BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Governors of 23 states asking that the Wind Energy Tax Production credits be extended.

November 15, 2011
Honorable Harry Reid Honorable John Boehner
Majority Leader Speaker of the House

U.S. Senate U.S. House of Representatives
522 Hart Senate Office Building H-232, U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20510 Washington, DC 20515

Honorable Mitch McConnell
Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Republican Leader Democratic Leader
361-A Russell Senate Office Building 235 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510 Washington, DC 20515

Dear Senator Reid, Senator McConnell, Speaker Boehner, and Democratic Leader
Pelosi:
As governors from diverse regions of the nation, we share an interest in the development of our states’ wind energy resources and the associated manufacturing and infrastructure modernization benefits — an interest that will be severely damaged if the wind
production tax credit expires.

Although the tax credit for wind energy has long enjoyed bipartisan support, it is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2012. Wind-related manufacturing is beginning to slow in our states because the credit has not yet been extended. If Congress pursues a last minute approach to the extension, the anticipated interruption of the credit’s benefits will result in a significant loss of high-paying jobs in a growing sector of the economy. We strongly urge Congress to adopt a more consistent and longer-term federal tax policy to support wind energy development in the United States and to support recently introduced legislation such as the American Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit Extension Act (H.R. 3307).

The leading wind project developers and manufacturers are slowing their plans for 2013 and beyond due to the current uncertainty. Some developers have no projects scheduled for 2013, and are beginning to lay off employees. The ripple effect of this slow down means reduced orders for turbines and decreased business for the hundreds of manufacturers who have entered the wind industry in our states. If the tax credit is allowed to expire at the end of 2012, there will be negative impacts on the high-tech manufacturing jobs that the industry has brought to or created in our states.

The nation’s wind industry is again facing the boom-bust cycle in large measure due to an inconsistent tax policy. Like the oil and gas industries — which enjoy substantial tax credits that have not expired in nearly 100 years — wind energy, a domestic source of energy, needs a predictable policy for sustained economic growth and innovation. When Congress allowed the tax credit to expire in 1999, 2001, and 2003, the development of new wind installations dropped significantly, between 73 percent and 93 percent, and thousands of jobs were lost. Providing renewable energy tax credits in order to provide consistency with conventional energy tax credits is the right policy to move the nation forward in an energy sector that offers global export opportunities and the ability to modernize a segment of our electric production infrastructure.

The United States has some of the best wind resources in the world, but our lack of long-term national policies hinders our ability to develop them fully. Extending the production tax credit this year, rather than delaying action, is critical to the stability and growth of wind manufacturing in our states. A multi-year extension of at least 4 years would encourage investment of new capital, help catalyze the export of wind energy technologies and related products, and support the goal of increasing domestic energy production. Without policy certainty, investors, developers, and manufacturers will move projects and jobs elsewhere.

We respectfully urge Congress promptly to pass a multi-year extension of the wind tax
credit.

Sincerely,
Lincoln Chafee,Terry Branstad, Vice Chairman
and Governor of RhodeIsland


Terry Branstad, Vice Chairman

and Governor of Iowa

c:
Members, Energy and Natural Resources Committee
Members, Finance Committee
Members, House Ways and Means Committee
The Honorable Steven Chu, Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy
The Honorable Ken Salazar, Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior

Read the original Governors’ Wind Energy Coalition letter at this link.

List of Governors

(1) Rhode Island
Gov. Lincoln Chafee
Chairman
~~~
(2)Iowa
Gov. Terry Branstad
Vice Chairman
~~~
(3)Arkansas
Gov. Mike Beebe
~~~
(4)California
Gov. Jerry Brown
~~~
(5)Colorado
Gov. John Hickenlooper
~~~
(6)Florida
Gov. Rick Scott
~~~
(7)Hawaii
Gov. Neil Abercrombie
~~~
(8)Illinois
Gov. Pat Quinn
~~~
(9)Kansas
Gov. Sam Brownback
~~~
(10)Kentucky
Gov. Steve Beshear
~~~
(11)Maine
Gov. Paul LePage
~~~
(12)Maryland
Gov. Martin O’Malley
~~~
(13)Massachusetts
Gov. Deval Patrick
~~~
(14)Minnesota
Gov. Mark Dayton
~~~
(15)Montana
Gov. Brian Schweitzer
~~~
(16)New Mexico
Gov. Susana Martinez
~~~
(17)New York
Gov. Andrew Cuomo
~~~
(18)North Dakota
Gov. Jack Dalrymple
~~~
(19)Oklahoma
Gov. Mary Fallin
~~~
(20)Oregon
Gov. John Kitzhaber
~~~
(21)South Dakota
Gov. Dennis Daugaard
~~~
(22)Washington
Gov. Christine Gregoire
~~~
(23)West Virginia
Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin

Additionally, another letter was sent to OUR represenatives by industrial wind proponents (Many of them Wind companies)
Their letter asks for a four-year extension of the renewable energy production tax credit (PTC) before the end of this calendar year.

Read their letter at this link~~~
Some of the Notable names on this letter:
ACCIONA
American Wind Energy Association, Washington, DC
Acoustic Ecology Institute, Santa Fe, NM
JPMorgan Capital Corporation, Chicago, IL
Sierra Club, San Francisco, CA
Defenders of Wildlife, Washington, DC
National Audubon Society, New York, NY
Natural Resources Defense Council, New York, NY
Wild Utah Project, Salt Lake City, UT
National Wildlife Federation, Reston, VA

Saturday, November 26, 2011

Galloo~ Developers win ~ Watertown Times Editorial

Bad deal for Jefferson County taxpayers

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2009

Jefferson County homeowners, dairy farmers and small businesses will pay the price in higher taxes to subsidize tax breaks for developers of the Galloo Island Wind Farm under the terms of a tax agreement worked out with the Jefferson County Industrial Development Agency.

 .[Watertown Times]

Friday, November 25, 2011

Cape Vincent~Send lawyers, guns and money

Watertown Daily Times Send lawyers, guns and money

Send lawyers, guns and money
Outside Looking In
By Perry White

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2009


When the Cape Vincent Zoning Board of Appeals affirmed Monday night its decision to require that Roger D. Alexander tear down the windmill he built on his property, it might as well have sent e-mails out to every lawyer in the county that a lawsuit is a-comin'.

 [Watertown Times]

Thursday, November 24, 2011

We've come a long way

Since that day


CAPE VINCENT’S UNETHICAL BLACK HOLE
Sunday February 15, 2009 Wind Power Ethics Group wrote an open letter to representatives of British Petroleum and Acciona/AES this letter was published in New York's Watertown Daily Times newspaper in response to questionable business practices by the developers seeking to build wind facilities in Cape Vincent, New York

