Monday, December 21, 2009

Wind turbine special permit

The Select Board was set up as the Special Permit Granting Authority for commercial sized wind turbines by a zoning bylaw, section 34, adopted by the Town Meeting. A super majority of the Select Board, 4 out of 5, must vote to approve an application in order to issue a permit. The application can be found at this link.
The Alternative Energy Committee has been studying ways to provide clean renewable energy for the town since 2005. They have conducted tests that show there was a sufficient wind resource on the DPW lands in the Paskmansett Valley to justify the installation of commercial size wind turbines.
The Alternative Energy Committee held numerous public meetings and gave presentations at Town Meeting and at Select Board meetings. The Town Meeting has funded studies to determine if the proposed facilities could be placed on the sites. The results of those studies show that the sites are suitable and turbines can be installed within the parameters set by the bylaw.
At the same time, the Finance Committee has assessed the financial impact of the cost of buying and installing the turbines and the likely benefit in reduced energy costs and payments for excess generation. They have held many public meetings where the wind turbines project was presented and the financial impact to the town was discussed. The Finance Committee concluded the turbines would save the town many millions of dollars over their service life.
In the past few months, the town has begun the process of permitting the wind turbines. As part of the process, some residents, who are not in favor of the installation of the machines, have raised some issues against the project. Noise, shadow flicker from turning blades, danger to residents from parts or ice flying off the turbines, hazard to wildlife, especially birds and bats, and reduced property values are the main reasons given for opposing wind turbines.
The noise generated by the installation is not zero. The noise report for the wind turbine project can be found at this link. There will be some increase in noise but that increase is small, on the order of 2-3 DbA. That increase is near the limit of perceptibility by the human ear and well below the 10DbA limit for noise impact set out by Massachusetts noise regulation, 310 CMR 7.10. The Select Board has been given some reports that contain anecdotal accounts of persons who claim to have suffered adverse health effects from noise caused by wind turbines. One report, included by reference, is by E. Pederson, Human response to wind turbine noise - perception, annoyance and moderating factors found that self reported health effects did not correlate to the sound power level (SPL) of the exposure, ...

