Yes or No: The Barton Group Wind Turbines 165 comments
Nancy A. Bernstein, 2008
The Barton Group has proposed building 10 wind turbines on 1700 acres of land formerly used as a garnet mine and already zoned for industrial use. The turbines will be located near North Creek, New York, in the south-central Adirondacks. The turbines could generate enough electricity to power more than half of all households in Warren County. The turbines may also provide a positive message about generating power from a renewable, non-polluting resource, important in a region that has been so adversely affected by acid rain—generated largely by coal-fired electric plants in the mid-west.
Opponents argue that the turbines could prove fatal to birds and bats, and pose a particular threat to the endangered Bicknell’s Thrush. Aesthetics are another concern. 280 feet tall and 400 feet wide when the blades are fully extended, the wind turbines will be visible along an exposed ridge, compromising the wild forest character of the Adirondacks. They also argue that allowing this project will set a precedent, opening the door for similar projects in the future.
What do you think? Should the Barton wind farm be built?
I’m in the adirondack park as much as possible, and feel the wind farm is an excellant use of free renewable energy - look to Denmark and see what they are doing - 50% of their electric use is from wind turnbines - about time we catch up here in America.
Constructing additional wind power could be beneficial in New York to diversify fuel mix and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. However, the Barton Mines and the Adirondack Park in general are the wrong places! Modern wind turbines are enormous industrial facilities that can be as tall as the Statue of Liberty. These intrusive structures are simply incompatible with the wild forest character of the Park. Instead, future wind power development should be carefully sited outside the Park – preferably in large wind farms located near existing electric transmission corridors.
There are numerous articles about the problems Denmark is having with wind power. See this example <>.
Feel free to contact me for more facts “aaprjohn@northnet.org”
Denmark and the rest of Europe are not as enthralled with industrial wind as we have been led to believe. (BTW, their electricity from wind is less than 20%, and what they can actually use is far less than that.)
Niels Gram of the Danish Federation of Industries said “In green terms windmills are a mistake and economically they make no sense. Many of us thought wind was the 100 percent solution for the future but we were wrong. In fact, taking all energy needs into account, it’s only a three percent solution.” Aase Madsen, who chairs energy policy in the Danish parliament, said, “For our industry it has been a terribly expensive disaster.”
With all the pro-wind information in the news these days, it’s not surprising so many people see industrial wind as a solution to our energy problems. The real-world data from existing wind projects shows a different story - a small amount of poor quality electricity produced and no reduction in fossil fuel plant emissions. Conventional plants need to keep running to back up variable wind output - so wind is duplicating, not replacing, electricity generation. The process of manufacturing, transporting and on-site construction of the turbines adds to the environmental problems. The clearing of thousands of acres of trees for access roads and siting destroys a natural method of taking CO2 from the air.
The huge impact of constructing and operating industrial wind turbines, causing multiple problems related to health, safety and destruction of wildlife and habitat, does not justify their tiny contribution to clean energy. Their real purpose is to create tax write-offs and Renewable Energy Credits for the financial gain of wind companies at taxpayer and ratepayer expense. Without these huge subsidies which ultimately come out of our pockets, the industry itself admits it would stop building wind projects.
Please, please, please educate yourselves before allowing wind turbines in the beautiful Adirondacks. A good place to start is http://www.wind-watch.org. We can do more to help the earth by reducing our electricity usage, and at far less cost, than by building useless industrial wind developments. The treasure of New York’s natural beauty, once destroyed, is not renewable.
I love the beauty of the mountains but understand the needs of energy. I enjoy electricity as much as mountain views. The wind farms can and should be part of our future landscapes. When I gaze out my window or stand in awe from the peak of a mountain in the future I will understand why the wind farms are now included in the vista.
I’m all for alternative energy. We just have to be very careful we don’t harm the habitat if we decide this is a viable energy source for our State. I’m opposed to the ones around Lake Ontario & Cape Vincent. There is a heavy bird migration (42,000 raptor birds counted this spring at Derby Hill) at Southeast end of Lake Ontario and Onondaga Audubon Society is worried about bird mortality in that area. The Adirondacks have always had the challenge between development and keeping the Park pristine. I think it should be left to a vote in the individual communities — whether or not it will help the economy and its overall health.
Absolutely, the wind turbines should be built. Global warming is too much of a threat to be concerned about a few bats.
Global warming is not going to be stopped by turbines. Turbines do not save on oil consumption and it takes electricity to keep them running. I disagree with you. It is more than a few bats that will be affected. Please read http://www.windaction.org and you will get a different take on the wind turbine issue.