The group's letter outlined the potential conflicts of interest that State Sen. Darrel J. Aubertine, three Town Council members and three Planning Board members have with wind developers. The conflicts are leases they or family members have signed with one or both of the wind farm developers in the town.
~~~~
A lot has happened since since that February 2009 letter, and we are now coming out of this unethical Black Hole.
Below is a portion of the original letter outlining the conflicts of interest and an update on the conflict situation in Cape Vincent today.

Original Advertisement as it appeared in the Watertown Daily Times


Cape Vincent’s Unethical Black Hole

• NYS Senator Darrel Aubertine — Has contract with Acciona/AES.
Wrote letter to Cape officials advising to disregard conflicts of interest.
Former Cape Vincent town councilman
Voted at state level on legislation which could influence his wind contract
Sister married to John Wiley, member of Zoning Board of Appeals.

[Darrel Aubertine found himself in a more than 3,000 vote BLACK HOLE to Republican Patty Ritchie on election night. His loss has been attributed to his actions regarding wind development.]

[John Wiley resigned from the. Z.B.A.December 28,2009]

Joe Wood — Town Board, has wind contract
Wife Debra Wood, Deputy Town Clerk
Sister Karen Bourcy on Planning Board
Brother Alan Wood, Zoning Enforcement Officer, partner in Wood Farm LLC,
which has contract
Another brother is partner in Wood Farm LLC, which has a contract
2 nephew partners in Wood Farm LLC, which has wind contract.

[Joseph H. Wood did not seek re-election in 2009 and has not been be a board member since Dec. 31, 2010.]
[Debera Wood stepped down as Deputy Town Clerk ~September 14, 2010]

[Alan Wood
continues to serve as zoning enforcement officer ]

Marty Mason — Town Board, has 3 wind contracts
Sister Jerri Mason is Town Clerk.Cousin Donald Mason, Town Board, has wind contract

[Marty Mason ~ defeated in his bid for re-election due to his wind conflicts. Marty received 515 votes and his anti- corruption opponents received over 800 votes each]

[Jeri Ann Mason ,Town Clerk resigned abruptly after a partial audit report found discrepancies in the town's finances.
and she has been indicted on charges of grand larceny and defrauding the government.]

Donald Mason — Town Board, has wind contract
Cousin Marty Mason, Town Board, has 3 wind contracts
Cousin Jerri Mason, Town Clerk

[Donny Mason lost the election as well (due to wind conflicts) he lagged behind Marty with only 484 votes and his anti- corruption opponents received over 800 votes each. ]

• Richard Edsall — Planning Board Chairman, has wind contract
Wife’s parents have wind contract.
Brother-in-law has wind contract.

[Ricard Edsall submitted his letter of resignation as Planning Board chairman June 30, 2011 effective July 1 2011.]

• Andrew Binsley
— Planning Board
2 brothers-in-law and a nephew have wind contract.

[Andrew R. Binsley resigned from the Planning Board following a heated meeting Nov. 10,2010 ]

• Karen Bourcy
— Planning Board
Son, Partner in Wood Farm LLC, which has wind contract
Brother Joe Wood, Town Board, has wind contract
Brother Alan Wood, Zoning Enforcement Office, partner in Wood Farm LLC, which has a wind contract
Nephew, partner in Wood Farm LLC, which has wind contract
1 additional brother partner in Wood Farm LLC, which has wind contract.

[Karen Bourcy remains on the Cape Vincent Planning Board as the only member with wind conflicts of interest.]

To:
James H. Madden — Cape Vincent Wind Farm — British Petroleum
Peter E. Zedick — St. Lawrence Wind Farm — Acciona/AES

[James Madden project manager for BP Wind Energy's Cape Vincent Wind Farm announced in a Watertown Times article dated March 22, 2011 that he was leaving the company .]

[Pete Zedick
changed directions and by June of 2011 is no longer working in Wind development . He is working with a Rochester company called Edgemere Development, Inc. as their Director of Development. ]

Link here to board members conflict disclosure forms

Link here to original February 2009 post

Link here to read Watertown Times article ~ Ethics ad has official angry.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

How many times can a man turn his head Watertown Times Editorial

Watertown Daily Times Now you see them, now you don't, now you see them

By Bob Gorman

FRIDAY, AUGUST 21, 2009
How many times can a man turn his head, and pretend that he just doesn't see, The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind, the answer is blowing in the wind.


Link to original here

Are Wind Lease Easement Enforceable?

Are wind lease easements enforceable in a court of law? What if you had children that were experiencing problems as a result of living in close proximity to wind turbines?

Imposing these conditions upon a child because a parent has agreed to cooperate for financial considerations may be tantamount to child abuse.
If the developers do not inform lease holders of the potential consequences would the wind developers be culpable ?
Read the excerpts from the Acciona easement that I have posted. Acciona's easement denies the leaseholder the right to bring any complaint, suit or action or intervene in any investigation or inquiry. Additionally, there is an easement for noise and setbacks etc...

Is this enforceable?

Windpower Facility Effects Easement. AND the Waiver of Setback and Setback Easement.

The Windpower Facility Effects Easement
.

ii) Windpower Facility Effects Easement...Grantor hereby grants Grantee a perpetual easement (the “Windpower Facility Effects Easement “)

[A perpetual easement is that type of easement, which is to last without any limitation of time. It is a right, which a person has on the property of another person, which to an extent is permanent. ]

for any audio, visual, view, light , noise, vibration, air turbulence, wake, electromagnetic or other effect of any kind or nature whatsoever resulting , directly or indirectly from the construction instillation, maintenance or operation of Wind Power Facilities in the vicinity of the property; to generate and maintain audible noise levels on and above Property wherever originating at any or all times of day or night; and to cast shadows and reflect glare onto the property, whether intermittent(flicker) or constant , from Windpower Facilities wherever located, and agrees not to bring any complaint , suit or action or intervene in any investigation or inquiry by any person or entity with respect thereto.
~~~~~~
Waiver of Setback and Setback Easement

(iii) Waiver of Setback and Setback Easement. Grantor hereby grants Grantee a perpetual easement (the “Setback Easement”) pursuant to which Grantor consents to Grantee is siting of Windpower Facilities at any location upon property near the Property and by which, to the fullest extent applicable and permitted by law, this means that Grantor waives enforcement of any and all setback requirements related to the siting of Windpower facilities upon property in the Vicinity of the Property , including Setback Requirements applicable to the Windpower Facilities from lot lines, residents and other improvements, consents to setbacks for the Windpower Facilities being less than required by such Setback Requirement and agrees not to bring any complaint, suit or action or intervene in any investigation or inquiry by any person or entity with respect thereto.


Grantor agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to assist , cooperate and participate in any proceeding and petition prepared by grantee in connection with any modification or variance to an existing siting or Setback Requirement.


Further, if so requested by Grantee, Grantor shall, without demanding additional consideration therefor,
(i) Execute (and if appropriate cause to be acknowledged) any setback waiver, setback elimination or other document or instrument reasonably requested by Grantee in connection therewith.

Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, this agreement shall be deemed a “setback agreement” For the purposes of the Town of Cape Vincent Wind energy facility law.

links below to Acciona wind lease and easement
lease agreements.

lease easement

Official Election results

Hirschey 889 Mickey Mouse 1

General Election 11/08/2011
Cape Vincent


Final results with some interesting write in choices!

3 of 3 (100%) machines reporting (3 total districts)

Town of Cape Vincent Supervisor Vote for 1

Urban C Hirschey 889
Harvey J White 462
Tom Ingersol 2
Mickey Mouse 1

Town of Cape Vincent Town Council Vote for 2

Clifford P Schneider 827
John L Byrne III 807
Marty Mason 515
Donald J Mason 484
Liz Brennan 5

Town of Cape Vincent Town Justice Vote for 2

John D Blodgett 1,025
Colleen M Knuth 706
Kirk E Grant 653
Danny Hubard 1

Town of Cape Vincent Highway Superintendent Vote for 1

Danny Hubbard 526

Hubbard 18
Steven J Hall 11
Stephen Docteur 4
Void 4
Marty Mason 3
Liz Brennan 3
Harvey White 1
Harvey Blodgett 1
Tom Hubard 1
Danny 1
Steve Docteur 1
Marty Hubbard 1
Floyd Gould 1
Micky Hibbard 1
William DeSouza 1



Link Here to Jefferson County web page posting the official election results

Google Cleans House & Abandons Renewable energy goals

The tide is rapidly turning on renewables.
As the bloom is off the rose, not only are people re -thinking renewable energy production tax credits but the bad news for renewables continues to grow rapidly.
Recently Prince Philip, the Queen of England’s husband, reportedly describing wind farms as “utterly useless”; a view publicly supported by the UK’s Former Chancellor, Lord Lawson
Now according to a post on Google’s corporate blog Google is doing a little off season Spring-cleaning.

