainers. To do
otherwise is to do us a disservice, don’t you think?
Wishing you and yours a peaceful Memorial
Day.
Respectfully,
Karen Pease
Lexington Twp., Maine
I’m not surprised at this person’s comment. The wind industry is heading for the scrap heap and most of the smart ones are already using the exits.
It’s time you stop telling our communities how to act or vote. We’ve done the homework, we’ve seen how wind energy has brought many benefits to our state. Please stop the attacks. It’s not in line with our values, Maine values, to persistently share your inaccurate, fear mongering, minority view point that an overwhelming majority of Mainers have rejected. In Maine we work together as Mainers to better each other and do so positively. Your comments are negative and simply intent on trying to scare people from making decisions that they themselves have spent countless meeting at deliberating the choice between a future based on clean energy based here in Maine or continuing a volatile status quo of dependence on out of state power. If you disagree, PLEASE acknowledge that you are a fringe view, that just because you can post on everyone of these articles, that you are out of touch with a consensus position that wind energy is good for Maine and good for the future of our state. You’ve said your piece, its been rejected and discounted. Time to move on.
Please, please, please STOP. Karen, you say you are speaking just for yourself, yet you continue to misinform, mislead and create a false narrative. Your view of us Mainers is so offensive, its hard to know what to say, except to ask you to please stop. You consider us to be naive and uninformed. Why should we listen to you when we continue to look at our future and considering our options of where we want our power generation to come from, have chose a power source that is clean and brings economic benefits here to Maine, over what you want is for us to continue on a path of exporting money out of state and to do so with incredible environmental impacts. Mainers have acted courageously to say enough is enough. We’re rallied together despite persistent naysayers like yourself who REFUSE to listen to the will of the people of Maine, to continue to advocate for a better future, one that looks to improve our economic climate and our planet. To keep jobs here in Maine and lessen our dependence on out-of-state sources of energy. You are in denial on so many levels. You say you are not a ring leader, yet you comment in every single possible article spreading lies and misinformation. You rally a crowd up to Augusta to try to dispel a view that is frankly anti-Maine, a view that goes against the agency and will of communities across Maine that have taken deliberate steps to evaluate wind projects and guess what, overwhelmingly supported development of wind energy in our state. You talk about the affected on Vinalhaven and fail to tell people how those 5 or 6 people have REFUSED to work with the Coop and people in town to resolve their issues, who have litigated an incredibly expensive legal suit against the people of the Fox Islands and who continue to misinform the public. What about the working people of Vinalhaven who can now afford to keep their homes and continue to raise their families, many 5, 6 generations strong, who have saved an impending doom that was coming from a reliance on a status-quo energy policy of out-of-state dirty power? What about the thousands of Mainers and communities across this great State who stand to benefit from wind power proposed and the future of off-shore wind that is projected to be a major source of jobs and economic benefits in our State? Do you think of the people of Maine and our communities when you wage your misinformation campaign? Do you get a kick out of attacking Mainers and their right to make up their own mind and their will? We’ve heard your stick. It’s time for you to respect us, the majority of Mainers who support wind energy and who have made our voices heard in town meetings across our state. Please stop. Thank you.
Friends of FIW will you (or your group) please stop commenting on what Maine wants and what Maine is. You are not Maine. Who appointed you the expert on Mainers? The fact of the matter is that Wind Energy policy has been expedited and fast tracked in our state without careful consideration for the effect it will have and the impact it is having. I don’t know Karen Pease but I have read some of her comments and I am happy to see that there is someone asking questions and demanding facts for the minority. This has been going on for 5 years and there is a growing number of anti-wind citizens and groups that are begining to see that a relatively unregulated industry has taken hold of Maine via political influence and there has been very little put in place to give protection to the citizens whose lives are most affected. I don’t pretend to know what is best for Maine but I do know that citizens in any rural state would not stand for having an industry, that so profoundly impacts their lives, fast tracked so that it takes away their voice and their right to protect their home, their land and their quality of life. Nobody likes having anything crammed down their throat.
This is not just the viewpoint shared by a majority of people on the Fox Islands, but actually, if you care about the FACTS, you would realize its a view shared by a majority of Mainers. This is based on not just one person or one group but on several surveys conducted in our State looking at how us Mainers view wind power and where we want our energy to come from. You have to look at it in context. Energy is a choice. We can either develop clean, cheaper power here at home that creates jobs and benefits to our communities or we can continue to export massive amounts of money out of state and see little if any benefits except maybe to appease a few very organized, vocal naysayers who don’t appreciate what is at stake for communities across Maine and who have shown a shocking propensity to discredit and mislead the public.
