Library from Massachusetts
“Everything I continue to hear on Cape Wind is that they have been taken out of what’s happening right now,” Golden said. “There are a lot of questions coming out of the committee [about whether] that can be competitively bid today.”
Canadian hydropower and offshore wind projects would become more prominent pieces of the state's overall energy landscape under a long-awaited bill House lawmakers unveiled Monday. Members of a legislative committee that oversees energy issues were expected to endorse the bill, in a vote taken by email, setting the stage for debate in the full House next month. Renewable energy advocates have said the bill does not go far enough.
Rep. Thomas Golden, House chairman of the Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy, told the News Service he is still working to determine the size and nature of proposed increases in the state’s share of renewable energy.
There was little dissent at the Wednesday night, May 4, candidates’ forum, with the exception of differing views on the protracted debacle of the municipal wind turbines.
The energy bill may be introduced as early as this month and is expected to require utilities to purchase power from offshore wind farms, according to Rep. Thomas Golden, one of the Democrats who control the state legislature. Still to be determined is how much power utilities would be forced to buy under the bill and, crucially, whether the state’s Republican governor -- who has already opposed one offshore project -- will sign it.
The state's Land Court will be the venue for a lawsuit brought by the town against members of its own Zoning Board of Appeals that challenges the denial of a special permit for Wind 1, one of two municipal wind turbines.
Still, the projects face myriad federal and state regulatory hurdles, as well as opposition from business groups and power generators who strongly oppose government carve-outs and subsidies for clean energy. Likewise, wind farm projects in New York and Maine face opposition from those unhappy that the intrusive developments are benefiting other states.
The Falmouth "Land Court deal" is so corrupt the news media won't even print a story .The news media and the government are entwined in a vicious circle of mutual manipulation over the poor placement of wind turbines taking health and property rights. Folks, this story happened April 28 and not one peep from the news media.
Cape Wind claims the siting board exceeded its authority and asserts the decision to deny a two-year extension of transmission permits “is based on errors of law, is made upon unlawful procedures, is unsupported by substantial evidence and lacks requisite subsidiary findings and is arbitrary and capricious.
For those inclined to see the glass half full, Massachusetts has made enormous strides in reducing its carbon emissions. Coal-fired plants, the worst offenders, are dying out across the Commonwealth. Investments in energy efficiency have lowered demand. The solar panels sprouting up along the Massachusetts Turnpike are only the most visible of the new generation of green technologies feeding power into homes and businesses.
In this detailed ruling issued by the Falmouth Zoning Board of Adjustment in reference to Wind 1, one of two Vestas 1,65 MW turbines sited at the town's water treatment center, the board listed 38 separate finding on whether a permit should be issued that would allow the turbine to continue operating. The turbine was shut down following a court ruling that found the turbine was erected the town without first securing a permit. Some of the 38 findings are provided below. The full document can be accessed by clicking the links on this page.
The appeals board voted 4-1 on April 14 in support of a draft decision to deny the special permit.
The decision means that Wind 1, one of the two turbines, will remain dormant in accordance with the board's September cease-and-desist order. The state's Appeals Court ruled in 2015 that the machine should have received a permit before it was constructed.
“These regulations do not empower the board to regulate the construction of wind turbines in the town of Plymouth,” Nickerson wrote in his two-page ruling. ...“Nevertheless, a Board of Health has broad powers to regulate and prevent nuisances that affect the public health. It remains to be seen as to whether the operation of the wind turbines will constitute a nuisance."
An official with Applied Materials says its wind turbine on the Dory Road campus in Gloucester should be functioning properly within six months.
Associated Industries of Massachusetts issued a statement saying that electric ratepayers will still be on the hook for billions of dollars over a 10-year period to cover the cost of these incentives. John Regan, a lobbyist for the group, wrote a letter to lawmakers saying that the bill is “poorly conceived, it will not lower costs and will not put the commonwealth on a path to a sustainable future.”
The turbine has not been consistently operational since its installation in 2011. The Wilmington-based energy company that installed it, Lumus Construction, eventually defaulted, and Hanover Insurance, the company that held Lumus’ surety bond, became involved, Clarkson said.
The decision means Cape Wind will either have to challenge the board’s ruling in court or start from scratch in seeking regulatory approval for the transmission line, both of which would be time-consuming. Cape Wind officials got up and left the meeting before its formal conclusion.
In its request for an extension of the transmission line approval, Cape Wind said none of the circumstances that led to the original approval has changed. The company said “it is quite feasible” it may be able to begin construction of the wind farm by the extension date of May 1, 2017, but conceded that if there are further delays it may need more extensions.
After more than a year, the Board of Health wants to revisit a shadow flicker regulation for Kingston wind turbines.