I hesitate to disagree after your very kind words above, but I grew up in rural Wisconsin surrounded by folks with some good sense, as opposed to city guys who’ll strip an abandoned car seven inches off the crowded freeway at rush hour.

Consider that the generator on these things weighs on the order of sixty tons, and each of the three blades weighs around ten tons. All of this is held about 300 feet in the air by a steel pillar more than 20 feet in diameter weighing around 90 tons. That’s one hell of a “Timberrrr!!”

So — again, with all due respect — I tend to think that these folks will simply wait for parts to fall off, rather than try to hasten their demise. After all, turbines are typically put up in phalanxes of several dozen at least, and these are the careful people who often remove the distributor cap at night to keep the raccoons from hot-wiring the truck and going for joyrides. (Or at least that was the advice I got from a good ol’ boy in north Alabama.)

So I continue to believe that our grandchildren, and probably great-grandchildren, will contemplate once-beautiful landscapes, now full of the hulks of these insanely ugly monstrosities, rusting, disintegrating, and dripping industrial lubricants into the soil, and say to themselves, “This must once have been so peaceful and lovely. Why did they ever allow this to happen?”

I maintained that without an escrow account that has guaranteed deposits every year and covered with a bond, the project shouldn’t be approved as this should be part of the financial capability analysis. The Maine DEP didn’t even respond.

Having said that, I actually believe that if a project was abandoned and the owner said no prosecution for stealing, the junkers in these poor rural area would be out with skidders and blow torches and the turbines would be gone quicker than it took to put them up. The only question is, how well do those Brazilian-made composite blades burn in a wood furnace?

Wolfe Island, Ontario, has become a wind wasteland. A forest of turbines was placed only three miles from Horicon Marsh, Wisconsin, the largest freshwater marsh in the world and a major stopover for migrating waterfowl. The Flint Hills of Kansas, the last remaining natural prairie, is being vandalized.

Not to mention Vermont, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, the countryside of Germany and the mountains of Spain.

This is ecological insanity on a scale never before seen. Jim Hansen and Al Gore will go down in history as the worst environmental criminals ever known.

1. It is electrical generation that we do not need. Period. The State of Maine currently generates more electricty than it uses and exports the surplus out of state. Even economic development s that project high growth do not absorb all of the state’s current production capacity in the next 30 years.

2. Industrial wind development in Maine will not replace fossil fuel baseline plants. Due to the intermittent and unpredictable nature of wind for electrical generation, all the megawatts of potential wind power must be duplicated with megawatts from reliable, baseline generation in order for the electrical grid to balance and provide electricity to meet on-demand needs without brown-outs.

3. It is a myth that wind-produced electricity is “free”. Due to the high investment cost compared to the low output, wind-produced electricity is so expensive that in a free-market economy, it would not compete with other sources of electricity; hence, it is expensive, not free.

4. It is a myth that wind-produced electricity is “green”. It is not “green” because fossil fuel baseline plants must be in place and when these are operating at greatest efficiency, they are less polluting. When wind-produced electricity enters the grid, these plants must be throttled back or placed in “spinning reserve” mode, operating at inefficient levels and creating greater pollutants. Isn’t it ironic that when the grid receives kilowatts from wind turbines that the grid is forced to produce more air pollution?

5. Wind turbines do not result in a net “savings” of energy. Because it takes so many wind turbines that produce so little electricity, it actually consumes more energy to manufacture the steel towers and install them than any wind tower will produce in comparable energy in its useful lifetime, which is 20-25 years. Becuase the turbine must continually rotate so it doesn’t freeze up, each turbine uses an enormous amount of petroleum based lubricants.

6. There are severe environmental trade-offs incurred with industrial wind site development. A site like the Rollins project in Lincoln Lakes will consume more than 700 acres of land, an acreage far larger than most Maine farms. It is more than the skiable acreage of either Sunday River or Sugarloaf ski resorts. It entails creating a 3-6 acre clearcut for each turbine site, blasting and leveling, digging down to bedrock and pouring tons of concrete to anchor each 262 foot tower which is topped by a 92 ton nacelle (turbine generator) and 253 foot wide blades. A huge, wide network of roads must be created up to and across ridgelines to get these huge components into place. At Rollins, more than 20 miles of powerlines will be cut. All of the turbine sites and powerlines will be kept cleared by the use of herbicides, effecting dozens of streams, all of the lakes around Lincoln and the watershed of three rivers. Siltation of streams and lakes will occur from erosion from all this construction. Lastly, important wildlife habitat will be fragmented and ruined. Thirty eight residences are within the blasting zones, all on wells, and changes in underground seams of water are a frequent consequence of blasting.