Friends of FIW you sound like a politician or lobyist. I am a citizen that is pro wind and alternative energy so I guess according to you I am one of the “majority of Mainers”. Putting Mainers into categories is devicive and will destroy the future of alternative energy in Maine. I am saying that expidited laws were written behind “closed doors” and did not allow for a proper process for the minority of Mainers to advocate for themselves. As a result we had hundreds, now thousands, of Mainers that are willing to lobby and fight for the defeat of any PTC on the federal level and any proposed project in our State. This fight is viewed by exterme advocates such as yourself as the minority folk acting up or not knowing whats good for themselves. There is clearly room for Wind in Maine but when you try to quiet the voice of a few by creating expidited laws that minimizes their voice, you start to create an autocratic environment that pits Mainer vs Mainer. There are many appropriate places for wind farms, that with proper citing could benefit our state and our country tremendously but putting them too close to homes and sacrificing the scenic and aethetic value of our environment is a bad idea.
All we ask is that people speak truthfully, to represent the voices of hundreds, if not thousands of Mainers who have responded positively to wind energy and also most importantly consider energy in context. What future do we want for Maine? Do we want it dictated by a small chorus of naysayers who will advance any narrative to achieve their ends, disregarding the opinion of a majority of Maine residents who see wind energy as a very positive investment for future generations to be able to afford to live in Maine?
No one is ‘cramming’ wind energy down one’s throat. To say this denies the careful process communities across Maine have taken to do their homework, to spend countless hours in town, permitting and legislative meetings over many years and many venues where the public has participated in the decision making. After a very deliberative process, the position to support wind power as part of our State’s energy future has been overwhelming. Suggesting the industry has ‘coerced’ Mainers with adopting wind energy is a falsehood and offensive to the thousands of people who have participated in the discussion and who have voiced their opinion that wind power is beneficial to our State and the future of our economy.
Wind Energy in Maine is an economic disaster! Why will no one release the revenue/ and expense of all those towers dotting our woodlands? Because they are hugely unprofitable. Yet the First Wind senior executives at the top took home annual salaries of $3 – $6 million last several years. That’s our tax money! Borrowed from China! The average home energy cost in Maine will double! repeat increase 100% if having to convert to wind energy ! Think $4 per gallon gasoline is ugly, try a seasons ‘energy at $4000 per home!
Let’s have open public meetings and review the real cost to Mainers. Stop the sham.
Dr. Peter Connelly Island Falls Maine
275 gallon oil tank (assume for argument sake approx. 200 gallons/fillup), $4/gallon oil, 5 fill ups/year …. that’s already $4000/year and reality for many Mainers, sometimes more with Maine’s old housing stock.
Although I don’t know that wind is the answer I do know that we have to get away from combustible energy as it’s a finite resource not to mention the pollution it creates. I sincerely doubt that any one energy source will be perfect so we’ll have to accept some downside to whatever we go with and we’ll also have to support the start up of any new industry, just as we support the oil industry now with billions in tax subsidies (even though they’re long past being considering a “developing” industry).
Instead of bench-marking any energy resource against utopia, let’s benchmark it against the existing resources and consider whether it’s an improvement from the present and if so, do the gains outweigh the costs.
Yeah, MEPac, you convert your house to electric heat and then only have heat when the wind blows. Then take away the subsidies and pay the real price of an intermittent, hugely expensive source of energy. Oil & gas do, indeed, receive subsidies, but they produce energy, unlike wind. Once again, for all those who don’t understand the concept of energy density, the subsidies for electricity for sources is as follows:
In July 2011, the USEIA published results for 2010 for subsidies per MWH (direct, tax, R & D, and electricity support). The subsidy per MWH is $52.43 for wind; the next highest is $2.78 for nuclear, then 84 cents for hydro, 64 cents for coal, and 63 cents for natural gas. Support for wind is bad economics, based on poor science, mandated by bad public policy caused by lobbyists influencing politicians pandering to be “green” rather than making sound decisions based on economics.
Wind Energy is a sham on the citizens of Maine! Why has there been no release on the revenue/ or the expense of each of these massive towers blanketing our state? Why? Because they are an economic disaster which no private citizen, nor enterprise would invest in! The First Wind senior executives pull down $3-6 million in annual salaries while we Maine folks struggle with $$4.50 gasoline prices. Our home energy bills will increase 100% repeat 100% if we switched to wind power.
This is not a tree hugging, environmental whacko opinion. These are facts in the public record which our revolving door politicians (including Senate candidates!) turn the other way as they line their pockets with cushy private sector jobs or massive and highly profitable in state construction and design awards.
