A proposal to place a meteorological tower on Antrim's Tuttle Hill to study whether the spot is ideal for wind turbines to generate electricity has ruffled some feathers. The debate in Antrim is just one example of the controversy blowing across the country over the placement of wind farms as the focus on renewable energy sources grows. Last month, the Antrim zoning board gave Antrim Wind Energy LLC permission to place a temporary 196-foot tower on privately owned property off Route 9.

Following numerous and heated public hearings, the zoning board approved a height variance for a meteorological tower on Tuttle Hill after just more than an hour of deliberation. Chairman John Kendall was the sole negative vote on the variance, which approved the construction of a 196-foot met tower on ridgetop property owned by resident Michael Ott. The decision will be effective at the end of the 30-day appeals period, but resident Richard Block has no intention of letting that happen. "It will be appealed, on a number of levels," said Block after the meeting.

The Antrim Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) unanimously voted on Tuesday to close the public hearing on the height variance for a meteorological (met) tower on Tuttle Hill, and begin deliberations at their next meeting on the issue, which will be Oct. 13. ...Including three company officials from Eolian Renewable Energy, the parent company of Antrim Wind Power LLC, those attending the meeting numbered thirty. The majority of opinions heard by the board were against giving the height variance for the met tower.

The Zoning Board of Adjustment says it needs more information before approving a variance that would allow for the construction of a small wind energy turbine on a property bordering Lake Winnipesaukee. Members of the Zoning Board voted to continue the application made by Richard Lavalliere and in the mean time, have the applicant hire an independent licensed engineer ascertain potential noise level and the amount of energy production that will be done on the site.

The Site Evaluation Committee will hold a public meeting at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, Sept. 28, to consider motions for rehearing on a recent decision to allow a wind farm along a northern Coös ridge line. ...On Aug. 14, just inside the 3-day appeal window, the state Fish and Game Department filed a motion for rehearing or amendment. That same day, motions for rehearing were also filed by GRP, Counsel for the Public Peter Roth of the state Attorney General's Office, and Lisa Linowes, executive director of the Industrial Wind Action Group (IWAG).

Granite Reliable Power LLC, the company that plans to build a 33-turbine wind farm in Coos County, asked the state last week to deny two motions for a rehearing. The motions were frilled Aug. 14 by the state attorney general's office, which serves as counsel for the public, and the Industrial Wind Action Group, which opposes the project. In his motion, Senior Assistant Attorney General Peter Roth argued for a rehearing, stating that GRP does not have the financial capability to carry out the project and there is no "assurance the project will be constructed and operated in continuing compliance with the certificate."

Abutters and area residents of the Tuttle Hill area in Antrim rallied against the proposal of a temporary meteorological (met) tower at the Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) meeting on Tuesday. The tower would collect wind and weather information to assess whether wind turbines would be practical in the area. Chairman John Kendall, faced with a growing amount of information for board members to consider for a height variance, continued the meeting to Sept. 15.

Following fiery criticism Tuesday of an application for a meteorological tower on Tuttle Hill, the zoning board will continue the public hearing in September. Eolian Renewable Energy of Portsmouth has applied for a height variance under the small wind systems ordinance to construct a 197-foot meteorological tower (met tower) on a 290-acre parcel owned by Michael Ott on Tuttle Hill, the fourth highest peak in Antrim.

One year to the day after Granite Reliable Power filed its application for a 99 megawatt wind power plant in Coos County, the state's Site Evaluation Committee yesterday approved a certificate for wind operation on the private land. The 60-page decision, still subject to appeal in the state's Supreme Court. will still require a federal permit.

After recessing deliberations for over an hour on Wednesday afternoon to consult in executive session with its own counsel, Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) chairman Tom Getz suspended all deliberations on whether or not to issue a Certificate of Site and Facility to Granite Reliable Power (GRP), the company that seeks to build 33 wind towers in Millsfield and Dixville, both Unincorporated Places in Coös County.

Dr. Kent also said he believed it would be important for the state Fish and Game Department and scientists from the Appalachian Mountain Club to verify - ground-truth - the condition of the 1,700 acres that would be set aside as a mitigation package to compensate for habitat loss on Mt. Kelsey and Dixville Peak. "We need to know the details, what's really on the ground, to understand if it's "tit-for-tat" - that is, the same spruce-fir habitat that will be lost on those ridgelines," Dr. Kent said. "No evidence has been presented."

Granite Reliable Power's $275 million plan to build a wind park in Coos County got a step closer yesterday to permitting. ...The committee still has to determine how the project will affect air and water and other environmental aspects as well as public safety and health. The committee reconvenes Monday at 10 a.m. at the Public Utilities Commission to take up those issues.

If the state is to approve a 99 megawatt wind park in Coos County, the counsel for the public said, the state should require Granite Reliable Power build a firehouse with two trucks and a visitor center in Errol and show it has $300 million prior to construction. Those are among a list of 30 conditions that counsel for the public Peter Roth suggested to the state Site Evaluation Committee.

The prospect of wind turbines in Coos County drew about 100 residents and foresters to a public hearing Monday night at Lancaster Town Hall. About 50 people gave testimony to the New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee which is expected to render its decision by May 6.

Jobs, the environment and energy independence were the hot-button issues last night at a Lancaster public hearing on the proposal to erect 33 wind turbines on forested ridgelines in Coos County, with the makeup of the crowd tipped slightly in favor of the project. Supporters said the wind farm would give the area an economic boost, increase the acreage of protected forest and help change the state's energy mix. Opponents said the jobs created are too few, the energy would be shipped out of state and construction would harm an ecologically sensitive area.

The state's public hearings on a wind farm proposal in Northern Coos County are coming to a close. The state's Site Evaluation Committee is expected to rule this spring whether the project can move forward. But on Monday night, in Lancaster, local county residents got a chance to tell state officials what they think of the plan. NHPR Correspondent Chris Jensen has the story.

A crowd of more than 150 North Country residents last night offered their opinions on a proposed wind power project for Coos County. ...Jeff Elliott, a conservation biologist from Lancaster, said the project was being conducted on an "absurd" scale. He warned the wind farm would destroy biological habitats" ..."It's the only remote area left in the East. This is the only dark spot left," Elliott said. John Harrigan of Colebrook said the "horrendous" project is "an insult to our history and high country."

The state Site Evaluation Committee heard closing arguments yesterday on whether ridgelines in Coos County should become host to 33 wind turbines. Meanwhile, two federal agencies last week wrote letters asking the committee not to issue a permit, saying not enough is known about the environmental impact of the project. ...Senior Assistant Attorney General Peter Roth, who represents the public in the proceedings, urged the committee to reject the proposal, saying the company had left too many questions unanswered: How would it pay for the project?