OVER
7. There are severe impacts on the lives of people living near industrial wind turbines. The Rollins project does not meet the emerging recommendation of these turbines being located more than a mile from residences. Hundreds of people who have chosen to live in rural parts of the Lincoln area are within the impact zone for noise from these turbines. Noise is relentless when it is windy, as experienced by people living with the turbines in Mars Hill. Read their testimony in letters here: http://www.windaction.org/faqs/15115
Even more acute, however, is the effect of sub-sonic waves from turbines. An unexpected, yet menacing threat to health is vibroacoustic disease. The turbines affect people in these ways: Symptoms include sleep disturbance, headache, tinnitus, ear pressure, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, visual blurring, tachycardia, irritability, problems with concentration and memory, and panic episodes associated with sensations of internal pulsation or quivering which arise while awake or asleep.
Source: Dr. Nina Pierpont, Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment. Is this what we do to people’s lives to build something we do not need?

8. Supporting industrial wind in Maine means supporting the folly of Baldacci’s Wind Task Force, which was a “stacked” group intended to put out what the lobbyists from the wind industry wanted. The ill-conceived and rushed report of the Task Force is now in statutory form. It expedites the permitting process of the DEP and limits public input on decisions that change the landscape of rural Maine. To reach its goal of 2,000 megawatts of installed wind capacity by 2015, the state will have to allow 34 of the projects the size of Rollins to be built. This will entail well over 20,000 acres of land and blast away miles of ridgetops, creating industrial sprawl all over rural Maine, without a single kilowatt being used in Maine.

9. Supporting industrial wind sites will cost you money. There is a disconnect between the Task Force goal of laying waste to rural Maine with industrial wind sites and the users of electricity in Southern New England: the inadequacy of the existing transmission lines through Maine to handle surges of wind energy on windy days. Also, Aroostook County, where many potential sites are located is connected to Canada, not the rest of New England. The answer? A $1.4 billion dollar proposal to upgrade and expand transmission lines. This cost will show up in your Bangor Hydro bill for decades to come. You will pay dearly for something we don’t need and for something for which we derive no benefit.

10. Supporting industrial wind sites supports wealthy investors and corporations raiding the public treasury. According to the US Energy Information Office in 2007, wind energy is subsidized at a cost of $690 million, which worked out to $23.37 per megawatt produced. This compares to federal subsidies of 67 cents for hydroelectric and 25 cents for fossil fuel per megawatt produced. The industrial wind industry would not exist without tax equity financing, production tax credits, double balance 5 year accelerated depreciation, guaranteed access to markets from Renewable Energy Portfolio schemes from the states, and the ability to sell so-called renewable energy tax credits to companies that pollute. It is an incredible array of money making schemes and scams on the taxpayers and ratepayers. Thus, the industry is not about creating “green” energy and saving the planet. It is about how to co-opt concerns about global warming and dependence on foreign oil, and slick propagandizing to position wealthy investors and corporations to get rich as “pigs at the public tax subsidy trough”. If industrial wind sites had to be built with only the usual standards of the free market economic system, there would never be a single one built.

Help us stop this insanity!!!
Support Friends of Lincoln Lakes

My testimony:

Transmission Lines:

Two reliable sources within the eclectic power industry have informed me that the 345 KV line from the Canadian border connecting to the rest of the New England grid at Orrington is not available to the Rollins Project unless ISO-New England would order such access.

The Rollins Project must utilize the existing Bangor Hydro 115KV line, known as “Line 64″. Both of these sources, one of whom is an electrical engineer, indicate that, depending on the size of a conductor, a 115KV line can accept 125-350 MW. The electrical engineer, who is familiar with Line 64, estimates load for this particular line is at best 200 MW. With the output of various power generating sources that are presently or will be utilizing this line, it creates enough load to question its capacity.

