The Standard Times article about the forum can be found here.
I think that the information presented was helpful to residents in understanding the impact and benefits of the wind turbines. You can download the presentation here
One particularly interesting question came from the Fire Chief. He asked what provisions are made for getting someone down from the top of the 100 meter (328ft)tower and would the fire department receive any special training needed. I did a little investigation this morning and found that there are ladderways with intermediate platforms within the towers for access. These ladderways are equipped with fall protection devices. In addition, there is a rescue and descent device stowed in the top nacelle by some turbine manufacturers which allows descent outside of the tower. I think that the town should make these devices a requirement in the request for proposal when issued.
Several of those in attendance expressed concern about health effects and decreased property values. Jeanne Nesto of Chase Road was worried about "wind turbine syndrome" and others about property values. I have posted my thoughts on those subjects here.
I spoke with Ms. Nesto and others after the forum and invited them to send me information about health effects and property values. I am open to valid concerns and want to weigh all the information. What I asked for were reports that applied science and statistics to show that there are deleterious effects. Reports, such as that by Dr. Pierpoint, do not constitute a scientific or statistical approach. What I want to see are reports that apply the scientific method of data collection, analysis and conclusion to reach verifiable results. Statements of belief are not persuasive to me.
As an example, there are millions who believe that flying saucers exist. Some claim to have seen them, others to have met them. Despite many books, reports and websites claiming their belief in otherworldly visitors, I have yet to see any conclusive verifiable proof. I don't believe that they exist and require proof that they do.
Another example is the belief ...
... that vaccinations cause a variety of ailments including autism. Many believe this to be true. There are long lists of websites that promote that belief. However rigorous scientific investigation has not found a causal relationship between vaccinations and autism. So what to believe? Should I not vaccinate and expose my child to known diseases which can definitely harm them or vaccinate even though many hold the unproven belief that it can cause autism? I would choose the vaccination because that is where objective science tells me the correct course lies.
I think that these examples show what I am asking for. If you have evidence that I should consider about wind turbines, please let me know in comments or by email.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Wind turbine forum report
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
50 comments:
Bill, You can not vote for this....it is in your best political interest.
Dartmouth may very well be the town in the United States that's used as an example of how not to site wind turbines to close to residential property .
We won't know until a year after the turbines are installed.
I'll estimate a loss of $50,000 per house in view of the turbines on an already depressed housing market.
Once again the comments are not supported by data or reference.
If the turbines provide $32 million over their life to the town, how is that not in the best interest of the taxpayer? That is only one of many benefits.
As Dr. DiPippo pointed out last night, many other similarly sized turbines within a few miles of our town are located closer to residential property than the ones we propose. Some have been in operation for several years now without problems.
Do you have any basis for your estimate of property value loss or just a feeling? Give us the methodology used or tell us your expertise that allows you to make the statement.
Falmouth is right now commissioning two turbines of the same size with 80 meter towers.
Wind turbines have been in use for many years now. Plenty of time to identify at least some of the potential problems with them. The only legitimate issue I see is reduction of property values. Having said that, when adjacent property is commercially developed, new major power lines are run, or other infrastructure changes (i.e. schools, state or municipal sites) occur, etc.; the results affect property values as well. Stuff happens, get over it.
There was a question about wind turbine fires . Wind turbines represent serious and significant fire threats. Each turbine represents its own threat of wild fire ignition through malfunction and the scattering of toxic flaming hydraulic fluid and debris onto surrounding homes and vegetation.
How do you put the fire out? You don't ,there's no equiptment to do it !
Wind turbine manufacturers can provide various types of fire suppression equipment that is mounted within the nacelle. A brief survey of what is available showed that CO2, nitrogen, foam and water mist systems are offered. The town can consider whether or not to include a fire suppression system in the bid.
I also searched for instances of fires and found that they are rare.
Bill,
I would caution against using the $32million number. It is based on 50% probability. I would much rather quote the $19million, 99% probability number, which is not too shabby itself. I plan on spending the weekend playing devil's advocate to this project in order to feel comfortable with my fincom vote regarding the town meeting recommendation.
Bill or anyone , Where is the information about the Wind turbines integration strategy, which promotes the integration of wind energy into the grid and /or the waste water treatment plant off Chase Road ? The principal concern with wind energy is that the turbine output can suddenly fall to zero.