Google’s Green Energy Czar, Bill Weihl, told Reuters that he expected to demonstrate within a few years working technology that could produce renewable energy at a cheaper price than coal.
However, it was announced Tuesday by Google that they were pulling the plug on this project.
Additionally, A Google spokesperson said that Weihl had left Google earlier this month.
~~~~~~


Link here to read announcement on Google's Corporate Blog

Full story from Reuters

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

LEASE ~ BREAKERS


“If they had both sides of the story, they may not have signed the contracts.”
It’s nice to try to use alternative energy, but we are right on the Mississippi Flyway,” Edwards said.



Several local landowners want out of wind contract The Republican Eagle Red Wing, Minnesota

Minnesota~ A handful of participating landowners who agreed to be part of a 78-megawatt wind farm are now anxious to get out of their contracts and have sent what they call a letter of termination to AWA Goodhue.

AWA Goodhue officials have declined comment.

In addition to a laundry list of other reasons, the landowners — who asked not to be identified — said realizations about possible effects on the area’s wildlife caused them to want out of the project.
“Those landowners a lot of times are making decisions based on what the wind folks are saying,” said Jaime Edwards of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

“If they had both sides of the story, they may not have signed the contracts.”
It’s nice to try to use alternative energy, but we are right on the Mississippi Flyway,” Edwards said.

“You really have to look hard at whether something like this should be placed on a flyway.”
Edwards also said that although the project has fewer than 50 turbines planned, once one moves in she expects more are likely to follow.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It will be interesting to follow this case and see what happens.

I have often thought that the wind companies are taking advantage of the leaseholders in Cape Vincent .

I have been told by a reliable source that the developers did not inform lease holders of the negative aspects of wind development.

Additionally, I have been told that they were encouraged to be secretive during the signing process preventing them from engaging in collective bargaining .

It is also my opinion that the developers are not paying the leaseholders enough


Additionally, my source said that they were encouraged to sign a lease without the expertise of an attorney.


I think signing a wind lease probably seemed like a good idea at the time to many but I am sure that some people may have regrets.

The question is what can a leaseholder do if they want out?


Source Pierce County Herald link here to read the rest of the story

Developers should pay full taxes

Watertown Times editorial

Watertown Daily Times Wind power

Developers should pay full taxes
TUESDAY, JULY 21, 2009

Jefferson County development officials continue to wrestle with the terms of a tax-exempt policy for several wind power projects planned for the county.
 .[Watertown Times]

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Wind PILOTs Watertown Daily Times Editorial


Too much given away to developers
SATURDAY, JULY 25, 2009

A payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement being developed by the Jefferson County Industrial Development Agency will give away tens of millions of dollars in taxes with minimal return for the price being paid by county taxpayers.



Link
 Watertown Daily Times Wind PILOTs

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Un - certified 2011 Town and Village of Cape Vincent final results.

This election was more than a referendum on Wind development; it was also a referendum on Cape Vincent’s good old boys network.
Un -certified 2011 Town and Village of Cape Vincent final results.
Jefferson County Legislator District 1, Clayton - Cape Vincent:
The black number is the election day count and the red numbers are the final count after absentees.
Link here to JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS
Jefferson County B.O.E Results link here
General Election and absentee ballot Results
Tuesday, November 15, 2011


Jefferson County Legislator District 1, Clayton - Cape Vincent:
Michael Docteur (R) Election day 700 votes + Absentee Votes =( )



Town of Cape Vincent Supervisor
:Urban Hirschey (R) Election day 518 votes + Absentee Votes = ( 888 )



Harvey White (C) - Election day 388 votes + Absentee Votes = ( 442 )


Town of Cape Vincent Council (two of four):
Clif Schneider (R) - Election day 471 votes+ Absentee Votes = (826 )


John Byrne III (R) - Election day 448 votes + Absentee Votes = ( 806)


Marty Mason (C) - Election day 453 votes + Absentee Votes = ( 515)


Donald Mason (C) - Election day 423 votes + Absentee Votes = ( 484)



Town of Cape Vincent Justice (two of three):
John Blodgett (R) - Election day 679 votes= Absentee Votes= (1024 )


Coleen Knuth (R) - Election day 369 votes + Absentee Votes = (706 )


Kirk Grant (C) - Election day 565 votes+ Absentee Votes = ( 652)


Town of Cape Vincent Highway Superintendent:
Danny Hubbard write in votes = (? )


Village of Cape Vincent Trustee (two of three):Pamela Youngs (R) - Election day 230 votes + Absentee votes = ( won)


Harry Landers (R) - Election day 115 votes + Absentee Votes = (? )


Liz Brennan (write in) Votes ( won)



Congratulations to all winning candidates.
And
Thank you to all voters

APEC leaders agree to cut tariffs on green products and services

Markets Updated Tuesday, 0:37 am TWN
November 15, 2011
By Doug Palmer ,Reuters

HONOLULU -- Asia-Pacific leaders, including the United States and China, committed on Sunday to slash tariffs on environmental goods and services in a bid to boost trade in products that cut fossil fuel use and reduce pollution.


Source The China Post link here

Cape Vincent's

Sovereign Disgrace

Harold Wiley’s petition against what he called voter fraud was a document crafted with the intention of disenfranchising a segment of our community. However , it was based on an honest premise, the fact is Harold Wiley and the oligarchy that exists in Cape Vincent truly believe that voter fraud has been perpetrated they believe that they have supreme, independent authority over Cape Vincent.
Cape Vincent is their Sovereign Oligarchy.

Look back on the blatant actions that have been taken by certain members of the Town Board and Planning Board to push their wind development agenda. It is clear that certain board members think that they are above the law ,they have their own conventions that they abide by, for example the comments that the Town Board members made about the Attorney General’s code of ethics. They said it did not apply to Cape Vincent. All through this wind debacle, they have been conducting themselves as they choose. As wind contract holders, they have been voting and recusing on wind issues when it serves their own best interests. They seem to believe that as lifelong residents of Cape Vincent they possess an inborn entitlement of supremacy giving them the right to do as they please.
Moreover, as of yet no authority has stepped in to tell them otherwise.
Now the part time residents who happen to pay full time taxes have stood up for what is right and the good old boys truly do think it is illegal and immoral.

Remember the words of Thomas K. Reinbeck after losing the election of 2009
"It sucks, doesn't it?" "These people, they have registered to vote here but they don't even live here. They obviously took advantage of the gray area of the law."
Mr. Rienbeck said most of the people who changed their registration to vote for Mr. Hirschey were rich seasonal residents who oppose wind farms.
"All they care about is their cottages on the river," "They are nothing but selfish people. It's a sad day for the people of Cape Vincent."
~~~
In 2009, in a letter to the Watertown Times Harold Wiley attempted to marginalize Urban Hirschey‘s victory in the race for Town Supervisor, by labeling him a summer person. Additionally, he wrote that Mr. Hirschey was elected by absentee ballots generated from people that are against progress in Cape Vincent.

