Library filed under General from Ohio
“The more people know about these turbines, the less they like them,” Ledet said. “We need to be persistent in helping other people understand why this wind farm can’t sensibly be crammed into the area the wind farm has targeted for development."
“Although market forces have hindered the project’s development, the electric generation market has experienced other changes recently (several coal plants are expected to retire in the near term), and generation capacity is anticipated to be needed for Ohio and the region,” an attorney for the company told regulators.
The company cites market forces as another reason for the delay; local shale gas production has made electricity prices cheaper, and federal environmental rules in effect next year will take tens of thousands of fossil-fueled megawatts off of the nation’s electric grid.
How long before the American taxpayer gives wind farms and their supporting politicians the boot? As long as we give the handouts, there is no reason for the wind industry to become a responsible, viable, economical business. The only “green” in wind farm is the green in the pocket of wind farm investors.
Everpower Renewables, the company in charge of the project, has sought an extension of the certificate citing several ongoing legal fights over various aspects of the project. However, opponents have argued the company has already had a chance to request an extension and because there are two phases of the project that should be treated separately.
Steelmaker ArcelorMittal on Tuesday paid the state of Ohio $227,667 after discovering that its energy services division did not buy quite enough electricity generated by wind and solar in 2012.
Champaign County prosecutors are opposing a request from Everpower Renewables, a company that is seeking an extension to begin construction on the first phase of the Buckeye Wind Project.
Everpower’s attorneys are seeking an extension until May 28, 2018, to begin construction. The project’s certificate had been approved by the Ohio Power Siting Board in 2010, but expires in March of next year, according to court documents.
Ohio SB 310 allows lawmakers to take an extended look at the state’s renewable energy requirement to see if the laws make sense for consumers, said Ohio Sen. president Keith Faber. The renewable mandates might make sense but the state needs to determine whether the wind farms are a good investment for consumers.
It was no surprise when Iberdrola Renewables Project Developer Dan Litchfield told the Van Wert Rotary Club this week that the changes in state law regarding renewable energy (Senate Bill 310) and changes increasing the distance a wind turbine can be from a property line (House Bill 483) will keep that company from investing more money locally.
DeWine certified the petition language for the Ohio Clean Energy Initiative, a proposed amendment to the Ohio Constitution. Three previous versions were submitted, beginning in 2012. Another summary was rejected by DeWine in May.
Wind-power companies are dealing with the double blow of S.B. 310 and a provision in a separate bill that requires a larger setback between wind turbines and nearby property lines.
For every study Everpower has saying wind energy is safe, that it creates minimal noise (a hum, nothing above normal conversation) and that it doesn’t affect property values, opponents can point to a study showing wind farms cause health problems such as nausea and headaches and that they devalue property.
It was billed as an educational meeting by Iberdrola Renewables officials, but the two-hour meeting was more like a grilling administered by eastern Van Wert County residents who believe they would be affected by Iberdrola’s proposed Dog Creek Wind Farm project.
Opponents of the planned Black Fork Wind Farm in northern Crawford and Richland counties can rest easy for the time being. For a variety of reasons, the project is on hold until further notice. "As far as moving forward this year or early next year, that’s not likely,” said Scott Zeimetz, a spokesperson for the Portland, Ore.-based Element Power.
The Ohio Power Siting Board approval is only one hurdle the company must clear. ...In addition, several dozen local residents in a group called Fight the Wind have asked the Hardin County commissioners to repeal an “alternative energy zone” agreement that cuts the amount of tax the company must pay on each turbine. Dagger said the tax break is necessary to make the project economically viable.
The Scioto Ridge Wind Farm will have a nameplate capacity of up to 300 megawatts of electric generation. The project will include up to 60 miles of access roads, 83 miles of underground electric collection lines. The wind farm is associated with two additional OPSB cases that entail the construction of a 4.8 mile long 345 kilovolt (kV) transmission line and a 345 kV substation in McDonald Township.
The Trustees of Rushcreek Township in Logan County, Ohio passed this resolution requesting that the Ohio Power Siting Board deny the Scioto Ridge wind energy facility proposed by Everpower Wind. The text of the resolution is provided below. The full resolution can be accessed by clicking the link on this page.
Richland Township Trustees followed suit with other local government bodies in issuing a resolution stating their opposition to the Scioto Ridge Wind Farm. ...I’m the new guy on the block, but after talking to other township trustees (in Van Wert County), I see so many problems down the road,” Trustee Phil Alloway, who has only been on the board since the start of the year, said.
Both phases of the project have been approved by the Ohio Power Siting Board, but the second phase is being appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court. The turbines would be spread throughout six townships. Champaign County and members of Union Neighbors United, a group opposed to the project, have both filed arguments with the Ohio Supreme Court, raising concerns about safety and the cost to decommission the project, among other issues.