It is well known that there are questions about capacity and congestion on “Line 64″. In June of 2007, RLC Engineering, LLC conducted an Interconnection System Impact Study under the ISO New England Inc. Open Access Transmission Tariff Schedule 22-Standard Large Generator Interconnection Procedures on behalf of ISO New England Inc. and Bangor Hydro Electric for UPC Wind (now First Wind) to construct and interconnect the 57MW wind project on Stetson Mountain in Washington County, Maine.
The study showed that the existing transmission Line 64, into which Line 56 from Stetson Mt. and now the Rollins Project would feed, was at full capacity (151 MW) servicing Brookfield Power’s 126 MW hydroelectric system and Indeck’s (now Covanta) 25 MW biomass power plant in West Enfield- both base load renewable generators. With the introduction of Stetson energy into Line 64, energy output from Brookfield and/or Covanta would have to be significantly curtailed resulting in a 0 MW net gain in renewable generation for the region. Put another way, Stetson Wind and Rollins Wind, both intermittent and unpredictable generators, could displace existing reliable base load of renewable energy.
In its March 13, 2008 letter to the ME-DEP, Brookfield Power New England LLC stated through its attorney Matthew D. Manahan that “It is not in the public interest for new intermittent renewable generation to be constructed and to pass over Line 56 if it simply displaces existing renewable generation – that can provide capacity to Maine – on another transmission line, Line 64.”
In June of 2008, it was reported in the Bangor Daily News that ISO-New England and Maine state officials assured Brookfield and Indeck (now Covanta) that the established power generators’ needs would come first when the Stetson Mountain project goes active, which it did recently. Brookfield Renewable Power Inc.’s general manager told the paper “In layman’s terms, they [First Wind] were going to have to take a back seat to our transmission needs.” The same statements made about Stetson Mt. must be true for Rollins Wind and Stetson Phase II.

Currently, Covanta biomass in West Enfield is 25 MW; the two PPL hydro dams in Medway and West Enfield total 20MW; Stetson Phase I is 57 MW. If Rollins at 60MW and Stetson II, currently under review by LURC, at 25.5MW both come on line, this pushes the line to its maximum capacity. Here is the problem: the series of hydro facilities owned and operated by Brookfield Power that are in the upper Penobscot basin. While the output of electricity from these hydro facilities is primarily for the two mills in Millinocket and East Millinocket, surplus power is sold and enters the same grid. Due to intransigence in providing any information by Brookfield, I do not have the numbers. I was repeatedly told to get the information from either the Maine PUC or ISO-New England. As a common citizen, I have not yet received the courtesy of a return phone call from either agency. As the RLC Engineering study for ISO-New England shows, however, the capacity of a line must include the maximum potential output from a source.
Also, in 2008, Peregrine Technologies of Harpswell announced that its proposed $50 million, 17-megawatt biomass boiler project intended for the Huber Industrial Park in Millinocket would not be built due to, among other things, congestion on the New England power grid caused by First Wind and a lack of upgrading. This is further proof of the congestion problem with Line 64 and, alas, a loss of jobs for the Millinocket area that suffers higher than state average unemployment

With the unknown contribution of Brookfield added to the load of Line 64, it raises a question as to whether or not either the Rollins Wind Project or Stetson Phase II should be permitted by the state. As part of the permitting process, and because I assume DEP staff have more access to sources of information than an ordinary citizen, the DEP must analyze this question and receive written assurances from Bangor Hydro, Maine PUC, and ISO-New England that the line in question has the capacity to handle the load which, as we know, must be able to handle surges of maximum output from wind turbines. Furthermore, ISO-New England must provide a plan that clearly states what its priorities are in accepting power into the grid from these sources. If the capacity of the line is exceeded, which source must be curtailed? Must the hydro stations not produce even during times of peak flow like Spring run-off? Must the biomass plant of Covanta, which is a baseline plant be closed due to fuel costs? Does ISO-New England tell First Wind to shut down a certain number of turbines? By the way, if Covanta has to close to make way for First Wind’s Rollins and Stetson projects, that is a loss of 21 jobs in the Lincoln area, compared to a promise of 5 jobs from First Wind. That doesn’t seem to be an appropriate or fair trade off.