Where are the specification requirements, testing, tuning and requirement follow-ups concerning turbine, voltage controllers and power system stabilizers. This is particularly important when new turbines and/or controllers are installed, especially in the existing waste water treatment plant.
Has the town hired a power engineering consultant and what is the total costs of power upgrades at the wastewater treatment plant ?
The town has contracted with Glynn Electric to prepare an application to NStar for an interconnection study. The cost of that study was funded by Town Meeting this fall. The interconnection application will include 1- and 3-line diagrams and the site plans, as well as the specs for the generator. NSTAR does the design and feasibility and charges the town for the resulting study. The NStar study will incorporate their requirements for protection of their grid. The protective relaying that is needed would be included in the wind turbine bid package. Unless there are very unusual requirements for some reason, the protective relaying scheme for any generating facility is pretty straightforward.
Let me point out that the existing grid is able to power the town's facility. The question for the study is whether or not the grid is able to absorb the power generated in excess of the town's requirements at the DPW site. The wind turbines and NStar's grid will be connected to the DPW facility in parallel (i.e. both at the same time). One way to think about it is that the net meter installed at the DPW will run in reverse whenever the turbines generate more power than is needed at that moment, but if power is lost from the turbines, the flow of electricity is still available without interruption from the grid as it is today.
Did this answer your question? Let me know.
I am an engineer and spent a good portion of my career commissioning co-generation power plants. I offer that background as evidence that I have some expertise in this area. Also let me assure you that NStar will make sure that the coordination of all protective relaying, including from these generators, maintains the maximum reliability of their grid.
How did the public forum go at the high school?
frank1 - did you attend the high school forum? If so did you ask any questions? If not why not? Shackled to your keyboard?
Frank1- I thought you were going to identify yourself at the forum- I saw it on tv and you never spoke. Tomorrow night- go to select board and speak your mind. I read your posts, take them public. Complaining on the blog doesn't help you.
Bill , Does the town contemplate the question of condemnation via eminent domain from homeowners over residential property rights? There appears to be a division between the residents near the turbines in statements about the town taking lesser interest in their property through an easement. This easement is shadow / strobe flicker, noise concerns, lower property values, and adverse impact on the landscape and residential atmosphere.
Does the town have funds for civil litigation against a project being forced on an area because of shadow / strobe flicker etc. How will the town compensate property owners on the grounds that the attempted taking is for a public use ?
Any input from the town legal council ?
The wind turbines would have to be a neighborhood nuisance. The residents would have to prove boundary disputes and adverse possession claim with the shadow flicker.
The residents will have to bring a lawsuit for trespass in order to prevent the town from getting partial title to their land through adverse possession.
Residents begin to wonder if Dartmouth neighbors near turbines have been misled. The intermittent sounds and shadow flicker from the turbines will began to wear on your nerves. Most of the plaintiffs live within a half mile of the turbines .This will become a nuisance.
# Nuisance equals neighbors suffering from insomnia, depression and headaches related to the presence of the wind turbines.
Plaintiffs?
The residents around the wind turbine site will down the road become the plaintiffs .
If you decide to file a property claim suit with the Dartmouth wind turbines, contact an attorney to evaluate your claim. Even though you may be able to sue without hiring an attorney, legal representation is often needed to best prepare your claim and protect your interests .There are attorneys who will take cases for a percentage of the case rather than cash up front . This is the best way to resolve issues between the town and residents around the wind turbines if the town pursues the current plans .
The most likely basis for a complaint about the wind turbines would be a nuisance complaint, rather than a trepass complaint. Since there are no laws that define wind turbines as a nuisance per se, the plaintiffs would have to prove a nuisance in fact. Without any guidance on what can be considered a nuisance, determination of a nuisance would be quite subjective. In order to provide some guidance in that determination, towns and the Commonwealth adopt laws and regulations governing property uses. The most common sort of law that aids in this determination is a zoning law. Other types are environmental laws which apply to noise or odor.
Courts have traditionally held that aesthetics cannot be used for a claim of nuisance. If your neighbor wants his house lime green with fuschia trim and a bright blue roof, it may be in poor taste but it doesn't constitute a nuisance.
