BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Is Acciona a NIMBY ? ~ Why Don't They Look at Data From Our Back Yard? Wolfe Island Wind



Acciona searches far and wide for relevant data from wind plagued communities to compare to Cape Vincent.


~BUT NOT IN MY BACK YARD ~



Acciona ignores the most significant source of data within a bird’s eye view of Cape Vincent is Wolfe Island this community is our neighbor on the banks of the St. Lawrence River we have much in common .
And Acciona has chosen to look to non-relative areas to collective data to prove that their wind complex will not affect our community.
The Wolfe Island Bird and Bat mortality report was surprisingly large and represent a significant threat to several endangered species Acciona denies that there will be this kind of threat to bird and bat populations in our community .
Acciona did not look at Wolfe Island's Bird & Bat Mortality report when compiling data for their FEIS for their proposed wind complex; they chose to use data from Maple Ridge Wind Complex ~ a project that is roughly 50 miles away instead.
Acciona's Avian and Bat Protection Plan asks the question how do the fatality rates compare to the fatality rates from existing projects in similar landscapes with similar species composition and use?
Jefferson County is home to the northernmost colony of Indiana brown bats, a federally listed endangered species,
that are undergoing a serious population decline. There are hibernacula in Glen Park, New York approximately 20 miles from Cape Vincent. The Indiana brown bat typically moves between 12 and 40 miles to roost locations.
Acciona’s Indiana bat study reports that Cape Vincent provides summer colony habitat, roosting and foraging areas for the Indiana Brown bat and also it documented that there is a maternity roost location in this same area.
This is significant because Indiana bats have strong fidelity to summer colony areas.
Groups continue to study bird, bat mortality rates - The Whig Standard - Ontario, CA

An American bird specialist says no one should be surprised by the number of bats and birds being killed by wind turbines on Wolfe Island.

"Environment Canada ranked the site as their highest level of concern for raptors. It's an internationally recognized site for waterfowl," said Bill Evans, an ornithologist with Old Bird Inc. in Ithaca, N.Y.


"This was probably not a good place to build and that was said before it was even started."

Evans was invited by Wolfe Island Residents for the Environment to sit in on a meeting with various government officials as well as representatives from TransAlta, the company that runs the 86-turbine wind farm.
~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~
The Wolfe Island Wind Bird And Bat mortality Report


The total number of bird and bat deaths were estimated to be 602 birds and 1,270 bats were killed by the turbines from July 1 to Dec 31 , 2009. While the report says the numbers of dead birds and bats are similar to other wind farms in North America, Ottawa-based environmental advocacy group Nature Canada says the figures are actually surprisingly large and represent a significant threat to several endangered species.