When Harold Wiley presented his voter fraud petition to the Town Board he stated that "the things that are going on in Cape Vincent with this getting the vote out, the absentee ballots are unethical and immoral in my opinion its bordering illegal." Harold said that the intention of this voter fraud was to manipulate the outcome of the election to defeat wind farm development. Additionally, Harold added, “where have these people (absentee voters) been in the last 25 to 30 years?” “A lot of things have gone on in Cape Vincent in the past 25 or thirty years through the efforts of the town board. The Town Board has done the right thing and they should be able to continue to do the right thing.”
~~~~
In some small communities, you may find that the good old boy network is alive and well, maybe a pal gets a load of gravel, top soil or someone’s driveway may get paved , perhaps the town provides free stump removal or maybe new sidewalks. People will tolerate things like this; they look the other way generally, when it comes to the little extras that are doled out to the friends of the good old boys.
In Cape Vincent, certain members of both our boards began pushing their wind agenda and an arrogance developed growing until it was out of control, their efforts became so extreme and blatant that citizens that had normally trusted our good old boy network to do the right thing could no longer look the other way.

The proposed wind developments are the single most important issue that has ever been put before our community. These projects are not just benign structures that will bring extra income to lease holders; this is a life-changing event that will affect the quality of life of every resident in our community. These developments will change the face of Cape Vincent forever. It is wrong for a select few that would gain financially from these wind developments, to make these decisions for our community.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Sound - off on noise!

August 16, 2010
Mr. Richard Edsall – Chairman
Cape Vincent Planning Board
Town of Cape Vincent
1964 NYS Rte. 12E
Cape Vincent, NY 13618

Dear Mr. Edsall:
I have attached for your review and to be part of the record the complaint resolution section of the 2010 draft wind law that you and other members of the Planning Board helped formulate earlier this year. I thought you should compare what you and the board drafted with Acciona's Complaint Resolution Plan (FEIS, Appendix C-11). They are not even comparable.

I suggest that you recommend Acciona adopt the Complaint Resolution Plan that our community drafted and not the “wind industry friendly” variety Acciona hopes you will accept.

Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely yours,
Clifford Schneider
PO Box ???
Cape Vincent, NY 13618

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Complaint Resolution Process
Excerpt from Cape Vincent Wind Committees 2010 Draft Wind Law) Complaints from the Public will be addressed in the following manner: All complaints shall be directed to the Applicant/Operator and responded to by the Applicant/Operator or his duly authorized representative within five (5) calendar days after receipt of such complaint. The Applicant/Operator shall keep a log of any such complaints received, which log shall be reviewable by the Town Code Enforcement Officer upon request.

If the complaint includes the character or quality of the wind turbine sound, then any subsequent investigation shall use best practices to evaluate the overall level, tonal, and/or temporal nature of the wind turbine sound prompting the complaint. Any complaints which cannot be resolved during the initial response shall be subsequently directed to the Town Engineer for investigation, and any such investigation shall be undertaken with the full cooperation of the Applicant/Operator. In addition, the Applicant/Operator will shut down and Wind Turbines as may be needed to properly assess noise impacts. The operating data including wind speed and direction, turbine output, and rotation speed for adjacent turbines shall be available upon request.

Testing shall commence within ten (10) working days of the report of the initial investigation. If testing cannot be initiated within ten (10) days (exceptions granted for lack of stable atmospheric conditions), the wind turbine(s) causing the complaint shall be shut down until the testing can be started. Testing shall compare actual sound measurements at property line of complainant with and without turbine operation to confirm operation complies with sound limits established in Article 3, E3. “Sound Regulations”.

A copy of the test results shall be sent to the complainant and the Town within thirty (30) days of test completion.

After the investigation, if the Town reasonably concludes that operational violation of any applicable permit conditions or modeled sound levels are shown to be caused by the Wind Energy Facility, the licensee/operator/owner shall use reasonable efforts to mitigate such problems. These reasonable efforts include such measures as temporary cessation of operation.

Continued complaints from the same landowner will trigger additional investigation only if the Town determines that nearby wind turbine operational characteristics have
changed since the landowner's last complaint.

If the operator of the Wind Energy Facility does not mitigate such problems they will be subject to enforcement penalties in the Town Zoning Law.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Excerpt from 2010 Draft Wind Law
4. Compliance Survey – Protocol for dealing with noise complaints. Within three (3) months after a wind energy facility becomes operational, a compliance survey shall be conducted by the Town and funded by the applicant and/or operator. The following list of steps outlines the procedure:

a. Sound sensitive sites shall be selected based upon the model used for site plan approval.

b. Sound levels shall be measured at a non-participant property line that is closest to the nearest wind turbine, but at least 25 ft away from buildings and 50 ft. away from roads, driveways, power lines, or any other potential sources of man-made noise.
The A-weighted and C-weighted Leq sound levels shall be use to assess compliance. In
addition, L90, and L10 levels shall also be collected.

c. Data collection shall occur on any weekday dates (barring holidays). Measurements shall be made in accordance with the parameters established by the Planning Board and its consultants. Additional compliance surveying and monitoring may be required at the discretion of the acoustical sub-consultant if conditions vary. The actual hub wind speed and power output shall be provided. Compliance surveys are valid only when the four nearest wind turbines are all operating within the test parameters.

d. Data recording sound level meters shall be used that comply with ANSI or IEC standards for Type I meters, and the meters should be placed on the ground in accordance with IEC 61400-11. Microphone wind screens shall be used for all measurements in accordance with best recommendations of the sound level meter's manufacturer.e. Recording anemometers shall be placed adjacent to each sound level meter 4-5 ft. above ground and approximately 25 ft. from the meters.

f. Data collection should include a series of continuous 10-minute samples for at least 1 hour with the highest, valid 10-minute LeqA and LeqC levels from the same 10 minute interval used to define the wind energy facility’s operating sound. Observations must confirm that the highest LeqA and LeqC sound levels measured are not influenced by non wind turbine noise sources. These levels will then be compared to the sound levels predicted by the computer model at that location.

g. Other technical procedures should generally comply with International Organization for Standardization (ISO ) 1996 standards

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All members of the wind committee agreed to this version of the complaint plan - Notice that in the end they say if a wind developer does not fix the problem, they are subject to penalties and fines. This was not part of Acciona's feel-good complaint plan.

Acciona has put forward a plan to deal with our potential complaints because they have said we will have more complaints than usual because of the noise issue.
Tocci said the wind farm would be too loud and Acciona said, Hell we'll just resolve the complaints with our Complaint Plan and Complaint (developer loaded) Board.

What I would like to know is, those of you that may have submitted comments on Acciona or BP's EISs, how satisfied are you with the responses in the FEIS?
Acciona’s responsiveness to your concerns is a good indication as to how well they would respond to any complaints after they put up their damn pinwheels.

What kind of response do you think you would get to your noise complaints?


Link Here To Read The ST. Lawrence Wind Complaint plan

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Reading Between the Lines

Wind

Correspondence

Update on an old post
This post is a series of letters between Whiteman Osterman and Hanna lawyer Michael Sterthous , British Petroleum’s project manager Peter Gross and Planning Board member Richard MacSherry. I have posted these letters before but this posting has been updated with a fourth letter recently sent to Planning Board member Richard MacSherryfrom Michael G. Sterthouse of Whiteman Osterman & Hanna in regard to the Supplemental Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement(SDGEIS)
Additionally ,this latest letter(email) was read by Mr. Mac Sherry at the planning board meeting of Nov. 9, 2011
Letter #1
Michael G. Sterthous from Whiteman Osterman and Hanna advised Bp that the Cape Vincent’s Planning Board review of their project is “ongoing”.
Comments on the status of the completeness of the SDEIS will be delivered to BP Wind Energy‘s technical consultants over the coming months and ultimately lead to iteration of the document.
The planning board’s technical consultants have already issued a letter to BP Wind Energy advising it that the noise analysis presented in the SDEIS should be conformed to the noise analysis presented by St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC as part of its most recent submissions to the Planning Board.
Since an iteration of the current version of the SDEIS is expected, the planning Board has cancelled next week’s meeting…
It may be helpful for BP Wind Energy’s representative to schedule a time to present the project and the reports and analysis contained in the SDEIS to the Planning Board, as many members are new to the board.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sterthous is assuring BP that things are going along smoothly. However, are them it was right around this time that Todd Mathis was removed from the Cape Vincent project additionally BP’s senior project manager Jim Madden left the scene as well. The planning board meeting scheduled for March 23 was cancelled
The SDEIS was submitted to the planning board Feb. 10, 2011 however, it has not been formally accepted by the board. In late February of 2011, BP’s former senior project manager Madden said in a newspaper interview that he expected the SDEIS to be accepted by the end of March. Then a public comment period would begin followed by a hearing.
However, the Cape Vincent Town Planning Board meeting scheduled for March 23, 2011 was canceled. Planning Board members were to consider the supplemental draft environmental impact statement for British Petroleum's Cape Vincent industrial wind complex.