The town has adopted a zoning bylaw which governs the installation of wind turbines. The proposed wind turbines meet the bylaw without need for a variance. The Commonwealth has regulations regarding noise and the proposed turbines meet that noise requirement. That leaves shadow flicker as grounds for claims of nuisance. The proposed installation will result in brief periods of shadow flicker measured in a few hours per year occurring for a few minutes a day over a few weeks near the time of sunrise or sunset. Whether that condition would be judged a substantial interference to the use and enjoyment of the affected land is open to question and hence is legitimately the subject of a suit. One impediment to injunctive relief for shadow flicker is that the town has said that they'll prevent shadow flicker by shutting down the wind turbines if shadow flicker becomes a problem at a particular residence. Mere fear of future injury will not merit injunctive relief.
Wind Turbines in Dartmouth, YES! We need to find clean ways to provide energy and as usual, New England is the last to get on board! There are plenty in Europe and for the most part, people love them! Of course, you will always find those who dislike anything. I dislike dirty coal and expensive oil and gas!
Windmills, YES!
Nuisance factor? Noise? Shadow flicker? That happens frequently on Chase Road. It's called bringing kids back and forth to school everyday. It happens 8 months or so every year. Is it dangerous? Oh yes. Do we legislate against it? Let's just get over the fighting against wind turbines. It's called progress.
Every member of the Select Board will look at the FACTS (not the fear factor) and make a decision that will be in the best interest for the community. I watched the meeting on Monday night and feel that most of the people who spoke against the wind turbine project are ill informed. Shame on you for not being more involved in your town government. Don't blame the alternative energy com. just because you didn't know what was going on in your town for five plus years. Now you're angry because you don't have time to read up on wind power.
I have to agree with anon 2;33 and Joe Michaud actually on this one. For people to stand up and say they were not properly informed about this project simply means they were not paying attention for at least the last three years. Of any committee in town the AEC has been the most communicative one by far. Thank you Dr DiPippo and members of his committee.
The neighbors really can't plead ignorance. Dr. DiPippo has been on TV talking about every aspect of this project numerous times.
It's time for the residents around the wind turbine site to pool their cash,hire an attorney and become the plaintiffs!
If the town passes a bylaw and as a result of that bylaw anyone in town feels that any of their residential property rights will be taken this is the time to circle the wagons!
Siting a commercial project the height of the Statue of Liberty or a 747 Boeing Airplane on end in a residential location certainly counts as a nuisance.
Lets hpoe this goes to court ! It's the only way the SB will get the picture.
Contracts between landowners/abutters and wind energy development companies or the town are a necessary part of
any wind turbine development project.
The difficult part is knowing to what degree the various components of a contract can be arranged. Talking with the SB and AEC people involved in the project is helpful down the road and, most importantly, seek competent
legal advice and keep all correspondence with local officials .
There is a post about eminent domain in the first post today including police powers of the town .
When did the middle of the woods turn into part of a neighborhood?
Dartmouth has woods ?
Dartmouth looks like Rte 1 in Saugus on the other side of the Mystic River Bridge !
This formerly quiet historic town is going to look like Thunderdome with the addition of two wind turbines the size of 747s standing straight up.
This is no longer a residential town . The sooner residents understand that the better ! No one will move here !
Too funny! Turbines are growing like weeds in many communitys in Massachustts including many exclusive Cape communities - but Dartmouth is too good to have them!
How safe do you feel with this quote from the news :
"Dr. DiPippo's presentation noted there will be some "minimal" impacts from the project, with a small number of area residences potentially affected by shadow/flicker, noise, a degraded view, or the threat of falling ice.
He suggested the biggest potential problem, shadow/flicker effect, could easily be solved by shutting off the turbine at certain times of day,"
Frank1
Do you think this a tale of two cities ?
One end of town wants the money ,the other end doesn't want the turbines - in the long run who pays ?
Ah yes...It was the best of times,twas the worst of times. But I think Dartmouth is somewhere in between.
How can we ignore the economic benefits though? According to Friedman the town stands to make millions over twenty years on these things. As long as safety isn't impacted what is the downside? I understand that aesthectically they may be unappealling but the vast majority of the town will recieve a tremendous benefit in terms of reduced energy costs, lower taxes etc...and it will help to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil.
You HONESTLY think we'll see lower taxes???!
Industrial wind technology is a meretricious commodity, attractive in a superficial way but without real value—seemingly plausible, even significant, but actually false and nugatory. Those who would profit from it either economically or ideologically are engaged in wholesale deception. All adults should know that if something seems too good to be true, it almost always is. Although the wind itself may be “free,” the cost of converting it to electrical energy is extremely expensive
No one should listen to "Frank1". He is a courageous fellow who anonymously blogs here but has yet to identify himself at either of the forums where he had the opportunity.