~ WOLFE ISLAND REPORT ~
Link to the Wolfe Island report here

~~~~~~~~

MAPLE RIDGE REPORT ~

Link here to the Report for the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project
Postconstruction Bird and Bat Fatality Study - 2006May 31, 2007
Prepared for:
PPM Energy and Horizon Energy

BP ~ Cape Vincent Avian & Bat studies
Link here to view the avian and bat studies for Cape Vincent Wind Power Project

AVIAN AND BAT STUDIES FOR THE
ACCIONA ~ SPANISH ~ ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER PROJECT,
Cape Vincent Ny
Link here to view SLW ~ AVIAN & BAT ATUDIES


Links below for indiana bat samplings Cape Vincent NY in the proposed location of the SLW

Report on Indiana bat~sampling at 11 sites on the location of ~ SLW ~ JUNE 2008 ~

Report on Indiana bat~sampling at 11 sites on the location of ~ SLW ~ JUNE 2008 ~ report


Report on the Indiana bat ~ sampling on the proposed location of SLW at 6 sites
July & August, 2007

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Acciona Stock ~ Down ~Steepest Drop in more than six months

Spanish Stocks: Acciona ~ Point Shares Move - BusinessWeek

Bloomberg

Nov. 16 2010,

Acciona SA (ANA SM) fell 6.6 percent to 55.15 euros, the stock’s steepest drop in more than six months and the IBEX 35 Index’s worst performance today. The Spanish construction company said its nine-month net income dropped 3.3 percent to 101 million euros ($137 million). Separately, Acciona was cut to “neutral” from “outperform” at Exane BNP Paribas.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOVEMBER 15, 2010, 12:07 P.M.

WSJ
By Juan Montes, EFE Dow Jones;

on line
MADRID (Dow Jones)--Acciona SA (ANA.MC), the Spanish construction and renewable energy company, said Monday net profit dropped 92% in the nine months to September 30, on lower asset sales following the sale of its stake in Spanish power utility Endesa SA (ELE.MC) last year.

MAIN FACTS:

-Net profit for the first nine months of the year EUR101 million vs EUR1.23 billion.

-Results in 2009 were boosted by a gain of EUR1.13 billion linked to its Endesa stake sale to Italy's Enel SpA (ENEL.MI).

-Earnings before interest, taxes, amortization and depreciation, or Ebitda, EUR813 million vs EUR695 million.

-Net debt as of Sept. 30 EUR8.10 billion.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Ticking Turbine Time bombs~ waiting to collapse?





Updated 12:10 pm 11/14/2010
Ynn is reporting today that Work on the Hardscrabble Wind Farm Project FAIRFIELD, NY in Herkimer County has hit a snag video report---> here<--- ~ Atlantic wind is behind the project a subsidiary of the Spanish company Iberdrola .
Ynn Reported that Iberdrola took core samples and found that their structures were not up to standards. They are now in the process of taking down some towers and bases as a safety precaution.
~~~~
Concrete problems with Wind turbines foundations are nothing new.
~~~~
Fenner wind owned by ENEL North America was the largest the wind complex east of the Mississippi when it was built 10 years ago. Fenner had a turbine collapse in December of 2009.

Concrete issues with turbine foundations apparently are becoming a common problem.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In December of 2009 Hank Sennott, director of corporate affairs and communications for Enel North America is quoted in an interview~
by Martha E. Conway a reporter for the Madison County Courier ~
It was discovered that "concrete core samples from the foundations preliminarily showed inconsistent aging and degradation".
“Some of the samples looked like they were poured yesterday,” Sennott said. “Others… Didn’t”
According to Sennott the samples of five or six foundations led to the decision to test all 19 in the project. He said the company is in the home stretch of collecting data and a report is expected soon.
~~~~~~
It took 10 years for the turbine foundation to fail at fenner this prompted them to take the core samples otherwise they may not have tested the concrete. How many other wind complexes are out there with concrete like this? Are there more Ticking Turbine time bombs waiting to collapse?

~~~~~~~~~~~
Did the developers of Fenner's wind turbine system, actually pre - determined the wind turbine reaction forces in conjunction with the wind pressure forces on the towers, and the turbine blades themselves to withstand the overturning moments developed, that are being resisted by the soil or rock material that is, part of the anchorage resisting system, as required by New York’s Construction codes? One issue with wind turbines is that they actually try to unscrew them selves from the ground, due to wind pressure forces. The anchorage systems and subsurfaces are critical factors in wind turbine design.

I have not been able to find a final report on the Fenner Collapse.
The PSC Altona Turbine Collapse end of Investigation Report can be viewed--->here<-- Design of Wind Turbine Foundation Slabs .pdf file

~~~~~~
Jefferson's Leaning Left recently did a story titled ~ Business is not good for wind developers. JLL'S story highlighted a Wall street Journal article that was covering the bad economic news for Wind Development and how Enel stock was dropping. Speculating was that it was due to the world wising up about wind power read more ---> here<-- Is it any wonder that Enel's stock is dropping as fast as turbines are dropping...

Now Jefferson's Leaning Left reports about problems on Wolfe Island -->here<---

So many turbine problems so little time!!

Update ~
Sinking turbines could cost British wind farms £50million Mail Online
Daily Mail Reporter
14th April 2010

Hundreds of Britain's offshore wind turbines could be sinking into the sea because of a design flaw.
It is believed the concrete used to fix some turbines to their steel foundation can wear away, causing the power generators to drop a few inches.
The fault was first discovered at the Egmond aan Zee wind farm in the Netherlands and affects those with single cylinder foundations. Offshore farms are notoriously expensive, and large firms including BP and Royal Dutch Shell have pulled out of the sector.
More...


