ACTION ALERT: Support Highland Wind Farm

ACTION ALERT – SUPPORT HIGHLAND WIND FARM

DATE:	February 25, 2013
SUBJECT:	Fate of Highland Wind Farm in St. Croix County Hangs in the Balance

In December 2011, Emerging Energies of Wisconsin filed an application with the Wisconsin Public Service Commission (PSC) for permission to construct the $250 million Highland Wind project in St. Croix County. If built, this 102 megawatt (MW) installation would generate enough zero-carbon electricity from its 41-44 turbines to power 30,000 residences.  Constructing Highland Wind would create more than 100 jobs, while operating and maintaining this facility would require six to eight full-time positions. In addition to its job creation impacts, Highland Wind would pump nearly $1 million each year into the local economy, in the form of both lease payments to host landowners as well as shared revenues to host townships and St. Croix County.

To date, Emerging Energies has invested six years and nearly $2 million on this project.  Highland Wind is the only large wind energy project currently in active development in Wisconsin. 

On February 14, 2013, the PSC issued a preliminary decision turning down Emerging Energies’ application to build Highland Wind.  In doing so, the PSC cited concerns over the level of measurable sound propagated by the turbines that could be detected at neighboring residences.  In a nutshell, the PSC wants stronger assurances that Highland Wind’s wind turbines would be able to operate without exceeding the maximum allowable sound emission levels at any time. The PSC will take up the Highland Wind case again at its next open meeting this coming Friday (March 1^st).

On February 22, Emerging Energies filed a request to the PSC to submit additional evidence on the sound propagation issue. The filings came with several affidavits and exhibits to substantiate Emerging Energies’ assurances that the turbines can operate within the sound emissions limits likely to be specified by the PSC. According to Emerging Energies, compliance with sound emission limits will be achieved through the selection of a quieter wind turbine model, one equipped with operational controls that can automatically ramp down output when sensors detect atmospheric conditions conducive to high levels of sound propagation.  Emerging Energies’ filing can be accessed at the link below: http://psc.wi.gov/apps35/ERF_view/viewdoc.aspx?docid=181219

If this filing were accepted into evidence, the PSC would have both the factual foundation and a procedure for approving this project before March 25. As noted in Emerging Energies’ filing, approval of the project by March 25 is necessary to enable the developer to submit the project for consideration in Xcel Energy’s pending solicitation for an additional 200 MW of wind generating capacity.

On Monday February 25^th, RENEW Wisconsin will file comments supporting Emerging Energies’ request to have its February 22 filing entered into the case record as evidence. RENEW also supports Applicant’s request to the Commission not to issue a final denial order in this proceeding, as well as its suggested procedures and related time frames for presenting additional evidence in a manner that allows the Commission to issue a final order by March 25.  The text of RENEW’s two-page filing appear below this Action Alert.

March 1^st is a red-letter day for Highland Wind. Either the PSC will (1) accept Emerging Energies’ filing and with it documentation substantiating Highland Wind’s capacity to operate in full compliance with sound limits established by the PSC in this case, or (2) finalize its denial of Highland Wind.

If the PSC turns down Highland Wind, it’s a pretty safe bet that Emerging Energies will not submit another application to build in that location. A denial would also send a clear signal to all concerned that Wisconsin’s political climate has become positively radioactive for wind development. 

YOU CAN HELP! YOU CAN LET THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE KNOW THAT YOU ARE AMONG THE 85% OF WISCONSIN RESIDENTS WHO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS LIKE HIGHLAND WIND.

Please contact Governor Scott Walker:  Phone (608) 266-1212 or e-mail  govgeneral@wisconsin.gov

ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE WINDPOWER PROJECTS ADVANCE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. NOW IS A GOOD TIME TO COMMUNICATE THAT MESSAGE TO THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our request.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

BEFORE THE

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WISCONSIN

Application of Highland Wind Farm, LLC for a

Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity                                              Docket No. 2535-CE-100

To Construct a 102.5 MW Electric Generation

Facility and Associated Electric Facilities, to be

Located in the Towns of Forest and Cylon,

St. Croix County, Wisconsin

RENEW WISCONSIN’S COMMENTS ON HIGHLAND WIND FARM’S EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO PRESENT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

RENEW Wisconsin respectfully requests the Commission consider the following comments in response to the Emergency Request filed by Highland Wind Farm LLC on February 22, 2013 (PSC REF# 181219). RENEW Wisconsin is an intervener in this proceeding.

