Banner
    New Ohio Law Requires Wind Turbines To Be Built Farther From Homes
    By News Staff | June 16th 2014 09:57 PM | 11 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    Wind energy advocates were pressing Ohio Governor John Kasich to use his line-item veto to remove what they called an anti-wind-energy provision from a tax-cutting budget bill – a requirement that new installations be built further away from property lines.

    Critics of wind energy believe wind turbines nearby cause headaches, insomnia and other maladies. Environmental groups and wind energy corporations dismiss the claims as anecdotal evidence. The budget bill bring $400 million in tax cuts.

    Alternative energy has been something of a letdown. California residents pay 50 percent higher utility rates than the rest of America due to its alternative energy provisions while New Jersey and Pennsylvania have only broken even because much higher rates for solar and wind have been offset by lower costs due to natural gas. Wind energy subsidies were barely renewed during the 2012 election year, primarily because they were union jobs, an essential voting bloc for Democrats.

    Wind energy interests insist that the setback limits in the budget bill would kill more than $2.5 billion worth of projects now in development, and billions more in the planning stages. The state requires currently turbines to be located at least 1,300 feet from the nearest inhabited residence but the new law, in effect for two years, requires a turbine's distance to be measured from the nearest property line. Wind energy companies say the provision is anti-business.

    "It appears designed to make the construction of utility-scale wind farms commercially unviable," wrote Gabriel Alonso, CEO of EDP Renewables North America, who says his company's Timber Road project represents a $200 million investment in Paulding County and has "tremendous local support," and that EDP plans another $800 million of investment in Ohio, "all of which would be devastated by this provision."

    Advocates lobbied to have the provision removed, and then delayed. Instead, the distance provision will be in place for two years.  Critics insist it is designed to favor fossil fuel companies but the money wind companies claim they were spending makes that unlikely. Real money is lacking but potential money was the carrot they they dangled to get media support for a veto.

    Mark Goodwin, President of Apex Clean Energy, says his company has more wind energy development projects in the state than any other company, and "in our portfolio alone, we estimate that this bill will kill over $3 billion of investment in the state," enough clean energy to power 454,000 homes, and $525 million in leases and local tax payments. If it passes as-is, Apex "will have no choice but to take its investment and its business elsewhere. Given the need to find new carbon-free sources of electricity in Ohio, we cannot imagine a worse time to send wind energy companies packing."

    In other words, he insists they were going to invest $3 billion in the next two years and contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to the tax base. Had they been able to document any of that, it's a sure bet the governor would have felt differently about compromising.

    Comments

    The AEPS has been an economic boon for Ohio manufacturing and clean energy. Thanks in part to these standards, over $1 billion has been invested in the state’s clean energy sector. By Freezing the AEPS and establishing crushing setback requirements effectively slams the door on new wind power development in the state.

    The wind power supply chain helps provide up to 3,000 manufacturing, construction and support jobs to Ohioans. With public opinion increasingly in favor of expanding the state’s clean energy portfolio, wind power stands to contribute significantly to Ohio’s economy, and in tough times, that’s great news.

    Wind power is reliable, immune to fuel price shocks, and helps keep costs low for consumers. The AEPS is a vital catalyst, attracting more private investment and opening the door to efficient, innovative technologies. A study conducted Ohio grid operator PJM found that by obtaining 30 percent of their electricity from wind, they would save $15 billion a year in production costs. Those savings pass on to ratepayers.

    At least 15 independent studies conducted by governments, grid operators, and others confirmed that wind energy reduces electricity prices.

    One state wind facility with 150 turbines gives $2.7 million a year in payments to local taxing bodies, stimulating growth and revitalizing communities.

    Ohio counts among its ranks 62 manufacturing facilities in the wind power supply chain, more than any other state. The Buckeye state plays a critical role in building what has become a homegrown American manufacturing sector. Putting a freeze on the AEPS means a freeze on future investment into the state.