All at our expense from the federal government on money borrowed from China. Shame. Has the PUC and our officials have no shame. Wind Power in Maine viability makes Bernie Madoff look like a saint.
Show us the books! Open up the meetings!
Dr. Peter Connelly Island Falls Maine
Government “incentives,” increasingly look like blackmail, right down to penalizing or rewarding physicians with increased payments if they use electronic filing.
They feel they are the marionette masters and we are the marionettes. They are so proud of themselves playing God and manipulating rather than representing the hard working citizenry.
And how they hate your guts for stating that truth.
As someone who has been involved with the opposition to the Bowers Mtn./Champlain Wind Project, I must correct a statement in this article. The application has not been withdrawn. Rather, First Wind has asked LURC to permit them to withdraw the application, and that decision will be made at the LURC meeting on April 6 in Lincoln. In December, First Wind asked for leave to withdraw the application. When LURC appeared to not be amenable to that, the attorney for First Wind argued that they could reconfigure the project, and LURC generously granted them until early March to submit a reconfigured application. This was not done and now LURC will need to make a decision on withdrawal on April 6. First Wind is playing the system.
Lynne Williams, Esq.
This is the second article in which the BDN has indicated that the Bowers Application has been withdrawn. The Lincoln News also stated this and fortunately allowed a LTE correcting this misinformation. The interactive map designer had apparently gotten his information from the wrong sources. In light of this misinformation campaign, there will no doubt be little news coverage April 6th in Lincoln when, most likely, LURC will deny a major wind project for the first time ever. here is much more even article recently written by Naomi Schaliit:
http://www.sunjournal.com/news/state/2012/03/30/meeting-land-based-wind-goals-not-likely-say-two-s/1175295
ppdlw.org
So so so much hate among my fellow Mainers. Civil discourse — a thing of the past. Someone disagrees with you — you must call him or her names, categorize him or her in some narrow enemy-camp category, and attack him or her.
I would not be surprised to find a positive correlation between the vituperativeness of an individual’s post, and the number of hours of television (news) he or she watches.
So saddening. What happened to “As Maine goes, so goes the nation”? Instead it’s become, “As the country descends into hatred, so goes Maine.” Have not you read the Hon. Olympia Snowe’s editorial on why she is not running for re-election? Do you not long for when we, as Mainers, could sit out in front of the general store and discuss and disagree as ladies and gentlemen? How very very sad for us all, what these BDN forums reveal about our state character.
Helena, I agree with you that civility dissolves when such a divisive issue comes to town. Everywhere wind power is introduced in rural areas it produces this kind of division. Check out the film “Windfall” which is about that very thing. I also know that Mainers are known for showing rascals the door with civility and firmness. I think the issue is just about to that point. All the best, Helena.
Hmmm, I was thinking that “what these BDN forums reveal” is the inaccurate reporting and bias that has been continually demonstrated by this newspaper on the subject of grid scale wind power. Just a little dose of ethics and fact checking would go a long ways towards reducing the bickering on here.
People complain about the sound of wind turbines but not about highway noise. I’ve been living next to a highway my whole life and I don’t have a soundproof bed room in my garage. Seems if you throw money at the people belly aching they dont have trouble sleeping.
Maybe that steady highway noise has given you a case of curmudgeonitis.
No doubt. And maybe buying out the locals should be factored into the cost of building windfarms.
LURC has NOT allowed First Wind to withdraw its permit application for Bowers Mountain. Please get that fact straight. While First Wind filed to withdraw, that withdrawal has not been approved and will be voted on in Lincoln one week from today (April 6th). If common sense prevails, First Wind will not be allowed to withdraw, AND the project will be denied on May 4th in Calais. I trust that the press will pick up the significance of this case and will pay attention to the actual details.
Check the LURC website for a memo from Fred Todd to the LURC commissioners for a recap of where we are today. Here is the link to Fred Todd’s memo summarizing the situation: http://www.maine.gov/doc/lurc/agenda_attach/040612/0_DP4889_Memo_April6CM_FINAL.pdf
I have faith that the LURC Commissioners will vote down the withdrawal request and will then also vote to deny the permit application; thereby saving the wilderness character of the Downeast Lakes that attracts visitors from around the U.S.
The Bowers Mt wind project project HAS NOT been approved for withdrawal. Champlain Wind has asked that they be permitted to withdraw the application but it HAS NOT been approved by LURC. That decision has yet to be made. Please stop misreporting this information!! Get your facts straight.
The only wind I’m catching, is the hot air being blown from all these comment pages on the BDN site.