Monday, November 8, 2010

ACCIONA ~ ENEL ~ 2007~ Partners in Acrimonious Takeover Battle

Recently Jefferson’s Leaning Left posted a story covering a Wall Street Journal article about an energy company ENEL Spa. The WSJ story reported ~ (Nov 4) on its first day of trading, the “green” power utility is down almost 4% at 1.54 euros in an otherwise up market.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In 2007 ENEL and Acciona partnered up to take over Endesa, the Spanish energy utility.
October 5, 2007 it was reported that Italy’s Enel and the Spain’s Acciona had taken control of 92.06 percent of the shares of Endesa. The companies, which had already controlled 46.01 percent of Endesa, acquired 45.05 percent more through a joint bid worth 42.5 million Euros.
Enel and Acciona paid 40.16 Euro per Endesa share, slightly more than the bid of 41.1 million Euro made by the German energy giant E.ON, which withdrew from the race, it was reported.

The European Commission took legal action against the Spanish government over restrictions it wanted to impose on E.ON to keep the energy market under national control.




Joint Press release~ 2007~ ACCIONA ~ ENEL ~ ACCEPTANCE PERIOD OVER ENDESA SHARES




ENEL ~ PR ~ Company Profile ~ NOV ~ 2007

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Letter from Nina Pierpont MD ~ to Mike Crawley, International Power Canada Inc

Opponents blown away by ignorance
News
By LUKE HENDRY, QMI AGENCY

PICTON -- Opponents of wind turbines sounded the alarm at a three-day symposium hosted by the Society for Wind Vigilance on the weekend.

Organizer Beth Harrington, who divides her time between Toronto and Prince Edward County, said the weekend was a chance to unite those who have been working independently on a common cause.


"The most important thing is for all the scientists to be in the same room together," she said.

Harrington said the weekend's speakers represented a "multidisciplinary research group" and had basically "come to the same conclusion."

That was summed up by Dr. Nina Pierpont, the event's keynote speaker.

"There are significant health effects from the noise," said Pierpont. more...

Below is a letterwritten by Dr. Nina Pierpont to Mike Crawley the President of International Power Canada Inc.
RE: Wind Turbine Syndrome

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mike Crawley, President
International Power Canada Inc.
105 Commerce Valley Drive West, Suite 410
Markham, Ontario L3T 7W3 Canada

May 7,2010

Dear Mr. Crawley,

I am writing on behalf of XX, Harrow, Ontario. Mrs. X informs me that her home has nine (9) 1.65 MW V2 Vestas wind turbines within 2 km of her home. Three of these are within 1 km. Indeed, all 24 turbines (for this project) are within 5 km.
Mrs. X tells me that she and her neighbor are motion sensitive (see below). She likewise tells me that 3 of the neighbors suffer from migraine disorder. Mrs. X’s son has a history of ear infections. A second cousin, living 1 km away, has documented tinnitus. Two children in the neighborhood have autism-both living within 1 km of the turbines. One young man (27 years old) living within 2 km of the turbines has epileptic seizures.

Mrs. X and her husband are over 50 years of age (see below), and her in-laws (living immediately across the road) are over 80 years old.

With this as background, permit me to speak plainly. To build these turbines next to these people is a reckless and violent act.

The evidence for turbines producing substantial low frequency noise and, worse, infrasound, is no longer in dispute. I quote from one of numerous studies demonstrating this: “Wind turbines and wind farms generate strong infrasonic noise which is characterized by their blade passing harmonics (monochromatic signals)” (Ceranna et al., p. 23). In this instance, the authors are referring to a single 200 kW Vestas V47 at 200 meters-a peashooter compared to the turbines adjacent to Mrs. X’s home.’

Second, the clinical evidence is unambiguous that low frequency noise and infrasound profoundly disturb the body’s organs of balance, motion, and position sense (called “vestibular organs”).2

Third, the case studies performed by me and other medical scientists have demonstrated unequivocally that many people (especially 50 years old and older) living within 2 km of turbines are made seriously ill, often to the point of abandoning their homes.3

Fourth, there is no doubt among otolaryngologists and neuro-otologists who have studied the evidence that wind turbine low frequency noise and infrasound seriously disrupt the body’s vestibular organs, resulting in the constellation of illnesses I have called Wind Turbine syndrome

The cure for Wind Turbine Syndrome is simple: Move away from the turbines or shut them off. The prevention of Wind Turbine Syndrome is even simpler: Don’t build these low frequency/infrasound-generating machines within 2 km of people’s homes.