    For more information on wind’s economic and environmental benefits, please see our Ohio wind power fact sheet: http://bit.ly/1jARZgM

    For more information on state and federal policies, please visit:

    Federal: http://bit.ly/1mUj3rj
    State: http://bit.ly/1j63Rld
    State renewable electricity standards (RES): http://bit.ly/1qT2y2Q

    Peebles Squire
    AWEA

    Hank
    Ohio counts among its ranks 62 manufacturing facilities in the wind power supply chain, more than any other state.
    A lot of the factoids you cite are in contradiction to one another. Ohio is a giant in wind power, you state, so it seems a Republican governor is capriciously penalizing corporations for...nothing. That doesn't sound like Republicans. It can't be Big Oil, since Sierra Club is against having these wind farms so close to homes also.

    By the numbers you throw around, we could cure the US deficit simply by giving it to you - you spin dollar bills into solid gold. Your corporate PR campaigning aside, if customers are not forced to subsidize your companies, how many wind farms would go up?
    See: "Ohio SB 310: Energy Users Best the Cronies (GE, AWEA, etc)," at:
    http://www.masterresource.org/2014/05/ohio-senate-bill-310-why-is-good-n...

    Also read (pasted in its entirety below):

    Industrial Wind is The Great American "S-WIND-LE" - Not Clean, Not Green, Not Free!:
    http://citizenpowerallianceblog.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-great-american-...

    ~ Industrial Wind turbines are being sold under the pretense that they will significantly reduce CO2 emissions, and thereby help avoid Global Warming. Yet, 30 years into subsidizing the building of wind factories off the backs of taxpayers and ratepayers has proven otherwise.

    ~ With approximately 250,000 industrial wind turbines installed worldwide today (45,100 turbines totaling over 60GW of installed wind projects in the USA, according to AWEA), CO2 emissions have NOT been significantly reduced, nor has a single conventional generation plant - including coal, been decommissioned thanks to industrial wind. (See: Wind Turbines Are Climate-Change Scarecrows, by Robert Bryce)

    ~ Due to the unreliable, erratic, and volatile nature of wind, industrial wind turbines need constant "shadow capacity" from our reliable, dispatchable generators - that is, if you want to be sure the lights will come on when you flick the switch. Thus, as Big Wind CEO, Patrick Jenevein candidly admitted, "Consumers end up paying twice for the same product."

    ~ All things considered, including demand levels and import/exports - the more wind installations we add, the more we must add fossil-fueled generation.

    ~ The TRUTH: Wind generation locks us into dependence on fossil fuels.

    ~ Adding wind as a supplement to our conventional generating system requires so much supplementation that in many areas of the country, adding wind actually causes increased CO2 emissions in the production of electricity than would be the case with no wind at all. Iowa exemplifies this -- As Iowa's installed wind capacity has increased over recent years, so has their coal use and CO2 emissions.

    ~ ONE (1) 450 MW Combined Cycle Generating Unit located at New York City (where the power is needed in New York State), would provide more power than all of New York State's 16 installed wind factories combined, at 1/4 of the capital costs -- and would have significantly reduced CO2 emissions and created far more jobs than all those wind farms – without all the added costs (economic, environmental, and civil) of all the transmission lines that must be added across the state to New York City.

    ~ Industrial wind supplies electricity, and therefore, has nothing to do with our "foreign oil dependence" created by gasoline and diesel fuel needs.

    ~ 4,000 - 6,000 pounds of rare earth elements are required per turbine, producing disastrous ecological results in China, where the rare earth elements are being mined.

    ~ In many low-wind areas of the country (ie: New York State), Industrial Wind Turbines do NOT produce enough power to pay for themselves over their very short, 5 - 13 year lifespans.

    ~ The average output of many wind factories is less than 25% - many days, providing nothing at all.

    ~ Studies from those long-invested in wind power in Spain and elsewhere have shown that 2 - 4 jobs are LOST in the rest of the economy, in large part due to the associated "necessarily skyrocketing” electricity rates President Obama forewarned would accompany his 'green' energy policy.