Valary Sahlre
Yes, I am in favor of wind turbines.
I don’t think the wind turbines should be built. The Adirondacks has nature that shouldn’t be messed with.
We should set a precedent by converting a mine into green-friendly energy.
No, I don’t think the Barton wind farm should be built. It would help with all the eletricity; but I think the animals should be more of a concern. Once an species of animal is lost, it won’t return. I also think it would just look plain ugly.
Let’s put up the turbines. It’s a safer alternative to wildlife - & humans - than more coal plants or nuclear plants or any other energy source we now have. Aesthetically, they are preferable to ski lifts, cells towers, shopping centers, highways, etc.
I think it is a great idea although there are some risks I think this is one oppertunity that should not be abandoned.
I do approve the use of wind turbines, but perhaps some bird warning system could be developed to make sure the fewest birds possible fly into the wind turbines. Also the turbines should be spread out so that if flocks of birds fly into them, most birds will miss the turbines.
Would you rather have a coal or oil fired generator?
Studies have proven that cars kill more birds than windmills!
Build them
Wind power is an important source of energy, but should be installed outside of the Adirondacks.
What an oppertunity to prvidue non-polluting energy for the Adirondacks. The wind Turbines should be allowed to be built.
Continuing to generate electric power from other sources like coal and nuclear energy pose such wide spread and long term environmental hazards that the minor problems of wind generation are trivial by comparison. Wind generators use a renewable resource and are non polluting. Environmental impact is minimal. They should be one of the next important and visible steps in the evolution of eco-friendly energy. As a biologist and naturalist I recommend building more wind farms wherever practical.
Because wind is intermittent, variable and unpredictable, regular power plants equal to wind power capacity must operate on standby, ready to balance the variations from wind. They burn fuel and produce emissions in this mode, but the electricity that would otherwise be produced is wasted. Wind turbines run in addition to, not instead of, fossil fuel and nuclear plants.
In spite of this basic fact, industrial wind is a multi-billion dollar business. Why? Follow the money. Tax credits, subsidies, and high rates make a profit for developers. Wind companies use this money, which comes from taxpayers and consumers, to influence our politicians. Then they sell carbon offsets to polluters. How does this help the environment?
Industrial wind is a gross misuse of our money and diverts resources from better technologies.
Tax Credits for Energy Companies: Production Tax Credits (PTCs) for older, polluting energy production like oil and coal are permanent and have been in place since the 1920’s. Its how the energy infrastructure in this country was built.
Why should wind energy be any different? AWEA states that in 2006, the federal government subsidized fossil fuels by $6,250,000,000. Wind energy in 2006 was subsidized by a little over $500,000,000. This year, the Senate will try to pass a bill to redistribute some of the billions of tax payer subsidies we pay to the fossil fuel industry. I don’t see a problem with that, and hope it goes through.
Wind energy was subsidized in 2007 at $23.37 per MWh, compared with coal and natural gas at less than 50 cents per MWh. (Source: Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy Markets 2007.) Since wind doesn’t replace any conventional power plants, this is just an added expense that will continue to take money out of our pockets for no good reason whatsoever.
I’m not happy about my tax money going to any of these industries, but at least coal and gas deliver power as expected.
I am for the wind turbines. We have got to do something to protect our environment. Although the turbines might be visible, they will only be visible from certain locations and I think the visibility will only prove to others that Adirondackers are taking a proactive, responsible approach to protecting our beautiful area.
Yes I am for the wind turbines. We need to have a clean source of energy.
As a former ranking minority member of the NYS Assembly Energy Committee, I’ve been immersed in the pros and cons for 25 years now, but it seems to me that utilizing wind (along with water, biomass and other renewable forms of power production) is entirely compatible with, and instructive to, the Adirondack ethic. The policy struggle is one between aesthetics and conservation … and there are no easy answers … but on balance, wind power is an environmental positive, even when it is perceived as an aesthetic negative.
Yes. they would be beneficial tto save energy
Yes, of course, the wind turbines should be given every consideration. We simply cannot continue to ruin the earth.
But couldn’t some refinements be made to answer the worries about the potentially tacky profile they would create and the dangers to the birds and bats?
And what about noise?
Yes, the wind farm should be built. The Adirondacks are a region that has long held a belief of self sustainabilty. A wind farm would provide a positive message about the regions dedication to renewable power sources.
It seems odd that nobody minds the power grid lines cutting through the park.