Governments and corporations who violate this principle are guilty of gross clinical harm. Such governments and corporations should be taken before whatever level of court is necessary to stop this outrage.

These are strong words. They are carefully chosen. They are strong because governments and the wind industry stubbornly-l would now add, criminally-refuse to acknowledge that they are deliberately and aggressively harming people. This must stop. The evidence is overwhelming.

Some weeks ago I was contacted by the editor of a leading peer-reviewed American clinical journal to write a special article on Wind Turbine Syndrome. The journal is published both online and in hard copy and aimed primarily at audiologists, otolaryngologists, and neuro-otologists.

I accepted the invitation. The article will be peer-reviewed before publication and should appear online in the next few months. Following that, it will be published in the hard copy edition of the journal. This means, of course, that my research and my findings are being accepted by the clinical medical community. Wind developers may not take this research seriously-but medical experts are.

So is the international community of otolaryngologists and neuro-otologists. My research was presented in March 2010 in a paper at the annual meeting of the Meniere’s Society, in Austria. It was widely praised. The presenter was Professor Alec Salt, PhD, internationally acclaimed neuro-physiologist specializing in inner ear diseases, from the Department of Otolaryngology at the Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

I have interrupted my writing the above journal article to compose this letter to you. The handwriting is on the wall for wind developers and their wholly inadequate setbacks. Legal proceedings have begun in several states and nations. You would be unwise to proceed with installation of these turbines if you are planning on setbacks less than 2 km.

I repeat, <2 km="km" must="must" setbacks="setbacks" span="span" stop.="stop." style="color: red;">
Nina Pierpont, MD (Johns Hopkins), PhD (Population Biology, Princeton) Fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics Former Clinical Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, College of Physicians & Surgeons, Columbia University cc Valerie M Garry, Attorney at Law 1 Lars Ceranna, Gernot Hartmann, and Manfred Henger, “The Inaudible Noise of Wind Turbines,” presented at the lnfrasound Workshop, November 28 – December 02, 2005, Tahiti.
Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR), Section 83.11. Stilleweg 2, 30655 Hannover, Germany.

Wind Turbine Syndrome Book Info -->here<--- Below is a radio broadcast Wind Turbine Syndrome with Dr. Nina Pierpont March 18, 2010 , 12:49 PM by Steve Martinhttp://www.divshare.com/download/11017144-40c

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Pilot Payments ~ Easy money ?

A reader asked me to re- post this ~
because of the upcoming public hearing on a Draft Uniform Tax Exempt Policy for all industrial development in Jefferson County~

scheduled for Wed., Nov. 3, at 7:00 PM at the Jefferson County Community College Auditorium

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
PILOT PAYMENTS
Wind turbines are fairly expensive
The average cost of buying & installing a commercial wind turbine (per internet estimates) is roughly between $2M and $3M each. Then the wind developer and local IDA negotiate a PILOT (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) "deal" and the wind developer avoids paying his fare share of taxes pays a small fraction of the project's net worth as a result of the IDA PILOT "deal". [1] A PILOT is a payment in lieu of taxes (also sometimes abbreviated "PILT"), made to compensate a local government for some or all of the tax revenue that it loses because of the nature of the ownership or use of a particular piece of real property.[2]

No PILOT has been negotiated for the Cape Vincent project, but the developer's reliance on the Galloo plan to project payments to municipalities is a troubling sign that it will be presumed as the basis for the future talks.[3] There, the terms of the Galloo Island PILOT plan are being used to estimate possible PILOT payments for BP Alternative Energy's 124-megawatt project in a debate over the town's proposal to regulate noise levels. It is a consequence of the JCIDA's failure to follow the intent of the Legislature.[3]


Lowville Local taxing jurisdictions are considering a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement on the proposed 39-turbine Roaring Brook Wind Farm that is expected to pay out between $17 million and $24 million over 20 years. [4]
However, given the recent legal wranglings over the last payment from the existing wind farm here, board members may choose to hold off on approving this deal formally until they have a clearer picture of that situation .[4] "Due to energy market conditions, among other reasons, the Company is not able to make any representations regarding when the project would be constructed and therefore when PILOT payments would actually commence," the proposed term sheet states [4] The terms of the proposed PILOT are similar to an agreement approved recently by the Herkimer County Legislature for Atlantic Wind's 37-turbine Hardscrabble Wind Farm project there .[4] The wind company claimed it should pay only the so-called "fallback amount" since it had been decertified from the Empire Zone program, through which it receives state reimbursement for the payments .[4]

