David Webber’s Initial Comment began Sept 25 2014 with new items added as received…
Sept 25 2014
To SFS: These wind developers use every trick in the book. In WV they even rolled out a fake professor to testify at a hearing on wildlife impacts.
Their goal is to break ground and start construction – nothing can stop them at that point.
I have the photos of the construction damage; they ignore rules on running heavy equipment on roads. See what happens to the road surface when the heavy equipment transporters and more run across them.
And of course – in this case – the turbines are shipped from Spain – so much for global warming benefits – all that carbon footprint!
Hope this is helpful. (rest of photos are on this website under WIND NEWS USA – West Virginia)
…………….then later in October David wrote:
Somerset has no idea of the hell coming their way. And these farmers are naive and being duped. I strongly recommend a visit to Keyser WV – to see what these contraptions mean. Also notice in the Mt Storm development – cost $300M – $180M was a loan provided by Venezuela – who is making all the money from the project. Since WV is very Republican it is extremely ironic that this US government funding is subsidizing a socialist country! Finding out who is underwriting the Somerset project, what the loan terms are, absolutely critical. Next the turbines. Where are they being made, Canada, or Spain? Last but not least – the construction project is going to wreck your road network as happened at Mt Storm. The WV State (yes!) then picked up the tab for resurfacing the entire 8 mile section that provides site access.
So much for tax revenue. Hope this helps you push back against these useless contraptions.
………………………..Comment from Traci Schneider…
I still cannot believe that our county is even considering this….after everything they have heard and the noise that will be created not to mention the aesthetics of our beautiful county. Very sad.
That’s not the way any of this works in the US. Corporations trump people. These committees are there to assist companies to do business, provide jobs and pay taxes creating revenues for the bureaucracy to survive.
You are the inconvenient problem that has to be overcome with your complaints and concerns.
Look at the recent Ohio river spill and the toxic lake blooms polluting tap water. If companies thought there would be severe repercussions they would not do these things in the first place.
October 2, 2014
Subject: RE: Ice throw and noise abatement – Story on WBOC Ch 16 News
From: Mark Simmons To David Webber: Here’s the link to the story:
Pretty much what was in the paper. Might be a good place to add comments. Please do so.
From David to Mark Simmons:
That is insightful. 400′ does limit them to smaller turbines. For offshore they are now installing 650′ devices. Basically the physics says the bigger the better in terms of wind use efficiency.
Interesting that they feel the 40 decibels is hard to comply with — that argues for larger setbacks of course.
David also says…
We did not get much love for the ice throw issue in WV case – they can put up plenty of counter points.
However noise abatement is self evident – there are plenty of YouTube videos showing what the noise of these devices is standing 100 feet and 300 feet from one. I would strongly recommend a field trip too. There is nothing like seeing one up close and personal for the first time. These devices are massive industrial machines, not some cute toy in your cereal box. The blade tip is travelling hundred plus miles an hour and the blade weighs 3 tons. See the link below…
Then imagine that it is a still night and you are down wind – so that noise gets carried.
This is not hard for people to grasp. Clearly you would not want your property that close.
………………..David on SFS E-Mail concerning the First Draft by P & Z……
Subject: RE: First Draft of Wind Ordinance produced 9-30-14 from Planning and Zoning
OK – those setback distances are laughably too small. Especially for residencies and county maintained roads.
Are they SERIOUSLY considering putting devices THAT CLOSE to existing homes and roads? Not to mention impacted wildlife.
I would say setback distances need to be at least triple their 1,000 feet – so 1,000 yards – and also no smaller offsets for state and county roads and property lines or residences.
The $5,000 dollar deposit for road consultants time is also derisory. What does that buy – 2 people for a week? This hamstrings any actual review of road needs and use. $50,000 seems a better number.
The penalties for non-compliance seem light. $1,000 per day – if they are facing a $5M bill to repair roads is a cost they may decide to just eat instead! Better to tie the penalty to the amount – so minimum of $1,000 and up to 1% of total cost involved.
Each turbine will need those strobe lights. Do not underestimate the effect of this lighting. It will be visible for miles at night and impact night sky scenes and vistas.
Also – may be a good idea to have them publicly release their SCADA reports on the actual energy generation annually. These are produced 24×7 by the turbines and log the wind, performance and outages. That way public will see precisely how these machines are delivering.
Further point – funding sources. You want them to disclose who the backers are and financiers. Otherwise people may be very surprised who is benefiting from the profits.
Another point of interest is the ramp up, ramp down electrical equipment to cover over to the turbines, and then back off again – as the wind fluctuates. Its not like a on/off switch – they need to install that to connect themselves to the grid. Make sure they are covering that cost – and then who is controlling the process of bringing them online on a daily basis – the local power company needs that control.
……………………………….from Ryan Taylor to SFS Members about David’s remarks:
David makes some excellent points here! Sadly, after watching this ordinance develop through the P&Z meetings, it has become painfully clear to me that our county representatives have zero interest in protecting the citizens of our county. Much of the discussion was for show. For example, the P&Z members said they were concerned about noise, but then made no move at all to actually make effective setbacks.
The second thing that really concerns me about this is how the ordinance was developed. We have been told that we cannot comment unless specifically called upon. Yet Paul Harris has freely interjected throughout and has in fact helped to steer their conversations. A couple of us spoke up about this during the meetings (I even sent Gary Pusey and email regarding this), but it hasn’t seemed to matter. I think an important point we need to make is that this makes the ordinance invalid. If the P&Z have violated their own rules, and allowed the developer to influence the ordinance, then it is an invalid ordinance.
Just another point regarding David’s suggestion of setbacks.
German turbine manufacturer Retexo recommends a 2 km setback (6600′) See link below:
Likewise, Paul Harris has said many times that we should rely on physics to determine safe setbacks for ice throws. Well, here they are in this link to a document from a physicist at Rutgers University. He calculated a 1,700′ ice throw distance and specifically points out where the wind developers use flawed numbers to obtain lower setback distances!
END — TB Continued as more comments arrive from David Webber…. 11/30/2014 EJM