We firmly believe it is time to pull out all stops and do whatever we can to both limit the CO2 we’re adding to the atmosphere and to get off our dependence on fossil fuels. We therefore support the wind turbines at Barton Mines even though we know they will do little (except for Barton Mines) to diminish our local dependence on fossil fuels. But these will at least tell the world that we are willing to lose a little of our wilderness scenery in exchange for whatever little help we can get in our efforts to mitigate anthropogenic global warming and its projected detrimental effects on the Adirondack Park.
Let the opponents freeze in the dark. We must stop depending on oil and coal and use nuclear, wind, etc.
Two Words FOREVER WILD.. The park should remain untouched even if the our energy sources prices are rising. Wind energy is great but not at the ADK
Yes, such wind farms should be constructed. Our energy-intensive lifestyle makes possible tourism which supports the conservation of the Adirondacks. If such conservation is to consider into the future, alternative energy sources are essential, and we (folks who come to/live in places like the Adirondacks) need to share the cost (aestheric, property value, etc) of wind power.
Give us a chance to do a thorough study of impact on wildlife, first.
This is a great idea to help our world by thinking of good ideas of finding new ways of generating power. However, every effort should be made to blend into the natural environment. Also have a high pitch noise to keep animals away so they won’t be killed.
The sooner this system is put into operation the better. Instead of 10, it should be 1,000.
Future similar projects? Absolutely!
Much of the power used in the region now comes from environmentally destructive power production that is polluting the Adirondack air and soil. But this case should be decided on its own merits. Existing environmental rules need not be broken, nor negative precedents set. Each potential impact must be studied carefully. It may well be wiser to site these structures in lower-elevation, existing open terrain, rather than cut trees and despoil sensitive mountain ridges to create the enormous open areas the towers require.
This one should simple. The road and transmission infrastructure is already in place, Gore Mt lift towers already in the area, and this shows the coal plant States we are doing something positive.
We think it would be a great idea to use wind turbines for electricity for most of Warren County. You have our support.
Many of the comments here appear to be from good, well-intentioned people who have been duped by the industrial wind profiteers’ aggressive Madison Avenue campaign. No shame to that as these marketers are experts.
For instance, wind power is NOT a clean, free source of electrical energy, and it will not save us oil. And Denmark’s percentage of power from wind is 6%, not 50%. And although the developers’ strategy is to characterize it that way, this is NOT an issue about birds, bats, or aesthetics. Etc.
As an Adirondack resident, physicist, and energy expert, I realize that the decision about any renewable source should be made on the basis of whether it works equal to or better than other choices.
In this case, that means: 1) does wind power provide base load power and meaningfully reduce CO2? 2) is wind power a financially viable source of energy on its own? 3) Is wind power environmentally benign?
The answer to all three questions is NO.
We DO need to aggressively address our energy problems, especially pollution from sources like coal. But based on how the grid works, wind power is not the answer. For instance, worldwide there are some 50,000 turbines in operation today, and not a single coal facility has been shut down.
Due to a variety of technical factors, wind power’s contribution to helping with global warming is trivial, and what miniscule CO2 that is saved is extraordinarily expensive.
Wind power is a non-solution that is entirely being driven by enormous federal and state handouts (our money) to large multi national conglomerates. Think ethanol.
To desecrate the Adirondacks — or anyplace else in New York — just to put money in these people’s pockets, is a travesty.
If you want to support a meaningful renewable source, industrial geothermal is a much better way to go. Feel free to email me for detailed information about wind power: “aaprjohn@northnet.org.”
John Droz has stated the issues best on this forum.
Please people, do some research. Commercial Industrial wind turbines don’t deliver the goods.
Commercial wind interests give out misleading and incomplete information. They describe benefits using words like “could” instead of “will”, “may provide” instead of “will provide”, “rated capacities” instead of “actual output”, etc. Even though the overwhelming majority of these commercial wind interests are structured as private companies (LLC’s), I have yet to see one report anywhere of efficiencies higher than 30% and many come in under 20%.
There are tens of thousands of commercial wind turbines throughout the world with over twenty years of accumulated data. Someone please state one fossil-fueled power plant that has been decommissioned because of commercial wind turbines to reduce CO2 emissions. Someone please say how the United States will reduce its dependence on foreign oil with commercial wind turbines when only about 3% of our country’s electricity is generated from oil; most of this oil is low-level crude extracted from US soil. Why are so many focused on reducing our dependence on foreign oil but willing to let their electricity generation and distribution be controlled by foreign entities? Someone please tell how you can hookup your cars, trucks, SUV’s, boats, racecars, snowmobiles, jetskis, lawnmowers, snowblowers, farm machinery, commercial and private jets, on and on, to a commercial wind turbine.