    ~ Consider GE's Shepard's Flat Wind Factory, at which each 'job created' was shown to cost taxpayers $16.3 MILLION - exorbitantly expensive jobs for a product which is neither "reliable," nor "efficient" - two professed requirements of the "sustainability" movement.

    ~ Wind technology has proven to be effective only as a tax shelter generator for large corporations in need of an increased bottom line - just as it was originally designed to do by ENRON, the trailblazer for industrial wind in the U.S.

    ~ Two of the largest wind holding corporations - GE and Florida Power & Light - have paid NO federal income taxes in the U.S. in years, in large measure because of their "investment" in wind.

    ~ Studies have shown that MILLIONS of birds and bats are being killed every year by these giant "Cuisinarts of the air," as a Sierra official dubbed industrial wind turbines in a moment of candor.

    ~ President Obama recently gave industrial wind developers a 30 year free pass to slaughter eagles without penalty, while all other energy sources are fined tens of thousands of dollars and more per bird death.

    ~ The sprawling footprints of industrial wind factories cover vast swaths of land, causing massive Habitat Fragmentation.

    ~ Industrial wind installations significantly interfere with both military and weather radar, severely compromising both homeland security and weather advisory systems that would otherwise serve to protect American citizens.

    ~ Big Wind Corporations looking to cut corners have been caught using old Bethlehem Steel brown-field slag as fill in access roads which run amongst croplands.

    ~ Mathematically, it would take more than 3000 wind turbines rated at 2 MW each, spread over 800 kilometers (nearly 500 miles), to equal the energy from one 1600 MW coal or nuclear plant. Because these wind turbines can produce no effective (or firm) capacity, they can never replace the need for those conventional generating units.

    ~ Wind, paired with natural gas (the most flexible generating system), can offset a mere fraction more CO2 emissions than could be achieved with the gas unit alone - without any wind at all. Wind represents redundant generation, although it would generate capital costs more than triple the cost of the gas unit. With wind, the country gets one electricity production system for the cost of two.

    ~ Wind can neither be a functional alternative, nor additive energy source. Wind energy is so diffuse that no machine can convert it to modern power. (See: Understanding E = mc2)

    ~ Personal health and property value losses by those who end up stuck living within the massive footprints of industrial wind factories ARE significant and growing world-wide, yet are being ignored by most of the media, 'green' enthusiasts, and over 80% of the U.S. population who live within big city limits and are oblivious to the detrimental effects being wrought on rural America thanks to the 'green' "Emperor Who Wore No Clothes."

    ~ Suggesting proper 'siting guidelines' for wind factories is akin to suggesting building larger closets for the "Emperor With No Clothes."

    ~ Let's be real - Would you buy and move YOUR family into a home surrounded by 450 - 500+ foot tall industrial wind turbines, with their 164 foot-long, 11-TON, bird-chopping blades spinning overhead - only hundreds of feet from YOUR home on all sides? I have yet to meet anyone who would.

    ~ Why would anyone in their right mind support imposing this torture on their fellow Americans??? It is shameful, criminal, and un-American! These peoples' most expensive life investments - their homes, have been rendered virtually worthless.

    ~ Studies have shown, and any realtor worth his oats will tell you, there are significant property value losses (10% - 25% and more), depending on the proximity to the wind turbines. LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION!!! Could you and your family afford to take that kind of loss on YOUR home?

    ~ Would you take your family to vacation amongst the footprint of industrial wind factories? Neither would most anyone else - which ruins the tourism trade many scenic rural areas across rural America depend on, especially in this flailing economy. The only ones getting rich in this scenario are the multi-national wind developers. The rich are getting richer at the rest of our expense for a useless product.

    ~ Besides rendering these folks' homes virtually worthless, the fact that American citizens are being assaulted with their own taxpayer and ratepayer dollars (which are subsidizing the building of these wind factories to the tune of 80% of the total costs), is blatant theft of both their money and their Constitutional private property rights. Again I say - It is shameful, criminal, and un-American!

