Articles filed under General from Minnesota
A troubled wind energy proposal in Goodhue County has missed a deadline imposed by state regulators to make its intentions known, and opponents of the project are preparing to celebrate its defeat. ...The PUC is expected to move to revoke the permit.
Xcel agreed to terminate the PPA contract without receiving any form of damage compensation. The two entities have been arguing, through PUC filings, over the arrangement for nearly two years. Previous Xcel paperwork has suggested that New Era could be held responsible for "significant" damages due to its alleged breaches of contract.
Xcel Energy and the New Era Wind Farm have ended their power purchase agreement, making it even more unlikely the controversial Goodhue county wind project will be built.
The developer, New Era Wind Farm, could try to revive the $180 million project, its attorney said. But Thursday, PUC commissioners voted unanimously not to extend the company's legal authority to build the 48 wind towers in the county. The clearly frustrated commissioners cited ongoing questions about the company's ownership, the status of its contract with Xcel, and its failure to come up with a plan to protect birds and bats from turbine blades.
After lengthy discussion during Thursday's PUC hearing - including a few testy exchanges between commissioners and New Era attorney Todd Guerrero - the PUC unanimously approved five motions that will make it difficult, if not impossible, for the project to move forward in its current form.
Jim Alders, Xcel's director of regulatory affairs, said Thursday that New Era has "failed to meet the requirements" of the 2010 contract, which required PUC approval. Attempts since December to cure the defaults have failed, prompting the recent action.
Jim Alders, Xcel's directory of regulatory affairs, said Wednesday that Xcel had been committed to the agreement but informed New Era in December that it needed to resolve outstanding issues with the project by early May. "We gave them [New Era] until now to cure those problems and they have not," he said. "We finally reached the point where the contract gives us the right to terminate."
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is waiting to hear from Xcel Energy and New Era Wind in Goodhue County about what changes have taken place in the controversial wind project's power purchase agreement.
New Era was given until Sunday May 12 to resolve a delay in the production of a 78-megawatt wind farm in Goodhue County that is causing the company to default on an agreement to sell generated power, said Jim Alders of Xcel Energy.
"We are VERY unappreciative of this symbol being used by the USPS for Earth Day," Marie McNamara recently emailed postal officials in Washington. "Thanks for putting us on record as strongly objecting to the symbol of industrial wind turbines as a postmark. Thanks for putting us on record as wanting to see the postmark go away immediately."
A letter from the owner of a proposed wind farm to regulators shows his frustration in the permitting process and a willingness to sell off assets of his investment. "New Era has no confidence that due process for this project will ever end, nor that an ABPP (Avian and Bat Protection Plan) will ever be approved, however comprehensively and carefully drafted," said Peter Mastic, owner of New Era Wind Farm, in an April 17 letter to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission.
"New Era initiated discussion with NSP (Xcel Energy that was going to buy the wind power) to assign its power contracts to a third-party wind project developer and site," he wrote in a letter dated Wednesday. Three companies are interested and could get turbines turning this year or 2014. "Each of these projects is sited in a community that is far more receptive to wind energy than is Goodhue," he wrote.
U.S. District Judge Michael Davis dismissed a lawsuit filed by the developer of the 100-turbine Merricourt project, which remains unbuilt amid lingering fears that whooping cranes and piping plovers will be slashed to death by its turbine blades.
Jaunich solicited funding from individuals and groups for the purchase of pieces of membership in Averill Wind, a company that Jaunich created to develop and operate a wind energy project in Clay County, Minn. To induce these investments, Jaunich misled investors about the project’s status.
The 171-turbine, 280-megawatt project - which would have been the largest wind project in Minnesota - was reduced to a 58-turbine, 116-megawatt development by eliminating many of the turbines that had been targeted by critics. Issues remain before the project will break ground. Per Thursday's approval, Gamesa must submit an avian and bat protection plan.
The most significant blow to the project may have been delivered last week, when PUC staff filed briefing papers. Staff recommended that the commission deny the requested amendments or table the request, require an avian and bat protection plan to be created and - perhaps most importantly - initiate potential revocation proceedings "since the permittee has not commenced construction."
The plug has reportedly been pulled on what could have been the largest wind project in Minnesota history. EDP Renewables, formerly Horizon Wind, recently mailed project participants in Goodhue, Rice, Dodge and Steele counties letters informing them that the initial contract period was up and it would not be renewed.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission took another pass Thursday in deciding the fate of the controversial New Era wind project in Goodhue County. The commissioners voted unanimously to re-open the certificate of need docket, which was previously approved by the PUC in June 2011.
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously Thursday, Feb. 28, to re-examine the 78-megawatt New Era Wind Farm proposed for the area around Belle Creek, Zumbrota and Goodhue townships.
The delay is just the latest in a string of setbacks for the project, which ran into resistance as soon as it was introduced four years ago. Turbines were originally expected to be spinning by the end of 2011. Representatives for the developer acknowledged the project was taking longer than anticipated and that they remained uncertain how soon construction could begin if regulatory hurdles were overcome.