If commercial wind turbine production is so great, actual results should be widely available. Where are the actual results?
Health and safety issues can not be ignored either.
Take away huge government subsidies and tax credits (your money as taxpayer and ratepayer) and the commercial wind companies would be “Gone with the Wind”.
Instead of being bamboozled into commercial wind, we should be focusing our resources on new ways that will actually work to solve and meet our energy needs like geothermal and solar power combined with advancing research in nano- technology. Commercial wind projects create new and expensive problems. They do not live up to their claims of solving current problems. They do pit neighbor against neighbor splitting communities apart. They create a huge mess with additional future costs after the wind interests have made their money, in only four to five years, and left at great public expense.
yes,we need other sources of energy
I think we MUST build the windmills if we want the rich from NYC, NJ and Conn. to be able to buy land and build their huge out of place mansions that have been devouring the park. That is what the Adirondacks are all about now. Without electricty, how are we going to continue to expand? It has nothing to do with birds, deer or bears, its all about greed now.
No! The research shows that the wind turbines are not productive and that the foreign companies are they only entity to benefit from them. They would ruin the Adirondacks.
Absolutely Not!!!!
People need to fully understand the ramifications of BIG Corporate Wind and all the subsidies that go with it.
Wind is NOT a reliable source of energy and it will never take fossil fuel plants off line. In fact, with nearly 300,000 commercial industrial wind turbine is oopertion in North America, not ONE power plant has been taken off-line.
Get educated, get the facts. It might seem like a good idea, but it is not a solution, not even a start. Wind Turbines are an antiquated answer to a complex problem. Ut is no answer at all, simply a knee-jerk reaction to fear. Don’t buy into it without doing the research. Go see a wind turbine and LISTEN to it. Also consider the huge environmental footpringtrequired.
In any even, a source of info is http://www.schoharievalleywatch.org
We are just one group, of hundreds, fighting this ill-conceived and government subsidized fallacy.
It’s big money, for big energy. Nothing more and nothing less.
Don
Co-Director, SVW
How sad to think of industrial wind turbines in The Adirondacks. There is much evidence that they are not cost effective, and only make money for the companies building them. I’m in favor of nuclear energy instead.
The turbines should be built to produce further damage to the rivers and their inhabitants which are in more grave danger.
Until you have had an Industrial Wind Facility proposed “in your backyard” and you have taken the tremendous amount of time necessary to study and truly understand the effects it will have to your health and well being to say nothing of the harm to wildlife and your property values, then you will continue to think they are OK and will save the world. So sorry people, “It ain’t gonna happen!!!”
As much as I believe renewable energy is necessary for the future to rid ourselves of our dependence on oil, primarily from foreign sources, wind energy should not be the method consulted in doing so. Indeed, many flying creatures are susceptible to death from turbines. Also, turbines are not nearly as efficient as other sources. I believe other sources should be investigated, including nuclear. Nuclear power is very efficient, if its use is properly maximized, as shown in France. Nuclear waste can also be chemically changed to make it less dangerous, while its use can be applied elsewhere, although this is somewhat expensive. Inevitably, high costs are an unavoidable consequence, but wind energy should not be the key to the future.
I can not imagine what the politicans and town fathers in this state are thinking. Why devastate the Adirondacks with wind turbines? Why devastate any land with turbines? Turbines are only up to 23% effecient. Wind Farms do not lessen the use of our oil consumption. Electric bills will increase do to the upgrades on the electric lines. Think twice and do some sound research before wasting your beautiful mountain sides. Take a trip to a wind farm and see what they have done to God’s Green Earth. You will see that you will never get back the land that you once had. If there weren’t huge subsidies there would not be a turbine any where. Your attraction is the peace and beauty of your park. Tourist won’t want to sleep under a wind park with the thumping sound that is given off, which carries for three miles. People under the newly started wind park in Bliss, NY are already complaining of the noise and the inability to sleep. The turbines have only been running for two months. If you talk to someone that lives by a wind farm please interview someone that is not making money off the project or you won’t get the true story of life under a turbine. The people with easements are sworn to secrecy on their signed contracts and can not tell you anything negative. Don’t ruin your State Park’s heritage. Don’t put turbines in Barton!
John Droz has stated the issues best on this forum.
Please people, do some research. Commercial Industrial wind turbines don’t deliver the goods.