    ~ Corporate cronies push the "All of the Above" nonsense, while what U.S. taxpayers and ratepayers really need is an "All of the Sensible" energy policy. Industrial Wind does NOT make the cut!

    http://northeastwindmills.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/ask-more-questi...

    It would be difficult to add anything substantial to Ms. Barton's comprehensive analysis and data based comments, other than to support her reporting of the history of this scam industry. Wind developers not only rely HEAVILY on federal grants, guaranteed loans, and revenue from increased electricity rates to customers, but often decreased tax bills, as much as 80% less than many other businesses. This is called PILOT, payment in lieu of taxes, or predetermined annual payments to a municipality. All of these financial benefits provide "wind energy advocates" with the incentive to push forward with no regard for the human and environmental degradation so thoroughly described by Ms. Barton. Just look at the wind industry decline in Europe to see why the industry has moved on, like carpet baggers, to the U.S. Shame on them, and thanks to Gov. Kasich for protecting the citizens of Ohio. Hopefully, he has opened the door for other states to follow suit.

    While politicians & experts debate this, know that there are some everyday residents that are very relieved that SB483 has been passed. Several years ago we learned that every square inch of land around our small country home had been placed under lease with an industrial turbine company. Knowing the negative impact that many have experienced with the industry, we were less than pleased. But there was absolutely nothing we could do. The signing of SB483 has given us protection against being surrounded on all four sides by industrial turbines - from living within an industrial site! And for that, we are greatly relieved. We are also grateful to those that continue to help protect residents by creating fair and reasonable standards to protect against the potentially negative impacts of any industry.

    Hank
    If you add up all of the supposed money wind turbines are claiming to generate, they could cure Ohio's deficit in a year. Yet none of the money is actually there when it counts, it is all just redistributed subsidies that may benefit people later.

    It's J. Wellington Wimpy (of the Popeye show) economics:


    AWEA says: "Wind power is reliable, immune to fuel price shocks, and helps keep costs low for consumers."

    Marie Jane says: From where I sit, wind power is unreliable even when the wind is blowing. AWEA, please address industrial wind turbine agenda price shock (that action would be called "transparency"). As for "low costs for consumers", this is from the MassEnergy site: [MassEnergy offers for a mere...] "3.8 cents/kwh in addition to basic service charges (just 74 cents/day on average!) for 100% wind power from Massachusetts turbines". (I hope those reading this are laughing at the "100% wind power from Massachusetts turbines" line.) Although, there are greenwashed people buying it lock, stock, and RECs!

    Mark Goodwin, President of Apex Clean Energy, says: "If it passes as-is, Apex "will have no choice but to take its investment and its business elsewhere. Given the need to find new carbon-free sources of electricity in Ohio, we cannot imagine a worse time to send wind energy companies packing." In other words, he insists they were going to invest $3 billion in the next two years and contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to the tax base. Had they been able to document any of that, it's a sure bet the governor would have felt differently about compromising.

    Marie Jane says: For the good of the State of Ohio and the people of Ohio, that seems a very positive offer.

    Senator Keith Faber and Senator Bill Seitz say in the following timely quote(s) from the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch (June 15, 2014): "Senate President Keith Faber, a Celina Republican, and Sen. Bill Seitz, a Cincinnati Republican, support the amendment and have said it is crucial to protecting private-property rights of people.........." And, "But there’s no doubt that more is known about wind energy than when the projects all got off the ground years ago, he said. And it’s not all good. He supports the new setback proposal, even if it means that Scioto Ridge will never happen. I will never sacrifice individual property rights for the almighty dollar......"

    Marie Jane says: Thank you Senators Faber and Seitz for protecting and standing up for Ohio's private property rights. Hopefully your stand and that of Governor John Kasich will cross borders and open minds across the country.

    In MA, they quote from a certain property value study and claim that there is no negative impact to property value.