Blogs are not places to set political policy. You've had an opportunity to speak, and you took a pass.
Bill, may I propose that the SB sponsor a field trip to Portsmouth for those impacted residents so they can see first hand the turbines in action there. Give a chance to see the effects of sound and light flicker etc. Maybe arrange a panel at Portsmouth HS (the site of the turbine) to ask questions? Also maybe DCTV can go there and film and we can broadcast back here at home a special?
Don't think "Bill" will have the SB sponsor a field trip to Portsmouth . The wind turbines at Portsmouth Abbey and the Town of Portsmouth are two thirds the size of the proposed Dartmouth wind turbines . The Dartmouth wind turbines are the size of the Statue of Liberty, the universal symbol of freedom and democracy .
Foundation of pedestal to torch 306' 8" or 93.47 meters (Statue of Liberty height ) , Dartmouth turbine height 100 meters .
The decision to go with the large wind turbine on 100 meter poles was made after July 29,2009 . The only notification to residents was the July 29,2009 AEC meeting minutes !
Why does Bill have to set up afield trip? get in your car and drive the 25 minutes. You don't need someone to hold your hand.
Build them.
I live not far from where the turbines will be built. I favor them. It doesn't matter whether I live in "North" or "South" Dartmouth, does it? What's this North vs. South stuff all about?
So the decision was made in July. It's now December. Do the math.
Landowners need to be concerned about their exposure to liability that may result from the placement of commercial wind turbines and related structures and equipment near their residential property. The Town of Dartmouth should provide some type of liability protection. Be sure to review your private insurance homeowners policy . Give your insurance company a call .
Have your insurance agent review the agreement.
Noise - Wind turbines cause a steady, low-decibel sound that can be heard within a short distance.
Visual pollution - Visual pollution refers to the unwanted obstruction or intrusion into someone’s view of the landscape.
Vandalism - Wind towers or related equipment may be damaged by vandals on landowner property.
Access roads - Access roads are a necessary component of a wind development project. Making sure the natural flow of water is not impeded by road constructi on is important.
Construction period - Construction activity could include damage to overhead and underground power lines and communication cables, natural drains, road surfaces and neighboring property.
Ice shedding - Ice falling from tower or blades may be a hazard to humans or animals and may cause damage to structures or vehicles below.
Blade drop/throw - Blades may become damaged because of structural failure or imbalance. Blades or parts of blades may fall and cause damage below.
Shadow flicker - The shadow effect of moving turbine blades may cause health issues.
Fire - A fire or electrical short could occur in the generator, transformer or lines. Fire could cause damage to woods , grassing land or dwellings.
Stray voltage - Stray voltage may be a concern for humans and animals.
Electromagnetic fields - Electromagnetic fields may cause interference with electrical devices. These fields may have long-term health effects to humans or animals.
Lightening strikes - High towers are of concern because they may attract lightning. Lightning strikes could affect humans, animals, wildlife and man made structures.
Communications - Turbines may generate electromagnetic noise or physically obstruct signals.
Microwave and radar stations - Towers may obstructpoint-to-point signals of telecommunications and weather transmissions.
TV and radio signals - Interference may occur with TV and radio signals.
Police/fire/ambulance radio signals - Public safety signals could be disrupted.
Bird kill - Bird and bat casualties are a reality of wind tower development. The Endangered Species Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act .
Water - Water polluti on is a considerati on during the constructi on phase.
Air - Air polluti on may occur during construction excavation by producing air-borne elements. This situation is usually temporary.
Foolish people with small minds don't get it. The earth , according to scientist are telling us the air quality must change or the ice caps will thaw and cover the earth in water. Dartmouth will benefit from the wind turbines. Why must we sit and listen to unreasonable people who don't want the turbines on or near their properties. The energy generated will save the town millions. Bring on the turbines now.
Frank1 you forgot to throw in December 21st, 2012..Why build them when the world ends just 2 years from now anyway right?
Frank1 may have an interesting point!
The insurance industry has actuaries analyze data to estimate the probability and likely cost to the company of an event such as ice throw,catastrophic failure, fire ,blade throw and or environmental issues .