Commercial wind interests give out misleading and incomplete information. They describe benefits using words like “could” instead of “will”, “may provide” instead of “will provide”, “rated capacities” instead of “actual output”, etc. Even though the overwhelming majority of these commercial wind interests are structured as private companies (LLC’s), I have yet to see one report anywhere of efficiencies higher than 30% and many come in under 20%.
There are tens of thousands of commercial wind turbines throughout the world with over twenty years of accumulated data. Someone please state one fossil-fueled power plant that has been decommissioned because of commercial wind turbines to reduce CO2 emissions. Someone please say how the United States will reduce its dependence on foreign oil with commercial wind turbines when only about 3% of our country’s electricity is generated from oil; most of this oil is low-level crude extracted from US soil. Why are so many focused on reducing our dependence on foreign oil but willing to let their electricity generation and distribution be controlled by foreign entities? Someone please tell how you can hookup your cars, trucks, SUV’s, boats, racecars, snowmobiles, jetskis, lawnmowers, snowblowers, farm machinery, commercial and private jets, on and on, to a commercial wind turbine.
If commercial wind turbine production is so great, actual results should be widely available. Where are the actual results? Someone, please find them!
Health and safety issues can not be ignored either, but that is subject for another time.
Take away huge government subsidies and tax credits (your money as taxpayer and ratepayer) and the commercial wind companies would be “Gone with the Wind”.
Instead of being bamboozled into commercial wind, we should be focusing our resources on new ways that will actually work to solve and meet our energy needs like geothermal and solar power combined with advancing research in nanotechnology. Commercial wind projects create new and expensive problems. They do not live up to their claims of solving current problems. They do pit neighbor against neighbor splitting communities apart. They create a huge mess with additional future costs after the wind interests have made their money, in only four to five years, and left at great public expense.
No. I enjoy using the Park in the area of Barton Mines. Where I live in western NY a 67-turbine wind farm is proposed that would require a 24 square mile project area. GE Energy, manufacturer of the 1.5 MW turbines for that project, recently reported to NYSERDA that such turbines can be expected to generate only 10% of their rated or installed capacity. The 100.5 MW rated capacity in the 67-turbine project would therefore generate about 10 MW. (Real power plants generate 500-1,000 MW.) The Barton Mines area wind farm would generate even less, not justifying the land area needed and the adverse impacts (including the concrete and roads) involved.
Please don’t fall for this. Industrial wind projects produce very little usable power at a great cost to the environment and to our pocketbooks. Due to the intermittent and unpredictable nature of the power produced, they can’t power ANY homes. There has to be an equal amount of backup power production facilities on standby. When the wind turbines DO turn, they produce electricity at the top rate, which costs us all money. Do the math to see how many of these monsters they would have to build to really make a difference in our power needs, and you will see that this is a bad deal! Let’s not squander our energy research and development resources on tax eating schemes like this.
No turbines. The reasons are very complex. in short, $16 billion dollars of taxpayer federal money to subsidize a technology that is economically based on the accounting principles of ENRON is something akin to taxation without representation. Let’s talk about CONSERVATION of all our resources, and not the production of more electricity.
From what I have read, seen and heard I do not think that wind turbines are the wonderful savior that many people think they are. On the average their efficiency is about 25%. Try running your house on power supplied 6 or 7 hours a day. The size (up to 425 feet high) can totally visually overwhelm and change most any area they are placed in. Without big financial help in the form of our tax dollars and tax breaks they would never even be built. Studies are finding that the varieties of sounds created by the operating turbines do have definite big time negative effects on humans. With the noises, size and shaddow flicker taken into account,I wouldn’t want to live within 2 miles of them. I believe that in the future it will be found that wind turbines were really not the best direction to take and there are much better alternatives. But what do I know, I’m just an old welder.
I find the eagerness of some folks to allow wind turbines in the Adirondack Park distressing. Thank goodness for our visionary forefathers who overcame the same short-sighted perspective of many of their contemporaries and passed the forever wild law. There needs to be more education of the public about the limited capabilities of wind power. It will not be the panacea implied by some of the commenters. I strongly urge everyone to invest time to understand the simple facts that wind energy WILL NOT replace coal or nuclear and WILL NOT reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Do not sacrifice the largest state park in the lower 48 to a technology that has as its sole “green” attribute the money going to the developers. Forever wild MEANS exactly what it says!
These wind turbines should not be built! Every turbine that is built represents alternative energy tax breaks to the corporations who own them, who also own energy plants which burn fossil fuels! These plants then can pollute for a lot less tax money.
