BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Horsecreek Wind is still on the table

Will Iberdrola be eating Clayton’s lunch?

The word on the Street is that Iberdrola may be interested in reviving their Horsecreek Wind project

This past April I did a post concerning Iberdrola and their interest in the local efforts to kill SASS.After checkingpublic property records in the Jefferson County Clerk's office and discovering that leaseholders in Clayton had renewed contracts with Iberdrola in 2013. I did a follow up post

Iberdrola’s Horse Creek Wind Farm is still in play.  

A story posted May 8, 2015 in The Watertown Daily Times confirmed  that Iberdrola remains interested in the project .

“We still have meteorological towers and land leases there, so we remain interested in that community,” Paul N. Copleman, spokesman for Iberdrola Renewables, said Tuesday in an email. “New York has a proven track record of successfully integrating new renewable energy sources, so we are generally optimistic.”
Related posts:

Developer ‘still interested’ in Horse Creek wind project in Clayton


Anonymous said...

"Probably the greatest threat to the future scenic character of the SASS is large scale industrial and infrastructure development within or nearby district boundaries. Large-scale projects, such as tall buildings, transmission lines, wind turbines, bridges, communications towers, should not be sited within the SASS district or within the district’s viewshed."

From Grindstone Is. SASS impact assessment.

Anonymous said...

Ms. Pandora, this whole thing about windmills is silly. The town leaders in the 1000 Islands should realize by now that any proposed wind turbines are going to meet with heavy resistance, continuing the deep rift in all the towns. Why don't they just end the whole squabble over this SASS thing and join together to ban wind turbines period. End of story, lets move on with the rest of our lives.

TI said...


Then why are some of the most ardent supporters of wind also some of the most outspoken critics of SASS?

Anonymous said...

Thank the Demicks for the Wind Mills if and when they come.

Dave LaMora said...

TI, its fairly obvious that the SASS designation would likely deter the siting of industrial turbines, therewithin the reason for ardent wind supporters to oppose SASS.

The more curious question is why are some of the most ardent wind opposition, also opposed to SASS?

Have to agree with 11:19, it would make sense to prohibit turbines in the whole region, SASS or not. Those who oppose SASS but believe either, wind is dead in the region, or that their local wind laws will protect them, are misguided. Any proposed wind project in the region is going to meet the same opposition that BP experienced, dividing the community its proposed in. Why would any town want to put themselves through that again? If the residents are fearful of state interference with SASS, wait till they face the PSC ART.10 review of a wind project. Regional solidarity in the form of a regional ban ,would carry considerable weight,IMO.

Art Pundt said...

Exactly right Dave.

First of all I think far too many people in the wind opposition think the Art. 10 process is going to protect them. Art. 10 was not designed to prohibit the siting of wind, it was designed to SITE and fast track energy projects, for the state with a rabid renewable agenda. The carrot they dangle to appease anti wind is that you will get "input". And too many people have suckered into following that carrot.

You don't have to take it from me...take it right from the mouth of Gov. Cuomo who visited NNY and when asked about Art. 10 he said communities have to be "reasonable".

This is political double talk and the implication is clear what he thinks Art 10 should do...and it's not to let communities defeat Art 10 and wind with a simple community by community wind law.

Interesting Cuomo didn't say developers have to be reasonable!

In addition Art. 10 would not exist if developers and their lawyers and lobbyists thought it was actually a pathway for communities to defeat wind siting.

The Jefferson County legislators passed a unanimous resolution opposing Art. 10. The county and the local 1000 Islands/ Golden Crescent towns, as you say, should partner together and pass wind regulations prohibiting wind.

This would represent a significant unified regional political force that the state might not want to deal with. The plan should be that is one area is attacked by wind developers they should know the entire region will be the opposition force...not just a town by town approach divided approach.

It would be far far more powerful toward actually protecting this area from the ongoing wind onslaught than any SASS designation, although it would not hurt to have the SASS designation in addition.

This effort should start with Cape Vincent and Clayton, and hopefully encourage the other towns to come along.

It boggles my mind that the wind opposition is so frightened to say NO once and for all, and now we have the TIRAP report that essentially says this is the approach that should be taken with industrial structures like wind turbines.

Instead they fall right into and support the hands of the process that will guarantee wind development. They seemed to be frightened of the only thing that would give this region substantial protection.