BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Sunday, February 28, 2016

Clayton ~ Wind Development News Stories 2006 to 2013

Below are links to a few news stories concerning the Horse Creek  Industrial Wind Complex that I pulled from my archives.

April 28,2006
 Clayton Prepares For Wind Moratorium
November 17,2006
NCPR Clayton wind forum 
March 27, 2008
Towns seek atypical PILOT deals

June 7,2008
Horse Creek Wind project held up by bats
June 21, 2008
Iberdrola admits bat concerns affected decision
August 25,2008
Clayton~ Town keeping mum on noise report
Link hereTo noise report
September 26,2008
Session offers wind pros, cons
October 7,2008
Horse Creek wind farm: Noise report cover-up
October 8,2008
Clayton Town Council Meeting :  Recap
November 18, 2008
Amend Clayton's wind-power zoning law
November 20,2008
Clayton, Orleans organizing wind law committees
December 11, 2008
Clayton Wind panel to meet secretly
December 29,2008
 Orleans wind-power panel starts with 5 members
January 17,2009
Orleans wind group to focus on safety
January 23,2009
Clayton Wind panel agrees to let public attend
February 15,2009
Clayton panel rethinking law on wind
February 27,2009
Clayton wind panel gets Cornell expert's advice on turbines
March 15,2009
Group agrees to wind rules ~ Clayton
April 26,2009
Clayton panel seeks to alter wind law
July 6, 2009
Clayton Planning Board comments on wind law
July 30,2009
Developers sign on to state wind ethics code
September 26,2009
Wind farm revenue may take major hit
November 12, 2009
Wind Law Plan Leads to Feud ~ Clayton
February 15,2009
Clayton panel re-thinking law on wind
February 17, 2010
NCPR ~ "Golden Crescent" epicenter of wind farm battles
December 8,1010
DEC won't claim review
January 7, 2011
Iberdrola submits redesigned application
February 23,2011
Board cancels meeting on wind farm statement
April 8, 2011
Horse Creek DEIS is OK'd
 April 20,2011
Clayton Planning Board ENB - Region 6 Notices 
Positive Declaration
April 22, 2011
April 28,2011
Clayton wind law changes urged
April 29,2011
Horse Creek Wind Farm ~ A stunning reversal  
June 12,2011
Clayton ~Town mulls zoning changes
July 14, 2011
Clayton residents want stricter sound regulations in proposed wind power development law
July 28, 2011
Clayton’s wind law not strict enough, Jefferson County Planning Board says
August 11,2011
Clayton wind amendments adopted, council to tackle noise levels next
September 8, 2011
Clayton council to get first-hand experience on turbine noise levels
October 11,2012
Iberdrola suspends local application for Clayton wind farm, will seek an Article X process instead
Link to
Iberdrola letter to Town of Clayton
November 11, 2011
Clayton’s new turbine noise limit based on “invalid” sound test, acoustics expert says
 October 27,2012
Horse Creek Wind Farm developer might upsize project, begin state siting process as soon as next spring
January 8,2013
Iberdrola still on the fence about Horse Creek Wind Farm
April 6, 2013
Deception in Clayton on Iberdola project

Friday, February 26, 2016

Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Bill Gates on getting billionaires behind clean energy

Gates: We need clean energy that’s incredibly reliable, and most of the renewables we have are intermittent. Being able to store that energy or having some new source that runs 24 hours a day, that’s what we need to solve the climate problem. Continue reading via this link to Marketplace

Writer says shipping oil on Seaway could replace pipeline in Canada

CLAYTON — An opinion piece published Sunday on the website of a leading maritime industry news source calls for larger vessels to transport oil on the St. Lawrence Seaway, a move the author said would require year-round navigation on the international waterway. Continue reading via this link to the Watertown Daily Times

Saturday, February 20, 2016

What Iberdrola thinks about local wind Laws

In lieu of the recent notification by Iberdrola/Avangrid to unearth and push ahead with the Horse Creek wind project for the Towns of Clayton, Orleans, Brownville and Lyme it is worth reviewing comments made by Iberdrola on May 29, 2012 to the Public Service Commission regarding the burden they suffered from local wind laws. Here is one little taste of their dissatisfaction and what likely lies ahead for these towns:
"A number of communities have proposed or adopted such requirements in various forms, including  proposed setbacks measured in miles  from major water bodies, 500-foot setbacks from wetlands, 3,000-foot separation from adjacent properties or between wind turbines. These setbacks do not address environmental or safety concerns. Indeed, there is little or no empirical justification  for such significant setbacks;  such requirements will simply make it impossible to construct a project in New York."