Do not believe these turbine carpetbagggers - they are Trojan horses who are skilled in bait & switch techniques, who divide communities, pitting neighbor against neighbor. There is nothing clean about them or the turbines they are trying to push into communities, under the guise of saving the environment.
These monsters are not quiet, not environmentally safe, ridges must be blasted to install the huge concrete bases
that hold the turbines up. How much CO2 is emitted from thousands of tons of concrete?
Everything the opponents have said about wind turbines is true. Those who live near them wish they had not been fooled into thinking turbines were a good idea. Now it is too late for them, but not too late for you. Stop them at all costs!
France has a moratorium on turbines because they are so awful, and many European countries are sorry now.
We are fighting the same thing in CV. I suggest you take a road trip to Lowville Ny and go stand next to one of these monstronsities and see if you want one these huge things next to your house where you get to listen to the constant drone of these things . What do you do when the wind doesn’t blow , usually when the hottest weather is around , you have to have a normal power plant to be able to pick up the complete load and they are not something you can shut down . also when these things become obsolete in 10-20 years do think the wind developers will come back and pull these things out, hopefully you are not that naive. You get to look at those aging rusty hulks for the rest of your life….
Wind power is not a good alternative. Yes, it does not use oil, coal or natural gas. However, it leaves a huge fingerprint on the environment. The amount of land destroyed to erect wind turbines, transmitters for the turbines, power lines, access road, etc. is enormous. It forever changes the environment, the landscape, the view, the natural habitats, etc.
NO WAY! We humans put up man-made structures that ruin our land, electric lines, pavement, etc. We keep ruining our own land and this is worse because it is under the guise of “green energy.”
sWINDle
That basically sums up the aggressive push for inappropriate sitting of industrial wind turbines. Don’t let the wind developers fool you. They are in it for the money. The environment is of little concern to them. To construct these projects, they receive govt. tax incentives, get out of paying local taxes with PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) programs, and receive green credits (another scam). The town is offered a pittance PILOT compared to the millions the wind company will make. The towns do not get the appropriately compensated for the destruction these projects cause. You will not see any decrease in you electric bill, as a matter of fact there are some electric companies who want you to voluntarily pay $7.50 more a month on you bill for these projects.
The wind developers also want you to believe industrial wind turbines are sooo green. They are machines. They have moving gears and moving parts. They are hundreds of gallons of oil in the machines. These gear oils, mineral oils, hydrolic fluids etc. leak into the soil. Leaks from these turbines have recently contaminated home owners wells. They fail, spin out of control with huge blade flying through the air. Turbines have had electrical fires and have been hit by lightening. Think of what a forest fire that could start.
The wind companies don’t like to admit these things do happens and more often than you may think. They try to make light of the health hazards. Moresville Energy a subsidiary of Invenergy LLC, has an application for a wind project currently in the SEQRA stage in the mountains of Delaware County, N.Y. In the application an operators safety manual for the Vestas V90 turbine (the proposed turbine) was included. That safety manual includes specs on the hazardous materials in these machines.
They include these words, “Toxic to aquatic organisms: may cause long term adverse affects”, “prolonged or repeated exposure may cause dermatitis “ “Used oil may contain harmful impurities” It also warms their employees “Do not stay within a radius of 1300ft from the turbine unless it is necessary.”
Here is the kicker, when Invenergy’s representatives present at a public meeting were asked about these very items. They had no answer. The answer came a few days later when they just removed the sections off the webs site where the public can view the entire application. Their answer was it “proprietary info”. In English, oops you caught us. Wind power has its applications but these company’s are not concerned with saving the planet or peoples health so be very wary of this Trojan horse.
After educating myself with regard to the health issues and the energy effective of wind — I cannot see why we would deface our natural resources with Turbines. They are not a solution — but will end up being a problem to all and taking away peace and traquility that we all need to escape to at times in our lives.
Be Respectful of Nature and rely on alternative energy sources that are more effecient.
Turbines are not an efficient energy source. They pose a threat to both wildlife and humans. Dr. Nina Pierpoint has made a study about effects of turbines on humans. Her book will be released in August. Also, what happens when the wind doesn’t blow or blows more than 30 mph. Coal fired plants are used to power the turbines when the wind doesn’t blow. The turbines are shut down when the wind exceeds 30mph.
wind turbines are shut down when the wind exceeds 55 mph…not 30 as the author suggests. that is because wind generates power at the cube of velocity…at 55 and over…too much power. an increase of just 2 mph typically produces 30% more energy….and no fuel…so no pollution, no climate changing emissions and once built…the cost are stable for life of project because no fuel cost…which we all know is a major problem we face not only at the gas pump but many aspests of our energy dependent lives.