~~~~~~~~~~~~
Letter #2
In this letter Bp project manager Peter Gross explains to Mr. MacSherry that they are anxiously awaiting the anticipated comments from the Planning Board on their Cape Wind SDEIS.
Additionally, Gross states that BP would like to advance their project in a timely efficient manner.
Gross also requests that the Planning Board schedule a review of the SDEIS with the Planning Board and asks for a schedule ( deadline?) for the submission of any further comments so BP can receive a determination from the Planning Board that the doc is complete as soon as reasonably possible.
In other words, we have waited long enough hurry up with your positive determination.
Letter #3
In this letter Planning Board Member Richard MacSherry informs Bp project manager Peter Gross that he has no knowledge of any dialogue that Mr. Edsall could have possibly had with Whiteman Osterman and Hanna, which would have led them to indicate that any review was active and that comments regarding the SDEIS would be forthcoming under any time frame.
Additionally, Mr. MacSherry states that the primary obstacles are the time it will take to fill the Planning Board vacancies and a reasonable period for all members to become familiar with BP draft and supplemental EIS documents.
And an opportunity for the Planning Board to meet with our consultants to share and compare our findings
I cannot speculate as to when all of the above-mentioned matters will be concluded; I will commit only to keeping you informed as to our progress.


letter#4



This email isfrom Michael G. Sterhouse of Whiteman Osterman & Hanna directed To Planning Board Member Richard MacSherry in regard to the Supplimentary Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement(SDGEIS)
Additionally,this letter(email) was read by Mr. Mac Sherry at the planning board meeting of Nov. 9, 2011 .


Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Vestas drops 2015 targets, pledges cost cuts | Reuters

UPDATE 1-Vestas drops 2015 targets, pledges cost cuts | Reuters
Wed Nov 9, 2011


COPENHAGEN Nov 9 (Reuters) - Vestas , the world's biggest wind turbine manufacturer, on Wednesday dropped its long-term financial goals and pledged to cut costs and jobs as it struggles with weak demand for wind power.

  continue...

U.S. bureau may face suit in defense of Indiana bats

U.S. bureau may face suit in defense of Indiana bats


A coalition of conservation groups is threatening to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for issuing an opinion allowing a proposed wind turbine facility on ecologically sensitive Shaffer Mountain to mitigate damage it would do to a maternity colony of endangered Indiana bats.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11311/1188093-454-0.stm?cmpid=localstate.xml#ixzz1dRgx6IbL

madison county wind

Madison County wind projects


Madison County Census Data

New York State Environmental Justice?

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

CAPE VINCENT ELECTION 2011

Link here to JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS

Jefferson County B.O.E Results link here



General Election Results
Tuesday, November 08, 2011

Jefferson County Legislator District 1, Clayton - Cape Vincent:

Michael Docteur (R) 1,239




Town of Cape Vincent Supervisor:

Urban Hirschey (R)518





Harvey White (C) - 388




Town of Cape Vincent Council (two of four):

Clif Schneider (R) - 471




John Byrne III (R) - 448




Marty Mason (C) - 453




Donald Mason (C) - 423




Town of Cape Vincent Justice (two of three):

John Blodgett (R) - 679




Coleen Knuth (R) - 369




Kirk Grant (C) - 565





Town of Cape Vincent Highway Superintendent:

Danny Hubbard ( write in)-? (505 write in ballots)




Village of Cape Vincent Trustee (two of three):

Pamela Youngs (R) -230




Harry Landers (R) - 115




Liz Brennan (write in) - ?




There are 200 write in ballots and 400 absentee ballots to be counted as well.

Vote Republican for Cape Vincent’s future


There are not many times when a local election can be called the most important since a town was founded. Nevertheless, this aptly describes the importance of this year’s election in the town of Cape Vincent. What is at stake is Cape Vincent’s future and, fortunately for voters, the choices are clearly defined this year.

One future, endorsed by Conservative Party candidates for supervisor and council, proposes two wind projects totaling 135 turbines, which when combined with the Wolfe Island Wind Project would represent the largest commercial wind complex east of the Mississippi River — even larger than Maple Ridge.

The other future, supported by Republican candidates, would follow the “Joint Comprehensive Plan for the Village and Town of Cape Vincent 2003.” The plan represents the foundation for our zoning law and provides a guide to future growth and community development. Cape Vincent’s plan prescribes maintaining the Cape’s “small-town quality of life.” It advises to “further develop the tourism industry.” The plan also dictates what not to do: “discourage the location of towers, prisons or utility facilities where their impact would have a negative impact on scenic vistas and tourism assets.”

The Republican Party of Cape Vincent not only asks for your vote on Tuesday, but also your support for their efforts to work toward the future represented in our village and town’s comprehensive plan. By voting the Republican line on the ballot, you can also be assured that all our candidates have no contracts with commercial wind developers, no conflicts of interest and will serve all the residents of Cape Vincent. Republican candidates John Byrne, Clif Schneider, Colleen Knuth, Pam Youngs and Harry Landers all strongly endorse the spirit of this letter and want to thank you for your support and your vote.

Urban Hirschey

Cape Vincent

The writer is Cape Vincent supervisor

Monday, November 7, 2011

Because Character Counts & Principles Matter

CAPE VINCENT - ELECTION 2011

ELECT a Team who will
Provide:
GOOD JUDGEMENT
OPENNESS
SMART LEADERSHIP





Republican candidates release a strong


Unified Position Statement

    Urban Hirschey, John Byrne and Clif Schneider have committed to run as Republicans for positions as Supervisor and Councilmen on Cape Vincent's Town Board. The three candidates outlined the following issues and actions they collectively will undertake if they are successful in upcoming elections:
    1. Open Transparent GovernmentWe believe Cape Vincent is best served by its government when the deliberations and actions of its officials are open, honest and transparent. We support video taping meetings and completing annual financial audits. If elected, we will review the Town's Ethics Code and strengthen if necessary. We will then require all elected and appointed officials to annually review, sign and abide by the Town's Ethics Code.

    2. Wind Moratorium
    Wind projects currently proposed for Cape Vincent are incompatible with the path for community development outlined in the cooperative Town and Village 2003 Comprehensive Plan. If elected, we will institute a moratorium in Cape Vincent to halt any further progress by wind developers. The moratorium will extend for as long as necessary. Any subsequent amendments to the zoning law pertaining to wind will not only comply with the town's master plan, but will also provide the fullest protection for the public’s health, safety and propertyvalue.
    3. Cape SchoolThe Cape Elementary School is a small educational gem, the focal point of our community, as well as an important economic resource to our business community. We, as well as school officials, believe the crucial component to maintaining the Cape school is promoting enrollment, as well as supporting its teachers and educational program.We support marketing efforts to attract new families, particularly those military families expected to come to Jefferson County in the immediate future
    4. Economic DevelopmentWe believe economic progress for a small rural community needs more than just hope -it requires effort. Cape Vincent's town government should play a more active role in supporting economic development efforts by our Chamber of Commerce, LDC and other development initiatives that are compatible with the Comprehensive Plan.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Mitigating ~ Circumstances

Photo September 16, 2010 PB FEIS review

A recent comment about a post I did titled mitigation reminded me of a couple of incidents from the early days of fighting wind in Cape Vincent.

The comment
these "mitigation" pictures, while humorous, are also very true. They illustrate just how little respect the developers have for our intelligence.
I actually heard Todd Hopper state that Venetian blinds could be installed to deal with shadow flicker. And that goddamn lighthouse "improvement" isn't going help me or anyone else who is negatively affected by the turbines.
What a joke their mitigation proposals are.

~~~
My recollections
I think it was at Acciona’s first DEIS public hearing for their St. Lawrence Wind Complex.
At this hearing, a resident of Cape Vincent was addressing the board, they were expressing great concern over the attitude of the wind company and the seriousness of shadow flicker caused by wind turbines.
At issue was Acciona’s suggestion in their summary review of supplying curtains and blinds or trees and shrubs to resolve the problem of shadow flicker.
This resident was appalled that such a ridiculous proposal would be made.
I remember hearing the board members laughing and one even said that there was nothing like that in the DEIS.

Thinking to myself, do they bother to read these documents?
Over these past few years since this meeting, I firmly believe that many of the board members have not read the documents concerning the wind developments, and that they do not care to.

At the September 16, 2010 meeting where the town’s Planning Board reviewed, the Final Environmental Impact Study (FEIS) for Acciona’s St. Lawrence wind complex, Reinbeck asked how are the turbines going to get here?

If he had bothered to read the documents that they were reviewing, he would know how the turbines are going to get here.
Another incident sticks in my mind as well .
At the last public DEIS Wind hearing a resident was expressing concern about the industrial wind developments planned for our community. They wanted to know what this would mean for our future and our children’s future.

While this resident was making an emotional and heartfelt plea. Our Planning Board Chairman Edsall was flossing his teeth!

This disgusting display epitomizes the total lack of concern for our community by Edsall and other conflicted municipal officers . Clearly they have been pushing their wind agenda for their financial gain.

Edsall has since resigned as Planning Board Chairman ,the rest is up to us.

We can make it happen.
We can make Cape Vincent’s future brighter.

Vote Hirschey Byrne & Schneider

~~~~~
The following is from Acciona's DEIS RE shadow flicker
Some residents located within 10 turbine diameters would experience some degree of shadow flicker in the town of Cape Vincent.
The proposed turbines would maintain appropriate buffers to minimize shadow flicker.
Settlement agreements could be used to purchase landscape screening (trees, shrubs), or exclusionary treatments such as curtains or blinds.