What Mr. Miller left out of his discussion on wind power in Maine is the issue of the visual impact of 40 story tall wind towers on Maine’s rural areas considered a “significant natural resource” (i.e., rare beauty, remote, almost-wild, significant tourist destinations, such as the Down East Lakes area.) In addition, he neglects to discuss the environmental destruction as tops of mountains are bull-dozed off, forests are clear cut for transmission lines, and critters of all types and sizes (e.g., birds, bees, bats, humans) vacate the vibrating wind currents around turbines. Maine is losing it’s special places to industrial wind turbines.
I hope you are as passionately opposed to mining in Maine as well because it will do all that and more…….
Mars Hill sells energy into whose power GRID?
6 million 60 watt bulbs? Even pot growers use LEDs.
EUT decidedly pro wind. Fitts, Du Houx, Hinck married to Pro Wind lawyer; Juliet Brown, on and on
When operating at maximum capacity. ????? explain please……
$1 billion dollars of your taxes.
Jobs in rural Maine for 6 months. after that?
Noise problems at Mars Hill, Vinal Haven, Beaver Ridge, Spruce Mtn, Roxbury. Being recorded.
Michael Gosselin is sorry his neighbors lost their freedom of speech.
Jeremy Payne, are you proud of the buy outs?
Scenic impacts were not fore seen. Red, strobing night sky intruders, electric lake effect.
Not hundreds, thousands; as far as the eye can see. the BeHolder
Dixfield has a project under construction? See
Lift the ban on Hydro. Let Canada supply Massachusetts.
I don’t think anyone would support wind towers just anywhere. Is it appropriate to place wind towers on the rim of the Grand Canyon? No, of course not! Bowers Mountain project threaten one of Maine’s and National natural treasures. First Wind requested to withdraw it’s application to build 27 towers on Bowers, and LURC is in deliberations pending denial to withdraw and denial of a permit.
I don’t think anyone would support wind towers just anywhere. Is it appropriate to place wind towers on the rim of the Grand Canyon? No, of course not! Bowers Mountain project threaten one of Maine’s and National natural treasures. First Wind requested to withdraw it’s application to build 27 towers on Bowers, and LURC is in deliberations pending denial to withdraw and denial of a permit.
Wind Farms on Maines mountains are an expensive joke. Maine needs cheaper electricity ,not expensive subsidized towers which have a negative impact on tourism.
Hopefully the big wind carpetbaggers will be running away from Maine sooner than later.
and just what are we mainers getting for all this. Well we get to pay higher taxes to subsidized these turbines which we see no personal benifits from. My light bill is still higher than ever. We get to look at all these turbines obstructing our views. I think wind, solar and hydro is great, but I wouldent mind seeing a smaller bill at the end of the month……
I will accept this when they have them installed on Beacon and Munjoy Hills. We export 1/2 the energy produced in this state, why gum up the works with this mess?
The picture is that of the legacy of Angus King and John Baldacci. You be the judge, is that what Maine’s wilderness is supposed to look like?
2 miles away?
And the Liberals keep taking dams out.
I was just wondering why doesn’t anyone take another look at the Dickey-Lincoln Hydro
project?
I knew an engineer who worked on the Dickey Lincoln proposal. The site is not a good one. There is really low water flow on that part of the St. John in the summer and even in the winter. The cost-benefit analysis was marginal at best. Now, much of the area that the D-L site would flood is under conservation restrictions, as the Nature Conservancy is attempting to secure the entire riverfront from its headwaters to the confluence of the Allagash River. This same conservation group refuses to criticize the ecological losses resulting from blasting away and leveling our uplands for industrial wind sites–hypocrites!
All that ugliness to light just 60 million light bulbs? How many homes would that heat? Not many or homes heated would have been used as the example….
God are they god awful to look at… such a shame. Go Nuke or go live in a cave and freeze when the wind stops.
We have 8 operating projects to dismantle. a small host of other projects to defeat and that we can do. These industrial turbines belong nowhere in Maine and we must make that clear. Participate in any way you can conceive. The deceivers must go. Romney is running on GOP Superfund money and headed for a crash burn something like Huston (“There’s been a major malfunction”). I’ve no idea what’s going to happen with Obama at this point. Someone’s gotta shove big “control rods” into our banking system and make it more compatible with the same of the rest of human kind. We may have to use more soap and ingenuity.