I will be anxious to read Dr. Nina Pierpoint’s forth coming book on “wind syndrome”, assuming there is one…since I do not think there is much evidence she has collected…the book could be more anti wind rant that facts. 18 months ago some folks were arguing that wind farms caused epilepsy…then the national association issued a statement that said no truth to it and the revolutions per minute would have to be 3-4x higher to be close…..so that was the end to wind farms cause epilepsy…but the birth of wind syndorme….sleepliness, agitation, loss of libido, and pretty long list of other effects with Dr. Nina a principle proponnent. Several times I read her material and then reviewed her sources…they are mostly her testimony at township public meetings but no evidence other than her interviews with sympathetic patients. there are no data and no investigations….it is not credible to the health care community….that does not mean that some folks do not have sleepless nights, loss of appetite and anxious moments over wind farms, even when they are only in consideration, but not reality. I have met some and heart goes out to them, but that is very different from wind actually causing heart palipatations and internal organs pulsating in sync with a wind farm.
at the end of the day, we are facing some very signficant energy challenges. wind is one of several solutions, but we need a different energy solution and wind is part of it. the challenges are so strong that I am willing to do wind in Adirondacks…carefully evaluated because it it the best of the generation althernatives….I always prefer conservation and efficiency…but tougher to do…wind is not perfect … but best of alternatives. if we wish to be in control of our energy future, we will need to make some scarfices, and wind seems to be pretty clear…maybe that is why is is 35% of all new energy generation in US and coal only 10%.
happy hiking & hopeful;
The people that live in the areas where Wind Mills are proposed to be located should have the say whether they should be erected there or not. The Government should first checkto see if they are harmful to Humans. Animals and the envireoment The people should have the say ,not the politicans.
I have heard that the turbines last only ten years, and that the company that puts them up, will not take them down - leaving them just standing there. I have also heard of quite a few people having illnesses from the turbines, and have also read of some turbines catching fire. Why go to all this trouble for only 10 years of energy?
Definitely not! Why would anybody want to ruin the pristine natural beauty anywhere near the museum? There needs to be much more honest and unbiased investigations done concerning the price we pay for aesthetics,bird and bat kill,health affects, noise pollution, the actual price we pay per killowatt for wind energy when all state and federal subsidies, tax credits, energy credits, accelerated depreciation,and dependability of power produced, just to name a few. Until we have these answers,this wind energy appears to be the biggest political scam to hit the world. The Adirondack Park should remain natural and untouched by corporate greed.
Until you have an Industrial Wind Facilility proposed “in your backyard” you will likely not take the time, energy and money necessary to research and learn of the negative impacts these monsters cause. If you we truly want to make a difference, we should be pushing for the technology to use trash for powering our vehicles. Our vehicles are the gas gluttens, not the making of electricity.
Fantastic project - compare oil based energy for human warmth and lighting needs versus this - an oil spill will kill wildlife same as the turbines might - and oil supplies are limited and pollute - look at the bigger global picture - possibly bird and bat researchers need to develop ways to keep birds away like a sonic wave system surrounding the wind park. As far as asthetics - the 1980 Winter Olympic ski jumps are a welcome sight every time I return to the Village of Lake Placid - that is the highest manmade structure between Albany NY and Montreal Canada - the view of the Marcy Range takes on a unique perspective with the ski jumps in the foreground in the view from town - if the Barton mine location is zoned Industrial then it is a viable location - I am sure that the year round “local’ citizens would welcome less expensive electrical rates when it gets to 20 below for a month on end each winter
Mike - Wind doesn’t replace oil, coal or gas power plants, so there is no environmental benefit to building turbines. Also, electrical rates don’t generally go down when turbines go up - the huge cost of building them, along with the transmission lines, substations and a government guaranteed high rate for what little electricity they produce sees to that.
The electricity goes on the general grid and does not give any extra electricity to the host community.
Good points - then we need the NY state legislature to review and change the tax subsidies and make sure “X” percent of electricty generated goes to the local communities at a regulated rate - local people who were born in the Park or others who live inside the Blue Line do not have the work opportunities available outside the Park, they would all like possibilities with wind power or maybe more hydro power generation
Mike:
I sympathize with your concerns, but the fact is that wind power will save essentially zero oil. That is the issue, not birds, etc.
