Against the Wind

A Citizen's Testimony: A short course in understanding the issues

A citizen, Lisa Linowes, from New Hampshire testifies for the House Science and Technology Committee on NH Bill 1568

Here are excerpts from that testimony.

Less than 2 years ago, I was like most people. I supported renewable energy of any form, and gave little consideration to the downsides.  Since then, an industrial wind company proposed a 30-MW, 20 tower facility to be erected atop Gardner Mountain in Lyman , NH. My family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues were all treated to a crash course in wind technology.

• Current assumption #1: Wind energy can address the pending energy crisis facing New England.

• Contradicting factors: The New Jersey Blue Panel Interim report on offshore wind, November 2005, Page 5, states: “New Jersey’s energy needs are substantial and growing. Wind cannot provide “base load” power needed to meet every day energy demands.” “Wind cannot contribute to the base load because wind is intermittent.”)  http://www.njwindpanel.org/

• Current assumption #2: Through conversion to wind energy, New England would see marked reductions in emissions and independence from fossil fuels.
 
• Contradicting factors: Wind energy will make a difference in emissions only to the extent to which traditional energy facilities are backed down, or turned off, while the turbines are generating electricity. E.ON Netz GmbH, the largest grid operator in Germany, and the largest manager of wind facilities than any other operator, had this to say in their Wind Report 2005: “Wind energy cannot replace conventional power stations to any significant degree.” “The more wind power capacity is in the grid, the lower the percentage of traditional generation it can replace.” Also, due to rapid, short-lived fluctuations in wind (wind gusts), wind energy causes other facilities on the grid to operate less efficiently, thus less clean.
http://www.eon-netz.com/
http://www.ref.org.uk/images/pdfs/eon.2005.REF.pdf

• Current Assumption #3: Wind energy facilities provide local jobs.

• Contradicting factors: Based on existing practices in PA, NY, WV, and elsewhere, local people are hired to clear for roads, land preparation, and security during the construction phase. Many of the workers hired to assemble the turbines on-site come from Europe. In any event, these are temporary jobs. When a site is on-line, it is usually unmanned. A wind firm may retain 2-3 employees for security.

• Current Assumption #4: Wind facilities offer steady tax revenue to rural communities.
 
• Contradicting factors: Throughout the US, state governments have dramatically reduced and in some cases (KS and PA) eliminated taxation on wind turbines as an incentive to develop renewable energy. Wind companies have promoted tax incentives to cash-poor communities all over New England, all the while lobbying the legislatures hard for pilot agreements or and other special considerations which translate into less dollars for communities.

• Current Assumption #5: Wind turbines are good neighbors and produce no noise or other nuisances.

• Contradicting factors: The sound report for the 400-foot tall, 2.0 MW towers proposed for Lempster Mountain gives a decibel level at 105 dB(A).
See p9, Airtricity contract agreement.

• Current Assumption #6: Wind energy facilities are carefully sited and, with a few exceptions, have proven harmless to avian life (birds and bats).

• Contradicting factors: The GAO report released in September 2005 found “Several gaps exist in research on wind power facility impacts on wildlife. Relatively few post construction-monitoring studies have been conducted and made publicly available. It appears that many wind power facilities and geographic areas in the US have not been studied at all”. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05906.pdf

In closing: The proposed industrial sites here in New Hampshire are slated for our most rural areas. The communities targeted are typically cash-poor, some with no zoning, many with only limited ordinances in place, and none that have dealt with large-scale development. All of us are struggling with the assumptions and the seeming contradicting factors. I ask this committee to recommend this bill to the legislature so we can begin to look past the assumptions and get the facts.