    And, if you are wondering why a person from Massachusetts is tracking Ohio's affairs, it is because I feel the time has come to cross the "borders". It is time to share our common concerns.

    In my state of Massachusetts, after they greenwashed us, they marched head long into and in lock step with the industrial wind turbine agenda and I followed them and believed that the industrial wind turbine would solve the world's problems. I learned that was not the case and far from any truth or reality. It was about the agenda moving forward and not about the people.

    I watch as the "agenda" continues to move forward without consideration for people, without consideration for siting, if indeed there is a place to site them. Siting for various installations here are in question and there are "bail outs" being requested/offered for two towns (so far), because of siting issues, in the amount of $3.8 million dollars; we paid (you and I) to install them and we (you and I) may be paying again to bail them out. Health issues are cropping up around the world and the industrial wind turbine agenda moves forward. Yet, MA HB 2048 requiring health studies, related to industrial wind turbines, sits in "committee". Property values have declined and because of health issues attributable to the industrial wind turbine, people have walked away from their homes. None of these issues have been acknowledged, addressed or resolved, but, the industrial wind turbine agenda continues to move forward. XXX

    AWEA says: "Wind power is reliable, immune to fuel price shocks, and helps keep costs low for consumers."

    Marie Jane says: From where I sit, wind power is unreliable even when the wind is blowing. AWEA, please address industrial wind turbine agenda price shock (that action would be called "transparency"). As for "low costs for consumers", this is from the MassEnergy site: [MassEnergy offers for a mere...] "3.8 cents/kwh in addition to basic service charges (just 74 cents/day on average!) for 100% wind power from Massachusetts turbines". (I hope those reading this are laughing at the "100% wind power from Massachusetts turbines" line.) There are greenwashed people buying it lock, stock, and RECs!

    Mark Goodwin, President of Apex Clean Energy, says: "If it passes as-is, Apex "will have no choice but to take its investment and its business elsewhere. Given the need to find new carbon-free sources of electricity in Ohio, we cannot imagine a worse time to send wind energy companies packing." In other words, he insists they were going to invest $3 billion in the next two years and contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to the tax base. Had they been able to document any of that, it's a sure bet the governor would have felt differently about compromising.

    Marie Jane says: For the good of the State of Ohio and the people of Ohio, that seems a very positive offer.

    Senator Keith Faber and Senator Bill Seitz say in the following timely quote(s) from the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch (June 15, 2014): "Senate President Keith Faber, a Celina Republican, and Sen. Bill Seitz, a Cincinnati Republican, support the amendment and have said it is crucial to protecting private-property rights of people.........." And, "But there’s no doubt that more is known about wind energy than when the projects all got off the ground years ago, he said. And it’s not all good. He supports the new setback proposal, even if it means that Scioto Ridge will never happen. I will never sacrifice individual property rights for the almighty dollar......"

    Marie Jane says: Thank you Senators Faber and Seitz for protecting and standing up for Ohio's private property rights. Hopefully your stand and that of Governor John Kasich will cross borders and open minds across the country.

    In MA, they quote from a certain property value study and claim that there is no negative impact to property value.

    If you are wondering why a person from Massachusetts is tracking Ohio's affairs, it is because I feel the time has come to cross the "borders". It is time to share our common concerns about the industrial wind turbine agenda.

    In my state of Massachusetts, after they greenwashed us, the state marched head long into and in lock step with the industrial wind turbine agenda and I followed them and believed that the industrial wind turbine would solve the world's problems. I learned that was not the case and far from any truth or reality. It was about the agenda moving forward and not about the people.