Document from Acciona's DEIS pertaining to Shadow flicker

4-year PTC-extens​ion bill is filed in the House by Blumenauer and Reichert

If you are serious about stopping "wind farms" and their high cost, low value electricity, I'd suggest that you contact your Congressman and Senators as soon as and as often as possible to OPPOSE this legislation -- and get your friends and neighbors to do the same. Multiple contacts (phone, fax & email) are useful. The sooner the better to head off cosponsors. Focus your efforts on fighting the bill just introduced in the House by Blumenauer and Reichert.

4-year PTC-extension bill is filed in the House

Reps. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., and Dave Reichert, R-Wash., introduced a bill that would extend the renewable-energy Production Tax Credit through 2016. Reichert said that extending the PTC would encourage more private investment, create manufacturing jobs and lower electricity rates.
"Extending the PTC will keep growing U.S. wind-energy manufacturing jobs, rather than losing them to other countries," said AWEA CEO Denise Bode. SustainableBusinessOregon.com (11/2), North American Windpower online (11/3)

You can find all the contact information you need by going to:http://www.senate.gov/and http://www.house.gov/.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Energy Valley Blog



Recently a reader sent me an email suggesting that I write something about my Energy Valley Blog .
I thought it might be a good Idea. I started the Energy Valley Blog as a resource so that people could easily find information about what has been happening in Cape Vincent and the surrounding areas over the years.
This blog is a compilation of newspaper articles Town Board & Planning Board minutes and various documents that I have compiled over the years.
Everything is posted in chronological order with the earliest post being the Ethics code that Cape Vincent adopted in 1970.

I update this blog almost every day. In addition, to date I have 666 posts.
It is a good resource that I often use it myself, it is much easier to find information on the Energy valley Blog than it is searching my PBOR blog

Link here to The Energy Valley Blog

Spain wind power sector pushes govt on final offer

Spain wind power sector pushes govt on final offer Energy & Oil Reuters
Wind industry: subsidies not enough
Reuters Africa~

MADRID, Nov 3 (Reuters) - Spain's wind power industry is pushing the government to further improve a proposal for subsidies after 2012 that the ruling Socialists have said is their 'final' offer, a spokeswoman for the sector's lobby AEE said on Thursday.

Vote to ‘save the Cape’

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2011


Vote for Urban Hirschey, John Byrne and Clif Schneider for Cape Vincent town board. Urban has done a superb job in the last two years as supervisor and should be re-elected.

Like Urban, John and Clif are also men of integrity, intellect, knowledge, experience, love of Cape Vincent and sensitivity to other opinions.

The people of Cape Vincent can no longer tolerate the stubborn refusal of present board members to acknowledge the huge downside of saturating the town with 420-foot industrial wind turbines. The fact that these board members hold contracts with the wind developers and have pushed the project forward at every opportunity should say enough for anybody.

Please help “save the Cape” and use the most powerful weapon we have to do so, vote on Tuesday.


David Docteur

Cape Vincent

Friday, November 4, 2011

Cape Vincent ~ Blog Traffic growing at a rapid pace



More people are stopping by every day to read about Cape Vincent's culture of corruption

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Political Profile: Cape Vincent Town Supervisor




Story Published: Nov 3, 2011 at 5:26 PM EDT

(Story Updated: Nov 3, 2011 at 6:34 PM EDT )
It comes down to wind in the race for town supervisor in Cape Vincent and the two candidates' stances on the topic couldn't be more different.

There's incumbent Republican candidate Urban Hirschey, who says a proposed wind plan is just wrong for the future of Cape Vincent.

"If you crowd that many into a town, you're obviously going to destroy the viewscapes, but more importantly you're probably going to annoy a lot of people because they're going to be too close to people,"

And then there's newcomer and Conservative Party candidate Harvey White.

"I'm supportive of wind anywhere, not just in Cape Vincent. I support wind power in general and all kinds of renewable energy," said White.

White is a dairy farmer from Cape Vincent.

He signed contracts that would allow wind companies to put turbines on two pieces of his property.

He says the town supervisor needs to work with wind companies to ensure the best scenario for Cape Vincent.

"Whoever is elected I think working with the two wind companies would be more beneficial," said White.

Hirschey grew up in Carthage and worked 40 years for his family business there before retiring in Cape Vincent.

He says he first ran for town supervisor two years ago because he felt wind companies were trying to convince residents that turbines are good for Cape Vincent.

"I didn't agree and I felt that we didn't have a voice in the government, we'd have to live with the consequences," said Hirschey.

You may be surprised to learn that the two candidates do have some opinions in common.

For instance, both say job creation is essential for the future of the Cape Vincent.


Source WWNYTV channel 7 News

Deliver de letter, de later de better.

Or Never...

A reader sent me an email telling me that a relative of theirs (a Cape resident) filled out an application for an absentee ballot requesting that it be sent to a Rochester address . However , it was sent to their Cape Vincent Address instead .
A family member took the ballot put it in an envelope on October 21, and sent it to the Rochester address.

After eleven days had passed and the envelope containing the Ballot had not reached Rochester, they called the Board of Elections .


I am happy to report that the Board of elections immediately dispatched a new ballot to the Rochester address and their relative has cast their vote.

Today after being, missing for fourteen days the envelope was returned to their Cape Vincent address marked undeliverable wrong zip code.

My reader said that they do not know why the post office returned the envelope they double-checked and the letter was addressed correctly including the zip code.

One killed and over 20 injured in Mexican wind protest


Michael McGovern

Wind power monthly
MEXICO: The killing of a man during a demonstration against wind plant construction in the Mexican state of Oaxaca has brought new weight to allegations of death threats against local protestors from the indigenous Zapaoteca community.



One killed and over 20 injured in Mexican wind protest | Windpower Monthly



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
September 27, 2011
ACCIONA completes the assembly of three wind parks in Mexico totaling 306 MW

This from Acciona's website
The company thus consolidates its position as the biggest owner of wind power assets in Mexico, with a total capacity of 556.5 MW and a market share of 65 per cent.

The new wind parks, located in the State of Oaxaca, will enter service in the next few weeks and represent an investment of over 450 million euros.

Acciona/ Hessler omitted important information and misrepresented their own protocol for estimating background sound levels.

At the planning board meeting of April 13, 2011 Clif Schneider pointed out another problem with Acciona’s noise studies and wind turbines noise.
Acciona/ Hessler omitted important information and misrepresented their own protocol for estimating background sound levels. As a result Acciona/ Hessler used an elevated background sound level to design their wind farm allowing turbines to be placed much closer to non-participants and allowing noise levels that exceeded NYSDEC guidelines.
Schneider was interested in seeing how much sound Acciona's turbines made at low wind speeds because he believes wind turbines sounds are more noticeable and annoying at low wind speeds. Tim Conboy, Acciona’s Development manager, refused to release low-speed sound data stating that it was unreliable. Fortunately for Cape Vincent, Acciona's turbine test data was available from another source on the web.

You can see by inspecting the data points in the plot in the WIND Test report that sound levels below 6 m/s actually fit closer to the curve than at higher wind speeds. It also looks like Conboy was using reliability as an excuse to deny access to the information.