RENEW Wisconsin has reviewed the Applicant’s Emergency Request as well as the exhibits and affidavits associated with that filing. Highland Wind’s filings address the central issue—the ability of this project to comply with applicable sound emission limits--that led to the Commission’s motion to deny the Application at its February 14, 2013 open meeting. Applicant’s Emergency Request asks the Commission not to issue a final order denying Highland Wind’s CPCN at its March 1^st open meeting. Instead the Applicant asks the Commission to conduct further discussion of the evidence that is already in the record and, if necessary, to also consider the information contained in the Applicant’s filings as a basis for determining whether the Highland Wind project can comply with the sound limits established by the Commission. Based on our review, RENEW believes that this information warrants Commission consideration. We therefore support Applicant’s request for leave to present additional evidence, as well as its request to allow interveners to respond to its request prior to the next open meeting. RENEW also supports Applicant’s request to the Commission not to issue a final denial order in this proceeding, as well as its suggested procedures and related time frames for presenting additional evidence in a manner that allows the Commission to issue a final order by March 25. 

Discussion: RENEW supports the Applicant’s Emergency Request because we believe that operational curtailment is an appropriate and effective mitigation measure to ensure compliance with applicable sound emissions standards. In fact, we believe that operational curtailment is the most effective tool available to a windpower project operator for reducing sonic output from individual wind turbines to allowable levels. Of the many variables and factors that determine what levels of sound might be measurable at a residence near a wind turbine (e.g., wind speed differential at different elevations, barometric pressure, humidity, background sound levels), the only one that is fully under the project operator’s control is power production.  Operational curtailment limits power generation from turbines, which results in a reduction of sound emissions. The Commission is fully cognizant of the role that operational curtailment can play in controlling sound emissions, as demonstrated by the conditions it imposed on the Glacier Hills wind project in its January 2010 order and by the provisions it approved in the development of PSC 128. In the latter instance, PSC 128.14 explicitly allows project owners to use curtailment procedures to maintain sound emissions below the maximum allowable levels.

Many of today’s utility-scale wind turbines come equipped with automated curtailment protocols that are triggered under a variety of atmospheric conditions. The more sophisticated models can ratchet power production when sensors detect atmospheric conditions that could contribute to long-distance sound propagation. As stated in its Emergency Request, Highland Wind is committed to using only those wind turbine models that are programmed to curtail power output based on real-time atmospheric phenomena such as wind shear. This commitment should remove any lingering uncertainty over whether Highland Wind can operate in full compliance with the sound limits specified by the Commission in this proceeding.

Summary: Apart from the question of whether Highland Wind can comply with sound limits modeled for the Commission’s consideration, this project undeniably advances the public interest in terms of stimulating local economic development, diversifying our region’s resource portfolio, enhancing energy security, and reducing pollution caused by fossil generation sources. We believe that the Applicant is correct that the existing record supports issuance of a CPCN with appropriate conditions.  Moreover, the exhibits and affidavits submitted with Applicant’s Emergency Request fully address any lingering questions that the Commission might have about the project’s sound profile. For that reason, RENEW believes that these filings should be entered into evidence and made a part of the record, so that the Commission has a factually solid foundation for rendering a decision on Highland Wind.

Respectfully submitted this 25^th day of February 2013. 

Wind farm proposal rejected, developer plans another try

More on the Highland Wind Farm PSC decision: an article by Thomas Content of the Journal Sentinel:

State regulators on Thursday rejected an application to build a new wind farm in St. Croix County, citing concerns about turbine noise the project would generate for nearby homes.

The state Public Service Commission voted 2-to-1 to reject Emerging Energies’ proposal to build the Highland wind farm, which was proposed to generate 102.5 megawatts of power from 41 turbines, or eough to supply about 30,000 homes.

Commissioners said that they were rejecting the proposal “without prejudice,” in essence leaving the door open for the developer to file a new application for the project, after it conducts a new noise study using more conservative assumptions about the background noise in the area.

The $250 million Highland project is the first wind farm to be ruled on by the state commission since Republican Gov. Scott Walker appointed two commissioners, a majority of the three-member panel.