The town of Dartmouth is about to approve an Application Special Permit for Commercial Size Wind Energy Conversion Facility. (An addition,change or revocation of current zoning)
Residential insurance rates will not be affected immediately but sooner or later the insurance industry will be looking for the amount of exposure on the surrounding community . Surprised no one one consulted the insurance carriers to get and answer in writing .
Frank1 - I keep hoping you will attend one of the PUBLIC forums and ask your questions. This way you will get them answered - not that it matters to you of course. I can probably figure out who you are though - the only person in town with a storm cloud that follows over him 24/7. This South Dartmouth resident says build them.
Residential insurance rates have not been mentioned, that I know of, by members of the AEC, just residential property values. Health issues have also been discussed.
Residential insurance rates are a valid consideration and one that ought to be examined, especially by those homeowners who will be directly affected by the turbines. It would surely be something to be brought out at the Select Board meeting that will be voting on the permit, and, unless I am mistaken, that will be tomorrow, Dec. 21st.
Maybe the Select Board's vote could be tabled until further information is made available? Is that a consideration worth pursuing?
An example I can think of and one that our home has been affected by: proximity to water. Not flood insurance, we don't need that. But, potential for wind damage because of our "proximity" to the water (actually quasi-saltmarsh). Our long-time insurance company dropped us a few years ago because we live within a 3-mile distance or some such measurement of the "water." I was told each insurance carrier could determine its own distance; there was not preset distance, just whatever the carrier determined to be "appropriate." Of course, our neighbors never got dropped by their carriers, at least at that time. Possibly they have now. I have been told that all carriers would be doing that eventually. That was a few years ago.
And there are homes that should have flood insurance (or maybe they are now mandated to.)
Now, the latest is the FEMA-recommended flood zone insurance, however, that requires the town to be insured if it hopes to get emergency government financial assistance if need be. Homes with a potential for flooding will be paying more for their homeowners insurance as a result of Town Meeting's passing the warrant article proposing acceptance of the FEMA recommendation. These homes may not have needed flood insurance before; now, being a part of the FEMA's determined flood zone plain, they have to have it, like it or not.
If it is flooding and can be wind damage as reasons for homeowners to find their insurance premiums raised significantly or otherwise, why can't it be proximity to a wind turbine that will be the reason insurance carriers will raise their rates for some homes?
And, what will be the defining distance? Maybe even more than just the homes directly affected or within the turbines' "allowable" footage?
Is the potential for increased homeowner insurance an issue worth considering by the Select Board members before it makes its final decision? Yes, the timeframe leaves much to be desired if the vote is to be tomorrow, but aren't the residents worth that consideration?
And isn't it worth the call to your insurance carrier to find out the possibility of having your rates increased because you live in the shadow of the turbines?
When you contact your insurance company, tell them that you want to insure against a town owned wind turbine or wind electric generator that will be tied to the utility power grid and back-feeding excess generation to that utility or in this case a waste water treatment plant .Give them technical information ,AEC committee reports so red flags are raised in their heads.. Never ever deceive an insurance company. Besides being illegal and just plain wrong, you could find yourself without coverage should you need to file a claim.
Explain that you wish to insure against a commercial wind turbine and tower, (both are terms that almost everyone is familiar with) as an addition to what is already insured on your property. If you really want to impress the agent, tell her or him that you want the wind system insured on your current homeowner’s policy. Request a quote by the insurance industry that refers to any uninhabitable commercial structure near your property.
Will you have to sign a waiver in the future ? An important question. The insurance company at a future date could ask home owners within a national standard setback to sign a waiver or pay for additional insurance .Remember commercial wind turbines this close to residential homes is relatively new .
http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091221/OPINION/912210310
Dartmouth has no good place on town land for big turbines
"The controversy has hinged on the wisdom of installing two turbines of unprecedented size in the United States, apparently, and the opponents have raised issues regarding how close they should be to homes (some say not closer than 1,300 feet); whether there will be stroboscopic flicker irritating homeowners from blades passing in front of the sun; whether there will be nighttime stroboscopic flicker from lights the Federal Aviation Administration may require on top of the turbines to warn airplanes of their location; whether there will be irritating noise or wind gusts or whether there will be airborne microbial contaminants blown from the waste water treatment facility into homes; whether the town should get a second opinion; and so forth."
Instead of building wind mills, why doesn't the alternate energy group use that land in a different way maybe by building a plant that burns garbage to create electric power? Hey, it was just a thought.
Post a Comment