    I watch as the "agenda" continues to move forward without consideration for people, without consideration for siting, if indeed there is a place to site them. Siting for various installations here are in question and there are "bail outs" being requested/offered for two towns (so far), because of siting issues, in the amount of $3.8 million dollars; we paid (you and I) to install them and we (you and I) may be paying again to bail them out. Health issues are cropping up around the world and the industrial wind turbine agenda moves forward. Yet, MA HB 2048 requiring health studies, related to industrial wind turbines, sits in "committee". Property values have declined and because of health issues attributable to the industrial wind turbine people have walked away from their homes. Although, none of these issues have been acknowledged, addressed or resolved, the industrial wind turbine agenda continues to move forward. XXX

    Marie Jane says: If you want to know how bad the industrial wind turbine agenda and greenwashing has become, read this from the Washington Times (June 19, 2014). No respect or help or proper health care for veterans, but plenty of money for a wind turbine in the Bourne MA National Military Cemetery and guess was there to commemorate it:

    "The administrators at the Veterans Administration have apparently been busy while old soldiers waited to see a doctor, after all. Serving those who served is not necessarily a priority, but saving the planet is Job 1. Solar panels and windmills can be more important than the touch of a healing hand.

    The department early on set up an Office of Green Management Programs designed to “help VA facilities nationwide recognize opportunities to green VA, and to reward innovative ‘green’ practices and efforts by individual facilities and staff within the VA.” This sometimes means paying more attention to greening the department and saving the polar ice caps than to health care.

    In the department’s words, it adopted a far more important mission to “become more energy efficient and sustainable, focusing primarily on renewable energy, energy and water efficiency, [carbon-dioxide] emissions reduction, and sustainable buildings.”

    The green office isn’t merely a desk and telephone tucked away in the dark corner of a nondescript government building. It’s a substantial undertaking, with all the luxury, bells and whistles of a bureaucracy that means business. Eric K. Shinseki, who resigned as secretary in the wake of the VA scandal of the sin of omission, traveled the country to boast of the green initiative. In one instance, he traveled to Massachusetts to flick the switch at a half-million-dollar windmill project at the Massachusetts National Cemetery. “Nationally,” he said, “VA continues to expand its investment in renewable sources of energy to promote our nation’s energy independence, save taxpayer dollars, and improve care for our veterans and their families.

    VA facilities have become littered with every scheme to banish carbon dioxide short of requiring visitors to hold their breath. Calverton National Cemetery spent $742,034 on solar panels. Fort Rosecrans National Cemetery spent $787,308. Not to be out-greened, the Riverside National Cemetery spent $1.3 million on its solar system.

    At the Phoenix VA Health Care System, where 20 Americans died from incompetence and cover-up, the department spent $20 million putting solar panels on the hospital roofs. That would have been more than enough money to provide the veterans with the health care they deserved.

    Some administrators won’t be satisfied until every federal building bears a green stamp. In military parlance, the VA is practicing “mission creep,” the expansion of a project well beyond its intended goals. While the rest of the government continues to waste taxpayer funds trying to become carbon-dioxide neutral, the VA should be spending every available dollar to relieve pain, cure the sick and restore the deserving to health. That’s more important than any fad, environmental or otherwise.

    XXX

    Question:

    Why has the Military allowed the desecration of a veteran's cemetery in Bourne, Massachusetts by allowing the siting of an industrial wind turbine WHEN, as Marie Jane points out, the very mission of the VA is to relieve pain, cure the sick and restore our veterans to health has been so negligently bungled! The focus of the VA is not to create energy sources that in essence are boondoggles!

    This just adds another layer on to the VA scandal that they would fund a department dedicated to pushing the "Green Energy" Boondoggle.

    "MISSION CREEP" INDEED! Our precious resources are being misdirected to an energy source (wind power) that harms human & animal health, is not reliable, has a very short life span, kill birds and bats, alter and destroy aquifers and watersheds, and increase the cost of electricity!

    Is it not desecration to plant a wind turbine in a Veteran's Cemetery??? Seems disrespectful to put an industrial power plant among the deceased!

    It doesn't matter what avenue they have to use to funnel taxpayer money to their corporate cronies, the top positions at all of these government bureaucracies - be it the EPA or the VA - are in on the legalized thievery of our money in the name of being 'green'. The only 'green' involved in the wind fraud is MONEY!