Galloo
The PILOT, which allows the developer to make reduced payments to taxing jurisdictions instead of paying property taxes, was approved along with a sales tax exemption and sale-leaseback agreement, which eliminates mortgage recording taxes. "This has been a very involved, committed, thoughtful process," JCIDA Chief Executive Officer Donald C. Alexander said. "It is one that has always had the best interests of the community at heart." [5] JCIDA attorney W. James Heary said the supplemental payments put in the PILOT give taxing jurisdictions extra revenue when electricity prices give the developer high earnings. "We don't necessarily need to go into the nitty-gritty of their plan," he said. Other board members chimed in and said they don't know the bottom line with several projects .[5] The PILOT for the 252-megawatt project will run 20 years and have base and supplemental payments .[5]

After the PILOT and sale-leaseback agreements were approved, the board unanimously agreed to a moratorium on accepting tax abatement applications from wind power projects until a uniform tax-exempt policy is approved. The board will hold a special meeting this month to discuss the policy .[5] "The economic benefits and earning potential are the company's business," said attorney Justin S. Miller, Harris Beach PLLC, Albany, which has consulted on wind farm PILOTs with the agency .[5]

On the wind farm aspect, the agency had worked for months on developing the uniform policy before Galloo Island Wind Farm's developer pressed for an individual payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement. That project's PILOT was different from the standard PILOT laid out in the agency's policy and those changes were approved in February after months of intense pressure
[6] If the wind farm operator ceases operation and doesn't pay the agency the PILOT, the agency returns title to the developer .[6]

The wind PILOT is based on income, not assessed value, anyway, consultant Mark E. Quallen said. "You've got variability around the annual production and you've also got variability around the price," he said. Though the developer may not give a pro forma, he said, the investment costs and revenue stream are easy to figure out .[6]


The Galloo draft policy includes a separate clause for renewable energy PILOTs, which allows for a fixed base payment per megawatt, increasing each year, and supplemental payments based on high electricity prices .[6] Board member John Doldo Jr. said the Galloo Island project wasn't lucrative enough for the taxing jurisdictions. He said the PILOT payments represented less than 14 percent of full taxation. "If you give that much away, there must've been a need to give that much," he said. Mr. Doldo based his numbers on the cost of the project " about $537 million of on-island investment .[6] Only about one mediocre paying job is created for every 10 turbines installed that's hardly job creation. Government watchdog groups say the absence of uniform standards makes the whole PILOT program open to abuse, because each wind company gets to negotiate its own private deal with the IDA. In addition, wind companies that fail to meet their original IDA job creation promises rarely get penalized .[1] New Yorkers in general are beginning to become completely fed up with PILOTs, IDAs, wind farms and seeing their tax dollars squandered by politicians and bureaucrats to offshore ownership. Taxpayers are beginning to revolt against the wind developers, IDAs and local governments and the November 2009 election results underscore this attitude .[1]

Once again the taxpayer is paying higher taxes to support the corrupt wind industry and people say the wind is free. Think about this - 65% of a commercial wind farm is being paid for with your American tax dollars thanks to stimulus money, NYSERDA, PTC (Production Tax Credits), rapid depreciation schedules, PILOTs, etc. while the foreign owner enjoys the profits while raping your community .[1] PILOTs are supposed to make jobs for communities but with wind farms this never happens .[1] PILOTs should be completely repealed and eliminated and taxpayers should demand the full value of tax revenue from the wind project and nothing less
.[1]

1. Beware NY Wind: PILOT Agreements - Corporate Welfare Ad Nauseum

2. PILOT (finance) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3. Watertown Daily Times Wind PILOT

4. Watertown Daily Times PILOT proposed for new wind farm project

5. Watertown Daily Times JCIDA gives nod to Galloo wind PILOT

6.Watertown Daily Times : JCIDA's tax-exempt policy for wind farms won't include local, county issues