Emerging Energies representative Jay Mundinger said after the vote the developer plans to continue its pursuit of a permit for the project.

Commissioner Eric Callisto, the lone remaining appointee of former Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle, said he would have approved the project but would have attached conditions binding the developer to protect nearby landowners from excessive turbine noise.

Noise studies by the applicant found that 20 homes would experience noise levels above the 45 decibel standard at night, but the commission could work with the developer on "micro-siting" issues after new analysis was done, he said.

The Highland project is the only large wind energy project currently in active development in the state. The state’s utilities have already built enough wind farms to comply with the Wisconsin renewable portfolio standard, which requires that 10% of the state’s electricity come from renewable sources by 2015.

During the commission’s meeting in Madison, commissioner Ellen Nowak said the applicant didn’t prove that all the wind project would result in noise levels below 45 decibels at night, the standard that’s in Wisconsin’s wind siting rule.

As a result, she said she concluded the project was not in the public interest.

In their decision, the PSC commissioners decided not to attach special requirements concerning low-frequency noise, after wind consultants studied the impacts of low frequency noise from wind turbines the same developer built near Green Bay.

Reached after the meeting, Mundinger said Emerging Energies would take the commissioners' noise concerns into account but was not giving up on the project.

“We believe that sound, from what we’ve heard, is a big concern, and we believe we can address that and we believe we have a pathway to get the (project permit) in short form,” he said. "We want to make sure we address the sound and be able to move this project forward.”

The company has offered not to use the kind of turbine that it used when developing the Brown County wind farm -- the tallest towers built so far in Wisconsin. Instead, Emerging Emergies has agreed to use two other turbines that don’t generate as much sound, he said.

PSC commissioners said they would not approve the project if it used the loudest of the three turbines Emerging Energies had been considering.

“The turbines are better than ever before,” Mundinger said. “They’re quieter than the ones just 10 years ago.”

Peter McKeever, attorney for the Forest Voice, a group that mobilized in opposition to the wind farm,said he was pleased with the commission’s decision.

Wind farms are difficult to build in Wisconsin because the state’s dairy farming heritage and land use history resulted in smaller farms being closer together rather than large farms that are farther apart on the Great Plains, he said.

“If we want wind to be a really viable energy source we have to get smart about siting wind farms in Wisconsin,” he said.

The state should be leery of developing projects where homeowners could experience problems similar to those found in the Green Bay area project, McKeever said.

At issue in this case is one of the variables in that model – an estimate of how much sound would be absorbed by the ground when the wind turbines are spinning.

In this case, the commission essentially asked Emerging Energies to assume a worst-case scenario:  That the 45-decibel standard will be met at all times, even when there is totally reflective ground – hard frozen ground with no snow or vegetation on it.

The commission adopted a more stringent noise requirement than it did when it approved its most recent wind farm, the We Energies Glacier Hills Wind Park, in 2010, said Katie Nekola, general counsel at the conservation group Clean Wisconsin. However, in that case, there was no challenge to the assumptions used by We Energies in its turbine noise modeling.

She expressed hope that the decision would be a temporary setback for the Highland project.

See the original posting of this article here.

PSC denies Highland Wind Farm

Today, the Public Service Commission denied the Highland Wind Farm application. This is unbelievable, and disappointing. See the press release below:

For Immediate Release
February 14, 2013
Contact: Kristin Ruesch or Matt Pagel, 608-266-9600
Kristin.Ruesch@wisconsin.gov or Matt.Pagel@wisconsin.gov

PSC Issues Decision on Highland Wind Farm Application

MADISON - Today the members of the Public Service Commission decided, on a 2-1 vote, to deny an application of Highland Wind Farm, LLC, for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to construct a 102.5 Megawatt (MW) Wind Electric Facility in the Towns of Forest and Cylon in St. Croix County.

The majority commissioners determined a clearer record and a better demonstration that noise from the wind turbines would not exceed Commission standards was needed before making a decision to grant a CPCN. Highland Wind Farm, LLC, will be able to reapply to the Commission if an improvement to modeling and additional information is presented in a subsequent application.

Background Information on the Application

In December of 2011, Highland Wind Farm, LLC, filed an application with the Commission for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) to construct a new wind electric generation facility. The project would have included the construction of up to 44 wind turbines, with an electric generating capacity of up to 102.5 megawatts.