These are important questions that need to be answered before a permit is issued for the Rollins Project. I expect a written answer that includes a delineation of all sources of power associated with this line.

Bradbury Blake
25 Westminster Terrace
Cape Elizabeth, Maine 04107

The First Wind application totally fails to properly address the indigenous and migratory bird populations and the potential effects of the turbines and turbine locations on birds. It is apparent that First Wind has done the usual “take a report off the shelf and plug it in to the application”, trusting that nobody reviewing the application will catch on.

There can be no substitution for promising to count bird carcasses after turbines are built and operating in lieu of a comprehensive, factual assessment of bird populations and patterns that are unique to the Lincoln Lakes area. An example of this is Appendix 7-2, the breeding bird survey conducted in Topsfield. While the forests and field/forest edges in Topsfield may share some characteristics with the Lincoln area, it is not the Lincoln Lakes and is miles away from Rollins Mt. and the ridges of Rocky Dundee. It would appear that First Wind is saying since the bird survey in Topsfield was OK for Stetson Mt., it is OK for Lincoln as well. This is simply not true and the Lincoln Lakes region must have a separate bird survey to have legitimacy.

In the bat and bird survey, Appendix 7-3, there is a fatal flaw. This survey was conducted only at Rollins Mt. There was no similar survey done in the ridges of Rocky Dundee, the so-called Rollins South part of the project. This seems to be a convenient way to skew the bird survey, thus undermining its legitimacy. It is a well known fact that there are nesting pairs of American Bald Eagles on both Folsom Pond and Upper Pond. The pair on Upper Pond has its nest within a quarter mile and 500 feet below the ridgeline where six (6) turbines will be located. This close proximity to the eagles nest seriously threatens them. If they are not driven off by construction activity, the noise and vibro-acoustic effects of the turbines will drive them away. With six sets of turbine blades whirling right above them, it is a high probability that one of the s or the fledglings as they are learning to fly and soar, will be killed. This should be considered a “taking” that is illegal under the Bald and Golden Eagle Act.

The nesting pair of Eagles on Folsom Pond will likely soar around the Rocky Dundee ridges as well, as the unique topography of ridges and undeveloped lakes in this area are excellent habitat. In addition to these eagles, there are eagles to the south in the rich wetlands of the Passadumkeag River and eagles which nest in the Penobscot River which fish the extensive ponds and marshes of the region, utilizing the ridges for soaring thermals. It is not surprising that an out of town company, hired to provide information to justify siting industrial wind turbines would issue a skewed report. Had they asked anyone in the Lincoln area, they would have studied Rocky Dundee and not Rollins Mt.

The other aspect of the bird population that needs study before any permits are issued is the location of the ridges and lakes geographically within one of the major migratory flyways in Maine, the Penobscot River. In reviewing the topographic map showing the locations of the proposed Rollins turbines, you will note that the ridges separate many of the 15 lakes and ponds for which the Lincoln Lakes Region derives its name. Please look at a larger topographic map of the area, however, and you will note that the location of this proposed utility scale wind site is bounded by three major rivers: The Penobscot to the West, the Mattawamkeag to the North, and the Passadumkeag to the South and East. Tracing tributaries and lakes, you will note that these ridges are the highlands that separate these three great rivers. Further observation shows huge swampy wetlands that are great waterfowl habitat, in addition to the rivers, lakes, and ponds.
The Penobscot is one of Maine’s great migratory flyways. With all of the other wetlands in the area, it is noted locally for large populations of waterfowl and other birds. Eagles, ospreys, hawks, loons, several species of ducks, and many woodland songbirds all thrive here and many species visit to rest and feed during migration.
Either God or the glaciers (take your pick) have blessed the Lincoln Lakes with rich habitat for birds. The Lincoln Lakes area is unique in its richness of bird habitat. Birds are threatened by huge turbine blades that spin at 200 mph out at the tips. They are also affected by the vibro-acoustic pulses emanating from these machines. There must be a comprehensive, site specific study of the bird population undertaken and published before permits are issued for this project.

I am submitting a copy of an email exchange with Mark McCollough of the US Fish and Wildlife Service with additional information.

Bradbury Blake
25 Westminster Terrace
Cape Elizabeth, Maine 04107