Although Texas leads the nation in wind development, you may be surprised to learn that Texas law concerning the wind is basically non-existent. Similarly, there is little to no statutory regulation of the industry. So far, wind farms have been located in remote rural settings; however, as wind turbine technology advances and the land and wind speed necessary for the efficient development of wind energy decreases (and becomes even more profitable), it will not be long before the fight over wind finds itself deeply entrenched in Texas courts. ...While water law and the law governing the rights of wild animals may help resolve the issue of wind ownership, the question remains as to whether the right to develop the wind is a right that is severable from the land. In looking for guidance, the state courts may choose to rely on an area of the law with which they are quite familiar: oil and gas law. It is well established in Texas that the mineral estate (i.e., oil, gas and other minerals) may be conveyed and reserved apart from the surface. Texas courts have also held that certain substances which are historically considered part of the surface estate (such as near surface lignite and gravel, as examples) may be severed from the surface estate.

Wind Power Ethics Group v. Town of Cape Vincent ZBA et.al. Index No. 07-0789; RJI No. 22-07-0250

Army Corps' letter to UPC Wind states that the Sheffield Wind project "is not eligible for authorization under the VT General Permit, and must be reviewed under the individual permit review procedure." The letter further states that UPC Wind "may not proceed with any proposed work within our jurisdiction until you have received written authorization from this office." The full letter can be accessed by clicking on the link below.

New York's Public Service Commission's decision to grant Jordanville Wind, LLC a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Pursuant to Section 68 of the Public Service Law. The PSC ordered Jordonville Wind (Iberdrola) to remove 19 turbines thereby reducing the tower count to 49, due to the adverse impact on areas of historic significance and the scenic quality of the setting. An excerpt of the decision (p. 18 of 35) follows.

UPC Vermont Wind, LLC motion before the Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) in reference to the Board's August 8, 2007 Order and Certificate of Public Good (CPG) issued for the Sheffield Wind Energy proposal. The motion requests Clarifications, Technical Corrections, and Modifications to the Order and CPG.

This Docket concerns a proposal by UPC Vermont Wind, LLC ("UPC", "Petitioner", or "Applicant") for a 16-turbine, 40 megawatt wind generation facility in Sheffield, Vermont (the "Project").

The Green-e National Standard applies to all Green-e certified renewable energy products: Renewable Energy Certificates, Utility Green Pricing Programs, and Competitive Market Electricity Products. Sections I and II of the standard are provided below. The full document can be accessed by clicking on the .pdf link below.

The November passage of Initiative 937 adds Washington to the states with renewable portfolio standards. Wind-powered generation is a resource of choice in meeting renewable standards, and it has been highly touted for its environmental benefits. Considered in isolation, the environmental benefits of a wind resource are undoubtedly warranted. However, it is misleading to consider wind on an isolated basis—that is, outside of the context of the full power-supply portfolio that is necessary to serve load. In the context of an integrated portfolio, much of the environmental benefit disappears and may even be non-existent as compared with other resource portfolio choices. In particular, a full assessment of the impact of wind resources on the environment necessitates a look at the energy consequences of adding wind-generation to an integrated portfolio in the context of meeting load. Accounting for energy, it is likely that there is no significant environmental difference between a resource portfolio adding wind generation and one adding high-efficiency combined-cycle gas turbines. It is also likely that the wind-based portfolio results in little reduction, if any, in the need for fossil fuels and therefore little reduction in the exposure to their price swings and environmental consequences. That is, the emissions and fossil-fuel impacts of a wind-based portfolio appear little better than a non-wind-based portfolio.

Editor's Note: This paper makes a critically important point re. wind's purported environmental benefits, i.e. "...it is misleading to consider wind on an isolated basis—that is, outside of the context of the full power-supply portfolio that is necessary to serve load. In the context of an integrated portfolio, much of the environmental benefit disappears and may even be non-existent as compared with other resource portfolio choices." In short, wind's environmental benefits (if any) will be grid-specific depending on the emissions generated (if any) of the reliable generating source(s) required to back it up.

The following report describes the research design, initiation and completion of the first year of postconstruction study (fall migration only) of avian and bat collision fatalities at the 120 turbine Maple Ridge Wind Power Project in Lewis County, New York.

The work was conducted in accordance with the “Proposed Scope of Work for a Postconstruction Avian and Bat Fatality Study at the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project, Lewis County, New York” dated March 14, 2006, and agreed upon in mid-May 2006, after several revisions. People/agencies who reviewed the proposed scope of work included staffers from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), Environmental Design and Research (EDR), NYS DEC staffers, developers (PPM and Horizon), and others. Representatives from some or all of these groups have been included in a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which has the responsibility of reviewing and commenting on progress reports, annual reports, and other updates from this project.