|
LANDGROVE, VT - Vermont’s only nuclear power plant, Vermont Yankee,
currently provides 36 percent of the state’s electricity. Its operating
license expires in 2012, and may not be renewed for security, safety or
environmental reasons. Shortly after Vermont Yankee’s license
expiration date, contracts with Hydro-Quebec, which provides 35 percent
of the state’s electric power, will expire because of Canada’s growing
power needs.
Southern Vermont is experiencing unprecedented growth.
With the potential loss of up to 70 percent of the state’s power
generation; the development-driven increase in demand; and concerns
about global warming rates, various state agencies, the Legislature,
major environmental and citizen groups have all recommended adding wind
power into Vermont’s energy mix.
I live in Landgrove, a small
town in a resort area where a $50 million wind farm project has been
proposed, consisting of 27 to 33 modern turbines that would generate 40
megawatts of clean electric power. Glebe Mountain – which is highly
visible in the area—has been designated by Catamount Energy as a
ridgeline suitable for the installation of the 220-foot-tall windmills
(the blades will add another 110 feet). Catamount, of Rutland, will be filing an application to develop this site with the Select Board of the town of Londonderry
in October 2005. Regarding the cost of wind-generated electricity,
Catamount Energy’s website states, “While wind technology may require a
higher initial investment than fossil-fuel generators, this can be
offset over the life of the project. The ‘life-cycle’ costs of wind
projects are much more competitive with other generating technologies
due to a lack of fuel costs and lower operating expenses.”
But
things are not cool between Greens who are advocating wind power and
some landowners. Wind power has emerged as the biggest issue that has
ever captivated the people who live here – from farmers to loggers to
second home owners to guys pumping gas at local service stations. This
local wind farm proposal has sparked intense debate between those who
fear altering gorgeous views, upsetting tourists, lowering land values
and other issues associated with the installation of wind turbines and
those who support pollution-free, renewable power. The fundamental
dispute comes down to long term priorities. Those who oppose wind power
argue that despite growth and development the bucolic atmosphere of
Vermont is the main economic resource—and that is never going to
change. The pro-wind side say that the changes already taking place
can’t be stopped, so there should be a responsible effort to develop
non-polluting utility-scale energy systems. Although the viewshed on a
few ridgelines will have to be sacrificed to achieve these goals, the
alternative—to continue relying on nuclear and fossil-fuel power—is far
worse.
Every issue of the local weekly, The Message for the
Week (which does not have a Web site), is loaded with letters to the
editor—mostly from people who are opposed to the project. The Glebe
Mountain group, a non-profit organization dedicated to stopping the
project, is making, in my view, great strides to misinform the
community. They are convincing people to post rather cryptic signs on
their roadside properties: “Save our Ridgeline. Learn the Facts.” Yet
they often get the facts wrong. For example, the proposed wind turbines
for Glebe Mountain are 220 feet tall. On the Glebe Mountain Group
homepage it states 330 feet tall, which actually represents the base
plus blade. Also on the Web site, the group makes the claim that
“property values would probably fall.” The claim is unsubstantiated by
evidence or studies.
Another example: “Tourists don’t come to
Vermont to see electric generation plants,” says the Glebe Mountain
Group. In fact, interested tourists visit the existing wind farm at
Searsburg, Vt., on a regular basis. Still another claim by the wind
power opponents is that wind-generated electricity would have “no
meaningful effect on global warming or acid rain.” This statement is
simply untrue and ridiculous. The website fails to compare wind power
to current forms of power with any meaningful metrics.
Another group, Fairwind Vermont,
is supporting the Catamount proposal. Fairwind “seeks to create a fair
and open discussion on the future of wind energy in Vermont’s working
landscape,” according to its Web site. Fairwind makes a good case, but
few in the Vermont media want to listen. Several weeks ago, Fairwind
sent press releases to all the local papers, announcing an
informational meeting and gathering. Only one paper printed the press
release, in abbreviated, edited form. All of the other papers did print
a full page ad, paid for by the Glebe Mountain Group opposing the wind
turbines.
The Glebe Mountain site is one of six proposed wind
farm sites in Vermont. Together, these proposals would create up to 135
megawatts of independent, clean, renewable power. This would supply
electricity for 48,000 Vermont households, and would stop about 54,000
cars worth of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere, according to
Fairwind Vermont.
Extensive, long term studies have been made
of all the proposed sites. Glebe is considered one of the very best
sites, because of its wind capacity and because there already exists an
infrastructure of logging roads that would minimize the amount of
forest clearing needed to install the turbines.
A local planning commission is proposing to amend the Town Plan to
prohibit commercial wind development on Glebe Mountain. There will be a
public hearing on Aug. 24.
An interesting postscript: In 1997 the Searsburg Wind Power Facility
was completed. This project, in southern Vermont, is the largest wind
power facility in the eastern part of the country. In its initial
phases, this project was selected by the U.S. Dept of Energy and the
Electric Power Research Institute for participation in their Utility Wind Turbine Verification Program.
Trackback(0)
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