Iberdrola Letter RE: Article 10 Rules and Regulation

 Page 1
 Page 2
 Page 3

Transcript of Iberdrola Letter RE: Article 10 Rules and RegulationS
May 29, 2012
VIA First Class Mail and Email secretary@dps.ny.gov
Hon.Jaclyn A. Brilling
Secretary,New York State Public Service Commission
Three Empire Plaza
Albany,New York 12223-1350

RE:     Case 12-F-0036 – In the Matter of the Rules and Regulations of the Board on
Electric Generation Siting and the Environment,contained in 16 NYCRR,Chapter
X,Certification of Major Electric Generating Facilities.

Dear Secretary Brilling:

Iberdrola Renewables submits this letter in supplement to its comments dated April 25,
2012. In these previous comments,Iberdrola Renewables suggested modifications to the
proposed provisions of 16 NYCRR§ 1001.31(e). The proposed modifications establish
sensible review standards that would allow the Siting Board to consider New York siting
precedent and override unreasonable or belated local requirements.

These suggestions reflect actual experience with the evolving siting challenges in the
State. While New York has enacted strong policies favoring development of renewable
energy sources(including wind)and numerous projects have been successfully and
compatibly constructed,a determined nucleus of opposition to such projects has formed.
A strategy which has been increasingly followed by these groups is to focus on key towns
with the aim of revising laws to thwart project development altogether, rather than
establishing appropriate guidelines for development. The following are some examples of
these efforts, which are cropping up with increasing frequency and which should be
quickly rejected in the Article 10 process.

Property Value Guarantees. Some jurisdictions have adopted property value
guarantee requirements. While there are various permutations of  this requirement,
it generally applies solely to wind project development ( as opposed to other forms
of development that are often claimed to devalue nearby properties). The
legislation requires the Wind Project developer,presumably over the life of the
project to pay owners for any devaluation in their property value arguably
attributable to the project. There is scant support for the “devaluation” argument
and the weight of present studies rejects this premise.  At best,this unique
requirement will invite the sort of claims/litigation exposure that will make a
project unfinanceable and unfeasible.

Required Origin of Project Components. Other proposed provisions require that a
certain percentage of Wind Project components(75% in some cases) must be made
in the US. This requirement has nothing to do with sitting or land use impact
considerations. Moreover,in an increasingly global economy,where most every
commodity is manufactured or composed of manufactured products,from
numerous states and nations,singling out one form of development (wind farms)
for a this requirement is of questionable legality, discriminatory and unfair.

Serial Local Law Modifications.    In most upstate communities. Town Board   
members serve for relatively short terms(most often 2 years). In a number of cases
this has meant that zoning and siting requirements for wind projects have been
subject to change at each election cycle dependant on the composition of the
Board. A number of recent Iberdrola project proposals (which, like most wind
projects, have long study and review lead times and do not have “vested rights”
regarding existing review standards) have been exposed to potential and repeated
revisions to local law siting requirements.

The potential for constantly shifting review/approval standards and the associated
uncertainty effectively stymies any project review or development progress: It
makes no sense to incur the significant expense of the application or review
process until an applicant can have certainty regarding the finality and longevity of
applicable siting requirements. The Article 10 regulations must adopt provisions
designed to avoid such debilitating “moving target” requirements.

Unreasonable Setback Requirements. A sure way to rule out the potential for wind
farm development is to establish unfounded,unreasonable setback requirements. A
number of communities have proposed or adopted such requirements in various
forms, including proposed setbacks measured in miles from major water bodies,
500-foot setbacks from wetlands,3,000-foot separation from adjacent properties or
between wind turbines. These setbacks do not address environmental or safety
concerns. Indeed, there is little or no empirical  justification for such significant
setbacks; such requirements will simply make it impossible to construct a project in 
New York.

A number of projects have been constructed in New York in accordance with well
defined setback requirements (generally 1,000-1,500 feet from Project components
and adjacent land uses and 100 feet from DEC wetlands). These projects have a
demonstrable history of reliability and compatibility with nearby communities.

Unreasonable Sound Requirements. Project opponents have urged increasingly
low sound thresholds as a means of thwarting potential wind farm development.
Sound study is a complex area and in this complexity, opponents have found
opportunity- advocating for unworkable background threshold sound levels and
modeling protocols which can result in overly conservative sound standards.