MaineHiker 26 minutes ago
We have 8 operating “wind-farm” projects to dismantle in Maine. A small number of other projects are ready for defeat and defeat them we can do. These industrial turbines belong nowhere in Maine and we must make that clear to the pearly toothed sharks. Please, if you love Maine participate in any way you can conceive. The deceivers must be banished despite the Portland Development committee’s willingness to bribe I Bedrolla PA to stay in Maine another ten years. Romney is running on GOP Superfund money and headed for a crash burn. Something like Houston’s (“We have had a major malfunction”). I’ve no idea what’s going to happen with Obama at this point. Someone’s gotta shove big “control rods” into our banking system and make it more compatible with the rest of human kind. We may have to use more soap and ingenuity.
The blatant censorship and manipulation that goes on in this paper is sickening.
6 million 60-watt bulbs..how many curly fry bulbs with mercury in them would that be???
I was in favor of the windmills in Mars Hill and I didn’t understand how anyone could be against them. I’m from Houlton and I moved to Portland in 1978. I drove my bike up to see them. I went on the backside of Mars Hill Mountain and shut my bike off. I was wearing my helmet and I could hear them. I would not want to listen to that. That totally changed my view on windmills.
I take the back roads from Bangor to get to Houlton. I stopped at the light in Lincoln and saw windmills on the mountain. That intersection is the reason why the blades had to go to Houlton in the first place. They can’t make the turn.
We have the possiblity of a windmill project about 3 miles from my house. I have been following the stories about wind energy with interest, especially the part about the noise. How far away can the noise be heard. My only contact with wind power has been seeing it when we flew over Germany. There the mills were in the fields, away from the villages and there were lots of the mills in fields. I am for green energy, but I am seeing that there is a price.
Copperrivergal, a lot of that depends on the topography and prevailing wind directions. In Maine, the steadiest winds are from the northwest and west, so people on the east sides of turbine arrays get hammered with noise. In Lincoln, the noise comes down the ridges and reverberates across the lakes. The noise annoyance does decrease over distance. You are less likely to have the noise level as someone one miles away.
But there are other considerations for you. Do you want to condemn people who are located far closer to the turbines to suffer from the horrendous audible noise and the possible ill effects of the low frequency sound waves? Are these neighbors not worthy of equal peace, quietude, and well being? Do you want the landscape of your town to be dominated by 45 story tall machines on ridges? Do you support a scam that relies on tax subsidies and heinous mandates and produces so little electricity?
If you have concerns, read, read, read! Wind power is like peeling an onion. At first glace, wind turbines might seem OK. Just like the skin of an onion is different than what is underneath. Like layers of an onion, wind power has many issues. The more you peel an onion, the more you cry. The more you peel away layer after layer of issues with wind power, the more you cry out of both sadness and rage.
Good luck!
Green energy? Really? These ugly machines are blighting our green hills and mountians. By the looks of these comments it appears the only people in favor of these monstrosities are the folks making money over and under the table.
thay look good on top of the mars hill mountain
i think they look good on top of mars hill mountain and buy it good job first wind keep up the good work
Now if they could just paint them to look like candy canes of barber poles.
This just in……..The Maine Wire has obtained a letter sent from U.S Congresswoman Chellie Pingree
(D- Maine) to the Department of Energy in support of Angus King’s Record Hill
Wind project. Record Hill was named last week in a report from the House
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform as one of a number of companies
that […]
Sorry Part 2 Record Hill was named last week in a report from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform as one of a number of companies that received federal loan guarantees under questionable circumstances. King’s company received a $102 million government loan guarantee, despite having more than sufficient cash on hand for the project, as well as the backing from the $8 billion Yale Endowment. King’s company applied for the loan guarantee under an ‘innovative technology’ grant. The report shows that King’s technology was not, in fact, innovative- it has been widely used commercially before the Record Hill project.
Unless I misread because the earplugs I’m wearing aren’t blocking out people yapping all the time, longitudinal sound waves (same direction of travel as their vibration) alternate between phases of compression (when the medium they are travelling through is more dense) and rarefaction (the medium is less dense).
The size of these changes is the amplitude. If a sound wave is created with the same amplitude, but with inverse, or opposite phases, the noise of the sound wave is supposed to be cancelled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_noise_control – Active Noise Control Wiki
http://www.noiseandhealth.org/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=2004;volume=6;issue=23;spage=73;epage=85;aulast=Schust – Study on effects of low frequency noise in the journal “Noise and Health.
I have been a Democrat all my life, now at 71, I find I am fighting against what I once supported, Green Energy production from wind.
Is not the idea of green energy to protect our planet and our community’s survival on Earth?
Do we need to destroy Special Places, our homes, and quality of life, in order to save it?
Have we exhausted all options and we now have justification to begin amputating earthly parts?