No. New York already confiscated park land in the Bronx for a water filtration plant that has proven to be a boondoggle and gone beyond all expense estimates. And it is still not built. The contractor walked out. There are now legal actions underway.
When parkland is taken for public works projects under the guise of benefitting the community, the community suffers from loss of the parkland, and the projects do not necessarily benefit anyone. I am skeptical about wind turbines in forest land. The land will be lost and the native species will be in danger.
We have seen that construction of wind turbines produces massive environmental degradation, not just at the site but to bring in the massive components (120 ft. long blades require wide, heavy roads with large turning radii) and to install the power lines that must carry what electricity is generated. NY State law prohibits local use of WT generated electricity–it must be sold into the statewide grid, so Warren Co. households won’t benefit. WTs are a very poor source of power because the wind is unreliable. You’re being sold a bill of goods. Don’t buy it.
NO - I do not believe that the Barton project should be allowed to be built in the Adirondack State Park - a pristine, wilderness area that was designated a State Park so that it would be preserved as such for future generations to enjoy - not to be exploited by, & for, whoever has the most money & power!
Wind power is NOT a scientifically sound solution to global warming; wind power is NOT economically viable on its own; & wind power is NOT an environmentally responsible energy solution due to these projects’ massive footprints and impacts on miles & miles of terrain - all for a miniscule amount of UNRELIABLE energy.
The only reason industrial wind exists is because businessmen & huge multi-national investors are proposing industrial wind power as part of an energy “solution” to global warming because these businessmen and investors stand to make in excess of 25% on their investment in just a few years time. Where else can anyone get that kind of return on an investment?!?
The way science is supposed to work is this - when a new idea is “proposed” as a potential “solution”, it is up to the “solution” proponents to PROVE its efficacy. So, the ball is in their court. It is up to these investors & businessmen to provide independent, objective PROOF that substiantiates their financially-motivated claims. Where is the proof that windpower saves meaningful amounts of CO2? Where are the actual output numbers to substantiate all the wind industry’s grandiose claims? With some 50,000 turbines in the world today, this should be very easy to do. Yet, this has not yet happened anywhere in the world.
“Wind farm” owners receive HUGE tax breaks and subsidies that shift the tax burdens and costs from the “wind farm” owners to us - the ordinary tax payers and utility rate payers. Wind industry officials have admitted that appproximately 65% of the economic value of a “wind farm” is derived from just 2 federal tax breaks - production tax credits and accelerated depreciation. State incentives cover another 10% of the projects. The amount “wind farm” owners intend to buy the communities off with will be less than 1% of what they stand to reap from the project, while most of these foreign-owned wind companies’ profits will be monies that will leave this country.
Unfortunately, in this politically-correct driven craze to be “green”, poor public policy is motivating multi-national investors to seek to rape our countrysides for their gain at the taxpayers & utility rate payers expense. The costs to our environment, and our pocketbooks, will be irrevocable.
I don’t think there are any multi-national investors or foreign-owned wind companies involved here.
We’re all for the wind turbines!!!
Clean ,free energy given by God. How could we not put it to use?
I truly feel that the world needs to learn to use renewable energy sources and to wean off our dependance on fossil fuels. I am a year-round resident of the park, and while I value the beauty of the scenery, I acknowledge the need for balance within the Blue Line.
We cannot put asthetics above the common good of the people living within the park. The Adirondack Park Agency works with a system of checks and balances, but should also take into account the lives of the residents of said lands.
The Adirondack Park should be kept forever wild without the blight of windmills across its landscape. The natural beauty of Tug Hill has been marred by 195 (and counting) windmills. An early report of bird and bat fatalities for 120 turbines estimated an annual death count in the thousands. Access roads are needed to each tower, further degrading the natural conditions of the land.
Windmills are going up at an alarming rate with inadequate environmental regulations in place. This reckless behavior is not justified when resources could be better utilized to pursue tougher energy conservation policies, and more easily adaptable technology such as solar.
If wildlife and the wild places are lost to massive numbers of windmills, as in the Tug Hill, it seems we are simply trading one evil for another.
Yes I do believe the Barton Mines wind project should be built. Having been to the site, and after hundreds of flights all over the Adirondacks, There is plenty of room for the public & private uses. To me what is ugly throughout the park are the NYMBY crowd that refuses to look for sustainable solutions. Tell me that the cost of oil & propane going forward won’t bankrupt all who live in the north country.
We have to think differently NOW!
Wind Power is just one part of the many alternatives we need to look to for our future. What are we waiting for, build them.