Again, the New York DEC sound guidance, as well as experience with sound
standards for successfully operating wind farms is the appropriate touchstone for
this evaluation. Local Laws that propose more stringent requirements are likely
aimed at prohibiting wind farm construction, rather than permitting compatible

Again thank you for the opportunity to comment on these regulations.

Eric Thumma

Director,Policy and Regulatory Affairs

Iberdrola Renewables,LLC


Friday, February 19, 2016

Cuomo Says 'Salt Mining' Contaminated Orleans Water

Did Governor Andrew Cuomo misspeak when talking about the water problem in the town of Orleans?

During a speech Thursday, he said the water there is contaminated by salt mining.Continue reading via this link to Channel 7 WNYTV

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

DANC sets kickoff meeting for

Fort Drum joint land-use study

The study, funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of Defense’s Office of Economic Adjustment, will focus on ways for smarter economic development at Fort Drum and in surrounding communities. It will address potential encroachment issues with Fort Drum, such as the siting of energy projects, airspace and land restrictions, and noise concerns. Continue reading via this link to the Watertown Daily Times

Wind developer renews several land leases in Clayton, Orleans, Brownville and Lyme

CLAYTON — The developer of the Horse Creek wind project recently renewed and updated several land leases across the towns of Clayton, Orleans, Brownville and Lyme, according to Jefferson County property records.

Sunday, February 14, 2016

PSC Commissioner talks energy reform at NYSAC Conference

Discussion of Article 10 was left out of Ms. Zibelman’s speech, however. Signed into law by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo in 2011, Article 10 law requires an extensive siting process to review new power facilities constructed in the state, which has slowed construction of wind farm projects in upstate New York, including the Galloo Island project in Jefferson County headed by Apex Clean Energy. Continue reading via this link to the Watertown Daily times

Friday, February 12, 2016

NY faces power shortage, but not enough to save FitzPatrick nuclear plant

SCRIBA, N.Y. – New York power grid operators say there will be a 325-megawatt shortage of generating capacity after the FitzPatrick nuclear plant and seven other major power plants close. But the report offers no grounds for state regulators to require FitzPatrick to stay open. Continue reading via this link to Syracuse.com

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Horse Creek wind project in Clayton could expand into Orleans, Lyme and Brownville

CLAYTON — Signaling that the footprint of its former proposal could grow, the developer of the Horse Creek wind project plans to erect meteorological towers in the towns of Clayton, Orleans, Brownville and Lyme. Continue reading via this link to the Watertown Daily Times

Friday, February 5, 2016

Take home message from Feb. 4, 2016 meeting between Iberdrola and Clayton Planning Board:

  1. Iberdrola seeking three permits for meteorological towers.
  2. New met tower data needed for newer, more modern turbine models.
  3. Iberdrola will be going to Town of Orleans with similar met tower request.
  4. Horse Creek project will have larger, multi-town footprint than previous version.
  5. Modern turbine models will be between 2.5 - 3.5 MW, larger than Horse Creek’s previous plan..
  6. Iberdrola recently sought new connection request with ISO for a 250 MW project, twice what was previously planned for the Horse Creek project..
  7. Jenny Briot explained turbines will have larger output, but not taller. (hard to believe).
  8. Iberdrola attorney was anxious to move the permitting process forward ASAP.

C.P. Schneider

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Horse Creek Wind Farm: More than industrial blight

The map below shows a small section of the first layout (2007) of the Horse Creek Wind Project DGEIS.

Fabend & Turbines.jpg

The red areas on the map above represent about 10 wind turbines. The concentric circles surrounding the turbines depict noise levels. The small green squares represent nearby homes

What is unusual about the Horse Creek project compared to any other wind project in New York is the density of residences.  There are too many people living in the area that Iberdrola wants to insert an industrial wind project.  The area has many small homes on small parcels adjacent to larger parcels that are now leased to Iberdrola.  Today we know far more about the negative health impacts on people from wind turbine noise, and we also know noise impacts are worse, far worse, with the new, larger turbines.  

Town of Clayton officials may have the impression that the big issue for Horse Creek will be the visual impacts from big turbines (600 footers), those that will likely be proposed for the latest version of the Horse Creek project.  However, don’t be misled.  As much as 600 ft turbines will be an eyesore to those living along the river, the real issue will be the health and safety impacts and the diminished quality of life for those who will live within the cold, hard embrace of Iberdrola’s misguided project for the Thousand Islands.

C.P. Schneider

 Horse Creek DGEIS 2007 Map