... but did correlate with displeasure over the look of the wind turbines. This and other studies have not found a causal relationship between the reported health effects and exposure to the wind turbine sound. Infrasound is another health area that opponents to wind power have raised. No evidence of any scientific study that supports that the claim of infrasound effects has been provided.
Shadow flicker is a event that occurs when the shadow of the rotating wind turbine blades falls upon the ground. The application for permit addresses these shadow flicker events and finds that the exposure to this phenomenon is low for residences in the area. The maximum calculated shadow flicker exposure for a year at any residence is just over 20 hours. All others are well below that duration. These shadow flicker events will only occur for short durations on a given day in the early morning or late evening when the sun is low on the horizon. The shadow flicker model does not account for screening by the wooded areas around the turbines which will lessen exposure to residents. I am satisfied that the effects of shadow flicker have been mitigated by the turbine site placement to the extent that is possible. No evidence has been presented that shadow flicker will harm residents.
There is a possibility that the turbines, the turbine blades or fragments of blades, or ice formed on the blades will become detached and be thrown to the ground. This debris could pose a hazard to residents. The required setbacks for the turbines as set by the bylaw is 2 times the turbine hub height.
The comments by Palmer to a Canadian wind plant permit, http://www.powerauthority.on.ca/Storage/52/4743_C-8-2_Att_17.pdf, calculated the probability of a catastrophic failure of a wind turbine based upon historical operating data at .00129 failures per year of operation or in other words , one failure in every 775 years of operation. A study by Larwood, Permitting Setbacks for Wind Turbines in California and the Blade Throw Hazard, shows (table 8) that a 2 times setback is sufficient to protect from a blade throw at up to 150% of rated speed. Throws of blade fragments and ice could possibly reach greater distances but the low probability of such accidents along with the low probability of the fragment or ice striking a populated area and the reduced consequence due to the smaller mass results in a hazard that is orders of magnitude less than some which are commonly accepted as part of modern life such as airline flight or driving an auto.
Studies have shown that hazards to wildlife species are low and within the range of the impact of other man made hazards. No evidence has been given to conclude a protected species would be affeceted.
Some opponents have posited a reduction on home property values as a result of proximity to wind turbines. A study was presented from Berkeley National Laboratory which did not find a reduction in home values due to wind farm proximity. The assessor from the Town of Hull did not find a reduction near their two wind turbines. Other than anecdotal evidence that purchase offers were withdrawn in Fairhaven, no evidence was presented that property values would suffer.
Our home, Earth, is straining under the impact of a remarkably successful species, humans. Our current use of the earth's resources is not sustainable, perhaps even in the short term, as the land, air and water that we need for survival are being polluted and changed by the activities of the billions of people on the planet. Renewable energy sources, such as wind, can help to reduce that impact and can lead to a more sustainable way of life for our world and our children.
One of the natural resources that modern life relies on and that is in in short supply is oil. Our nation relies upon foreign sources for that oil. Many of the oil producing countries have interests which are hostile or, at best, diverge from American self interests. Reducing our dependence on these foreign nations is in the best interests of our country. Wind power and other technologies reduce the need for importation of foreign resources and strengthen our country.
The Town of Dartmouth has long prided itself on having low property taxes and a good public school system. A combination of limits on the increase in property tax, changes in school funding formulas, and other factors outside of the town's control have made it increasingly difficult to maintain traditional town services without raising property taxes or cutting those services. The savings from generating our own power from wind turbines and from selling the excess generation can help to reduce the strain on the town budget. The town recently projected a shortfall of over $800,000 for the 2011 fiscal year. Steps will have to be taken to eliminate that shortfall. Budgets will be cut. Police, teachers, highway workers, and other staff may be laid off. The town cannot spend more than it earns, that is the law. Projections for the wind turbine project are that chances are even that it will generate more than $800,000 in savings and revenue for the town. Even in the most conservative projects are for a benefit of $more than $600,000. Wind turbines, owned by the people of Dartmouth, will provide financial benefits to the people and help to keep taxes low and all our town services intact.
Dartmouth can harvest a resource that is readily available, while preserving our planet, strengthening our nation, and maintaining the community values of our town. For these reasons, I will vote to approve the special permit for wind turbines on the DPW lands.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

For all the hand ringers....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nSB1SdVHqQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvvRHhsQhi8&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKkTUY2slYQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucpfqFFfG8w&feature=related

Anonymous said...

Bill Trimble stood up for what he felt is right. Too bad that the audience member was very rude to him. I am glad that Wadson and Mishow said it was wrong

Anonymous said...

Just wondering why this person posted a wind turbine on FIRE....seriously? Houses catch of fire also...and i have on next door to me. Factories also catch on fire. more people die from carbon monoxide poisoning than wind turbines...are you going to shut off your gas now?

Anonymous said...

Cars create carbon monoxide which is dangerous to humans. I live near Walmart which has lots of cars. I am going to sue to the town for allowing Walmart here. Sound stupid?

Anonymous said...

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.

Anonymous said...

I posted these links sarcastically...sorry you missed my humor when I said this was for all the Hand Ringers in town worried about the sky falling...and don't tell me their prop values will be affected..they live near a waste water treatment plant and sand/gravel quarry. BUILD THE TURBINES....

Anonymous said...

what's a hand ringer? any relation to bell ringer?

Anonymous said...

Poster meant HAND WRINGER...

hand-wringing definition hand·-wringing or handwringing hand′·wring′ing (hand′riŋ′iŋ)

noun

expression of distress or anxiety, as in clasping and twisting the hands together
Related Forms:

•hand-wringer hand′·-wring′er noun or handwringer hand′·wring′er

Anonymous said...

Bill, you make a point of "2 times" being a sufficient setback but you know it's actually 2 times the tower height plus the radius that is recommended by all studies you reference, not the 2 times hub height Dartmouth adopted in it's bylaw. Bad information from people wanting these so badly they would ignore all the experts and do what they want to, even when it means endangering the public. Then they get the town to adopt it as law because the people of the town and members of the SB who were unaware of the committees true intentions, trusted the people of the committee presenting it. Do the math and it's over 900' not the 660'. I suspect, you did the math long ago and know the turbines wouldn't have fit in the area on Chase Road. Be honest Bill.