There should be reliable sound levels at low wind speeds, only because this is the heart of Hessler's approach -- to find the maximum difference between the sound of a turbine and background sound.
Schneider maintains that instead of designing the St. Lawrence Wind Project around background sound levels associated with 6 m/s winds (e.g., 37 dBA), Acciona/Hessler should use the lower background sound level associated with 5 m/s winds (e.g., 34 dBA), because maximum difference occurs at 5 m/s.

He is also concerned with the variability of Acciona's turbine sound levels. It is impossible to determine what the sound variation is between turbines by testing a single turbine at one specific location. You can only understand the difference in sound levels between two or more turbines by sampling more than a single turbine. If the single turbine that Acciona tested happened to be the quietest turbine to come off their assembly line, then using that data may underestimate sound levels for all others. This may explain some of the problems at Waubra, AU.
Schneider concluded that this issue is important only because it highlights the dishonesty of Acciona and Hessler. His own studies have shown that background sound levels in Cape Vincent are 25 dBA, far quieter than either 37 or 34 dBA asserted by Acciona/Hessler. “To protect our community setbacks between Acciona's turbines and non-participants in Cape Vincent have to be moved back - way back”, Schneider said.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Link here to read Mr. Schneider's letters to Acciona and cape Vincents Planning Board and Acciona's response to Mr. Schneider

Wind Test Documents~









The Inspector General said Acciona should repay $2.1 million of a $67.9 million grant

Treasury cash grant update
Chadbourne & Parke LLP Keith Martin
Excerpts from original

Inspector General
The Treasury released five reports in mid-October on inspector general audits of two wind companies and one solar company that received Treasury cash grants. The inspector general asked the companies to repay amounts ranging from several hundred dollars to $2.1 million.
Two of the reports involved two wind farms that E.On Climate and Renewables North America built in Texas. The projects are the 197-megawatt Inadale wind farm and the 249-megawatt Pyron wind farm.
The other three inspector general reports involve grants paid to Acciona and eSolar.
The inspector general took issue with $117,497 in costs out of $19.5 million claimed on a five-megawatt solar thermal facility that eSolar built in Lancaster, California. The company applied for a Treasury cash grant on the project in September 2009 and was paid the grant in late February 2010. In November 2009 while the grant application was pending, it settled a claim against a contractor, which reduced the cost of the project by $80,285, but it did not update its grant application. The developer did not dispute the inspector general report, but said it has accrued other costs exceeding the adjustments since the grant application went in. If the company spent more on new capital improvements, it may qualify for an additional grant. However, the amounts must be new spending after the original application was filed. The Treasury will not pay an additional grant on costs that could have been included in the original application.
Turning to Acciona, the inspector general said Acciona should repay $2.1 million of a $67.9 million grant the company received on its EcoGrove wind farm in Illinois. The inspector general said the company should not have claimed a grant on $5.3 million in interest charges that one Acciona entity that owned the project paid another Acciona entity that supplied the turbines for a delay in paying for the turbines. The inspector general said roughly 40% of the interest claimed by Acciona supposedly accrued before the turbine supply agreement was signed. The inspector general also denied another $831,160 in costs for an “extended warranty” on the turbines. The Treasury does not allow grants to be claimed on the costs of extended warranties.
Unlike the other developers who agreed to repay the Treasury, Acciona said it does not agree with the conclusions. The Treasury cash grant team told the inspector general that it needs more time to evaluate Acciona’s arguments before deciding the company should repay the money.
In the last of the five reports, also relating to Acciona, the inspector general asked for $7,277 back out of a $2.9 million grant paid on the Nevada One solar thermal project. Acciona said it was willing to adjust, but had other costs that exceeded the adjustment on which it could ask for a grant.

Link Here to full story

Chu: America Faces a Choice to “Compete in the Clean Energy Race” or “Wave the White Flag”

Department of Energy Press Release

”November 3, 2011 -


. WASHINGTON, D.C. – In his speech to the Washington Post Live Smart Energy Conference today, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu highlighted the choice America faces on whether or not to take advantage of the huge economic opportunity and compete with countries like China in the clean energy race.

Excerpts and full text of remarks are below:

“Once again, there is a huge opportunity before us – a global clean energy market that is already worth an estimated $240 billion and is growing rapidly. In fact, a very reasonable estimate is that solar photovoltaic systems alone represent a global market worth more than $80 billion this year.”

“China – like many countries – has learned from the U.S. how government can support critical emerging industries. Last year, China offered roughly $30 billion in government financing to its solar companies, including $7 billion to Suntech. At least 10 countries have adopted renewable electricity standards, and more than 50 countries offer some type of public financing for clean energy projects. For example, Germany and Canada operate government-backed clean energy lending programs, and in the last several months, the UK, Australia, and India have announced plans to do the same.”

“America faces a choice today: Are we going to recognize the opportunity and compete in the clean energy race or will we wave the white flag and watch all of these jobs go to China, Korea, Germany and other countries?”

“The global competition is fierce, and support for innovative technologies comes with inherent risk. Not every company or every product will succeed, but that is no reason to sit on the sidelines and concede leadership in clean energy. Some in Washington are ready to throw in the towel and write off the clean energy industry. They don’t think America can compete or they don’t think it’s worth trying. Others think that the best thing we can do is for the government to get out of the way and let the free market work.”

“To those in Washington who say we cannot or should not compete, I say: that’s not who we are. In America, when we fall behind, we don’t give up. We dig in and come back. Why should we concede one of the biggest growing markets in the world that is in our sweet spot: technological and manufacturing innovation? America has the opportunity to lead the world in clean energy technologies and provide the foundation for our prosperity. We remain the most innovative country in the world ... but “Invented in America” is not good enough. We need to ensure that these technologies are invented in America, made in America and sold around the world. That’s how we’ll prosper in the 21st century.”

Secretary Chu’s full remarks to the Washington Post Live Smart Energy Conference, as prepared for delivery, HERE.News Media Contact: (202) 586-4940

