Documents
Category:
Indiana or Virginia
Browse in :
All
> Location
> USA
> Indiana (1)
All > Location > USA > Virginia (18)
All of these categories
All > Location > USA > Virginia (18)
All of these categories
This brochure provides a quick, but informative, summary of the key issues pertaining to wind energy development in Virginia and the Appalachian region. The document can serve as a start point for others preparing similar information materials for their community. Click on the link(s) at the bottom of this page to view the final layout including photos.
The VA SCC issued its final order that conditionally approves the Highland New Wind Development, LLC application to construct and operate a wind energy generating facility in Highland County, Virginia, near the West Virginia border. The proposed facility would consist of up to twenty (20) wind turbines of up to 2.00 MW capacity each. The order included comprehensive monitoring and mitigation for wildlife impacts (bird and bat) and could serve as a model for other projects. One of the commissioners dissented on a provision in the monitoring and mitigation plan.
Hearing officer's filing on postconstruction mortality & mitigation pertaining to proposed Highland New Wind
October 16, 2007
by Alexander J. Skirpan
The public version of this filing can be downloaded below.
Ecological impacts of wind energy development on bats: questions, research needs, and hypotheses
August 6, 2007
by Thomas H. Kunz et al
This important peer-reviewed paper written by bat expert Dr. Thomas H. Kunz et al identifies the significant risk wind turbines pose for migratory and local bat populations in the mid-Atlantic Highlands region of the United States. The projected number of annual fatalities of bats at wind energy facilities in the Highlands in the year 2020 can reach up to 111,000 bats.
Bird and Bat Studies Conducted at Proposed or Existing Windpower Facilities
February, 2007
by Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources
This document includes studies in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia.
Also filed under [
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Birds|
Impact on Bats|
Maryland|
Maine|
Minnesota|
New Hampshire|
New York|
Pennsylvania|
Virginia|
Vermont|
West Virginia]
Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of Wind Energy Development in the Mountains of Virginia
October 17, 2006
by Rick Webb, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia
Rick Webb's presentation on October 17 at the Energy Virginia conference provides a thought provoking analysis of the costs and benefits of industrial wind energy.
Also filed under [
General|
Technology|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Bats|
Impact on Landscape|
Pollution|
Energy Policy|
Zoning/Planning|
Virginia]
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries' Comments to the State Corporation Commission concerning the proposed industrial wind plant in Highland County
September 20, 2006
by Virginia Natural Resources Department of Game and Inland Fisheries
To reiterate, if the SCC chooses to license this project, we request adherence to the monitoring and mitigation recommendations described in this letter and attachments. In the absence of such conditions, we feel this project would pose an unacceptable risk to the Commonwealth’s wildlife resources.
Direct Testimony of Charles Simmons to the Virginia State Commission on behalf of Highland Citizens
September 1, 2006
by Charles Simmons
Q. Please state your name and position.
A. My name is Charles Simmons and I have been retained to provide assistance to Highland Citizens in regard to the application of Highland New Wind Development, LLC to construct a wind generation facility in Highland County.
Editor's Note:This testimony provides an excellent description of how a grid works- particularly the role of 'economic dispatch' and 'spinning reserves'. It also addresses the methodology for estimating emissions savings and numerous other topics of interest.
A. My name is Charles Simmons and I have been retained to provide assistance to Highland Citizens in regard to the application of Highland New Wind Development, LLC to construct a wind generation facility in Highland County.
Editor's Note:This testimony provides an excellent description of how a grid works- particularly the role of 'economic dispatch' and 'spinning reserves'. It also addresses the methodology for estimating emissions savings and numerous other topics of interest.
Also filed under [
General|
Technology|
Impact on Wildlife|
Impact on Landscape|
Impact on Views|
Impact on Economy|
Tax Breaks & Subsidies|
Energy Policy|
Virginia]
Virginia Wind Responds to Highland New Wind Development Air Quality Benefit Claims
August 9, 2006
by Dan Boone & Rick Webb, Virginia Wind
Virginia Wind (Dan Boone & Rick Webb) has submitted the attached comments (selected extracts appear below) to the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) in response to material filed by and on behalf of Highland New Wind Development (HNWD) purporting to quantify air pollution emission reductions that the Highland County wind project would achieve.
The HNWD submission to the SCC responds to a request from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for a "backdown study" to determine potential emissions displacement by identification of electrical generators that will reduce output in response to the HNWD wind project.
The HNWD submission to the SCC makes the extreme and unusual claim that emissions displaced by the proposed HNWD project would be entirely from coal-fueled electrical generating units rather than from a mix of generator types, including the cleaner quick-start units that are generally higher on the economic dispatch order.
The HNWD claim is based on material submitted by Alden Hathaway and Deborah Jacobsen, who are affiliated with the state-supported Virginia Wind Energy Collaborative. Their arguments largely rely on an appended report by the consulting firm Resource Systems Group (RSG), which, in turn, supports its conclusions with summaries of confidential data that are not available to the SCC, the DEQ, or the public.
The RSG report claims similar benefits for proposed wind energy projects in Virginia's Roanoke and Patrick Counties.
Virginia Wind contends that uncritical acceptance of claims and analysis regarding unverifiable benefits would be well outside the norm for either scientific debate or public policy deliberations, especially in a contested case such as this.
Virginia Wind has accordingly requested that the SCC and the DEQ defer any consideration of HNWD's "backdown" study until all of the data that underlie the analysis, including detailed wind power data for the actual project site, are provided and made available for public and agency review. Virginia Wind has also requested an opportunity to provide additional comments once the data necessary for informed review are provided.
The HNWD submission to the SCC responds to a request from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) for a "backdown study" to determine potential emissions displacement by identification of electrical generators that will reduce output in response to the HNWD wind project.
The HNWD submission to the SCC makes the extreme and unusual claim that emissions displaced by the proposed HNWD project would be entirely from coal-fueled electrical generating units rather than from a mix of generator types, including the cleaner quick-start units that are generally higher on the economic dispatch order.
The HNWD claim is based on material submitted by Alden Hathaway and Deborah Jacobsen, who are affiliated with the state-supported Virginia Wind Energy Collaborative. Their arguments largely rely on an appended report by the consulting firm Resource Systems Group (RSG), which, in turn, supports its conclusions with summaries of confidential data that are not available to the SCC, the DEQ, or the public.
The RSG report claims similar benefits for proposed wind energy projects in Virginia's Roanoke and Patrick Counties.
Virginia Wind contends that uncritical acceptance of claims and analysis regarding unverifiable benefits would be well outside the norm for either scientific debate or public policy deliberations, especially in a contested case such as this.
Virginia Wind has accordingly requested that the SCC and the DEQ defer any consideration of HNWD's "backdown" study until all of the data that underlie the analysis, including detailed wind power data for the actual project site, are provided and made available for public and agency review. Virginia Wind has also requested an opportunity to provide additional comments once the data necessary for informed review are provided.
Also filed under [
General|
Zoning/Planning|
Illinois|
Indiana|
Ohio|
Pennsylvania|
Virginia|
West Virginia]