Turbine Noise Annoys

View of Wolfe Island from Cape Vincent,NY
~~~~
Turbine Noise Annoys: Expert says people are suffering health problems from being too close to structures

By PAUL SCHLIESMANN

THE WHIG-STANDARD,
Story no longer at link below
http://www.thewhig.com/

January 16 2010

"Some people are definitely suffering from the noise. Some people suffering are keeping quiet about it because of family ties. They can also see that some people are revelling in it. They're making money. There are technicians coming over to work. Some shopkeepers made a lot of money. It's been a shot in the arm, if you like. There's a party line."

-John Harrison retired Queen's University physics professor



Some might accuse John Harrison of tilting at wind turbines, but the retired Queen’s University physics professor says he’s got the science to prove that wind farms are bad for people’s health.

Harrison became an expert critic of wind technology — and an ally of those who oppose it — after learning that his retirement community of Amherst Island could become the site of a wind farm like the one on nearby Wolfe Island.

“My first reaction was I thought it would spoil the island for the looks. I didn’t realize the noise problem,” said Harrison.

“I learned that they really should be kept away from where people live.”

So began what has amounted to a self-funded second career.

Two years ago, Harrison travelled to the western Ontario community of Kincardine to monitor an Ontario Municipal Board hearing into a proposed wind turbine project there.

He came away with the impression that, in order to get the project approved, industry representatives and provincial government officials were paying little attention to the science that linked the giant machines to health concerns.

“There were two experts,” he said. “Their testimony made no impact on the OMB hearing because, for one thing, the company had a very talented lawyer.

“I know the lawyer had no idea what was going on but had this amazing expertise to orient facts.”

Harrison recalled that the 100 or so residents opposing the Kincardine project had no money to hire a lawyer of their own and no ability to pay for independent studies.

“That was a real eye-opener for me,” he said. “First that there are noise problems, that there is a valid scientific basis for the noise problems, and that the ministry of the environment and developers are not interested in hearing about the noise problem.”

The scientist began poring over the research literature. He sent his analyses and critiques to anyone connected with wind projects, including Ontario’s environment minister, John Gerretsen, who is also MPP for Kings -ton and the Islands.

At the time, Wolfe Island, in Gerretsen’s riding, was about to become home to an 86-turbine facility built by Canadian Hydro Developers.

It officially opened last summer and was soon purchased by TransAlta.

Canadian Hydro had been considering a second wind farm on Amherst Island.

“I came back from Kincardine and started reading original reports, original science,” said Harrison.

One study, by a Dutch researcher on the topic of background noise, stood out.

At the time, Ontario’s regulations limited the noise effect from wind turbines on nearby residents to 40 decibels. At a wind speed of 50 km/h, however, up to 50 decibels were allowed, the theory being that wind blowing through surrounding vegetation such as trees and shrubs would mask the additional 10 decibels.

Harrison said the Dutch study showed that “at nighttime there is no masking noise.”

This would be especially true in places like Wolfe and Amherst islands, which are rural and quiet.

“This thesis was a thorn in the side for the Ministry of the Environment because it made nonsense of their thesis,” said Harrison. “It really rattled the Ministry of the Environment. Politically, it wasn’t good because it meant the regulation wasn’t very good.”

Gerretsen says the regulations that were subsequently written into Ontario’s Green Energy Act — with a 40-decibel maximum and 550-metre minimum setbacks — exceed all other jurisdictions and make the Dutch study irrelevant.

“He’s wrong about the masking,” said Gerretsen.

Despite his criticisms, Harrison was asked to sit on an environment ministry working group made up of about 40 people — ministry personnel and engineers, acoustic consultants, municipal staff, planning consultants, as well as himself and two other citizens.

When the working group endorsed a report written by a Ryerson University professor dismissing the Dutch study, Harrison was perturbed and, typically, responded with his own critique.

When a group of Wolfe Island residents asked for his help reviewing the environmental study for the new 86-turbine project in their community, again he found what he considered flaws in the data and dutifully told the consultants, Canadian Hydro and the ministry.

“They just ignored the whole thing. There was no check and balance in the system,” he said. “Those measurements were worthless. The ministry accepted them.”

Harrison said Wolfe Islanders today are more divided over the issue than many let on.

“Some people are definitely suffering from the noise. Some people suffering are keeping quiet about it because of family ties. They can also see that some people are revelling in it. They’re making money. There are technicians coming over to work. Some shopkeepers made a lot of money. It’s been a shot in the arm, if you like. There’s a party line.”

Harrison says he isn’t opposed to wind energy, though he feels it will never supply more than 4% or 5% of Ontario’s power.

He is against putting them near people. “My intention has been, let’s install renewable energy, but let’s install it away from people.”

Gerretsen said most wind-energy companies would probably prefer to be situated in remote locations to avoid conflicts, but the cost of getting the energy to the grid would become prohibitive.

“If you find more remote places, then you get into the problem of transmission lines,” he said.

In a recent interview with the Whig-Standard, Gerretsen endorsed an industry-funded report by the Canadian and American wind energy associations that characterized most of the health problems documented by people living near wind turbines as psychosomatic.

He said the Wolfe Island wind farm opponents were promoting not-in-my-backyard activism because they didn’t like the looks of the turbines.

Harrison dismissed that review as “an industry association convened and sponsored attempt to deny the adverse health effects being reported.”

He said the symptoms are real — people are losing sleep, becoming stressed and experiencing various health problems.

“Other families in Ontario are using safe houses maybe 20 km away. When they need a good night’s sleep, they go to these safe houses,” he said.

Harrison takes credit for helping a woman and her husband near Kindcardine get a settlement from the wind farm company.

“I sent in a report that the noise was far in excess of the Ontario noise regulation. The result was the company bought her out and made her sign a gag order,” he said.

“I think down the line you will see this on Wolfe Island.

The Nineties were busy times in the North Country between Wind turbine proposals and Airports.

CHAUMONT — A Lyme town councilman who recently accused a Point Salubrious couple of marketing a “phantom airport” is wasting taxpayer money to further his personal vendetta against the Borden-Cox family, according to family members.

“Why is a town board member with a personal agenda spending tax money and legal fees to pursue an issue that was put to bed 13 years ago?” said William Borden, son of Georgia Borden Cox, who was accused by her neighbor and town Councilman Warren A. Johnson of advertising a nonexistent airport to pilots on the Internet.
When Mrs. Cox initially proposed in 1998 to build an airport with a 3,000-foot-long runway on her property between Guffin and Sawmill bays, Mr. Johnson led an effort to stop the project, citing safety and noise concerns.

A petition with 119 signatures was submitted to the town that year and Mrs. Cox agreed to withdraw her application to the FAA in a 1999 state Supreme Court settlement between the couple and the town of Lyme.

The nineties were busy times in the North Country between Wind turbine proposals and Airports.


Initially Subcontractors of Niagara Mohawk had approached Cape Vincent and Lyme in 1989 by 1991 Niagara Mohawk had plans to erect a wind test tower in the Town of Lyme but issues over wildlife protection delayed their plans and due to time constraints, they withdrew their application, prompting Niagara Mohawk to select a site in Denmark. Early in July of 1993, Associated Weather Services (AWS True Power), a renewable energy consulting company hired to provide wind energy studies, approached the Cape Vincent Planning Board (PB) on behalf of seven utility companies with a plan to test the wind in the Cape for future development.

Sources: recent Watertown Daily Times articles ~
Watertown Daily Times archives

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

* Quiet Enjoyment

We keep hearing the line it's my property and I can do what I want with it, but what seems to be forgotten by the people making these statements are their neighbors right to what is called the quiet enjoyment of their property as well this is why the concept of zoning laws have been established to protect citizens from inappropriate industrial development. Unfortunately in Cape Vincent we as citizens have been thrown to the wolves. Our system of government has been corrupted and some of our board members have been acting on behalf of a few wind lease holders and the two wind developers interested in turning Cape Vincent into a massive industrial wind complex.
If the impending wind developments proposed for Cape Vincent come to fruition these projects will become quality of life issues on a grand scale add to this the property devaluation outlined in the Cape Vincent Wind Economic report and the noise from the wind turbines - quiet enjoyment of ones property will be a thing of the past.

Scott Aubertine : I felt I was standing up for what was right.

May 7, 2008
Excerpts from the Watertown Daily Times

Scott Aubertine : “I’ve taken the brunt from a lot of people who said I wasn’t representing the majority of the town, but I felt I was standing up for what was right."~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Lyme Town Council approved a strict zoning law for wind development that Bp project developer Jim Madden said will make industrial turbine development virtually impossible.

The approval was on a 3-2 vote at a special meeting Tuesday night.

Before the vote, the council received a report from the assessors that invalidated a protest petition from wind development supporters (Voters for Wind) that would have required four votes for passage of the law.

The law creates setbacks from wind turbines of 4,500 feet from Lake Ontario, the Chaumont River, the village of Chaumont and the hamlet of Three Mile Bay. The law also requires the wind farm developer to pay for several studies, including environmental, property value and well water quality testing.


Supervisor Scott G. Aubertine and Councilman Michael P. Countryman voted against the amendment.
“It’s actually a bit of relief for me,” Mr. Aubertine said after the meeting. “I’ve taken the brunt from a lot of people who said I wasn’t representing the majority of the town, but I felt I was standing up for what was right. I felt that the law was restrictive to those landowners who wanted turbines.”

The Rape of Britain

Wind Farms and the destruction of our environment

The Rape of Britain: Wind farms and the destruction of our environment






October 3, 2011


by Roger Helmer MEP in Straight Talking


Today at the Conservative Party Conference, my Scottish colleague Struan Stevenson MEP launches his new booklet, "The Rape of Britain". It is, as the title suggests, a passionate plea for an urgent reassessment of our manic renewables policies, which propose to generate around 30% of UK electricity from wind by 2020. Bizarrely, the Scottish government has set itself a target not of 30%, but of 100%.

Struan approaches the issue from three directions.

First, as he puts it, "The Financial Scandal". Wind farm subsidies are extraordinarily regressive. Quite simply, they take money from the poor (who pay electricity bills, and and probably find themselves in “fuel poverty”), and give it to the rich.
Continue reading at this link