Since the application was received, the Commission granted requests to intervene in the proceeding to Clean Wisconsin, Forest Voice, Inc., RENEW Wisconsin, and the Town of Forest, and granted intervenor compensation requests to Clean Wisconsin and Forest Voice. The Commission held multiple technical hearings in Madison; held public hearings in the project area, and accepted expert and public comments online and via U.S. mail. All documents, testimony, and comments submitted in the proceeding are available to the public at the PSC web site, http://psc.wi.gov, by entering docket number 2535-CE-100 in the Electronic Regulatory Filing System.

###

Clean Wisconsin: No link between wind farm sound and health impacts

Clean Wisconsin
Your environmental voice since 1970.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 2, 2013
Contact: Tyson Cook, Staff Scientist, 608.251.7020 ext. 27

Study Finds No Link Between Wind Farm Sound and Health Impacts

Testing finds sound below threshold of hearing in homes near wind farm

Shirley, Wis. – A series of tests on homes near the Shirley Wind Farm in Brown County found no evidence linking low frequency sound from wind turbines to health impacts, according to a study released late last week.

“After testing three homes near the Shirley Wind Farm, scientists were unable to measure any low-frequency sound from wind turbines above the threshold of human hearing from within the homes,” explains Tyson Cook, staff scientist at Clean Wisconsin. “There are no peer-reviewed studies showing negative health impacts from wind turbine sounds below the threshold of hearing.”

The testing was conducted in early December 2012 by four independent firms at the request of the Public Service Commission (PSC). The PSC requested the testing as it decides whether to approve the Highland Wind Project, a proposal to construct a wind farm in St. Croix County that would bring clean, renewable energy to 29,000 homes and create up to 100 jobs.

“It’s important that we fully understand the impacts of our energy sources, which is why we wanted to see this study conducted,” said Cook. “Like others, this study finds no physical link between wind farm sound and negative health impacts.”

Wind farms offset the need to burn fossil fuels, which result in harmful pollution that threatens the health of our families. A poll conducted by a bipartisan research team in January of 2012 found that 85 percent of Wisconsin voters would like to increase the use of wind energy to meet the state’s future energy needs.

“While there is no evidence directly linking wind farms to negative health impacts, there are volumes of studies showing the disastrous impact of air and water pollution from burning fossil fuels,” said Cook. “By moving toward clean, safe energy choices like wind, we can help improve the health of families across Wisconsin.”

###

Clean Wisconsin, an environmental advocacy organization, protects Wisconsin’s clean water and air and advocates for clean energy by being an effective voice in the state legislature and by holding elected officials and polluters accountable. Founded in 1970 as Wisconsin’s Environmental Decade, Clean Wisconsin exposes corporate polluters, makes sure existing environmental laws are enforced, and educates citizens and businesses. On behalf of its 10,000 members and its coalition partners, Clean Wisconsin protects the special places that make Wisconsin such a wonderful place to live, work and play. www.cleanwisconsin.org.

Commentary: How Wisconsin regulators 'tax' renewable energy

Michael Vickerman's commentary in Midwest Energy News on the recent changes in WI renewable energy. Find the original post here.

Commentary: How Wisconsin regulators ‘tax’ renewable energy

RENEW Wisconsin's Michael Vickerman

Starting next January, the price of purchasing renewable energy voluntarily through monthly utility bills will spike to all-time highs, thanks to recent decisions rendered by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW) on two popular “green pricing” programs.

The thousands of Madison Gas & Electric (MGE) customers participating in the utility’s Green Power Tomorrow program will see their premiums jump from 2.5 cents/kWh to 4 cents/kWh. That’s an increase of 60 percent. To translate this into dollars and cents, an average MGE customer consuming 500 kWh of electricity per month and subscribing at the 100 percent level will pay $90 more in 2013 for the same amount of renewable kWh sold this year.

Residential customers of Milwaukee-based We Energies (WE) will see an even larger percentage increase next year. In that utility’s rate case, the PSCW jacked up the premium paid by Energy for Tomorrow subscribers by nearly 73 percent, from 1.39 cents to 2.4 cents/kWh. Energy for Tomorrow has more than 20,000 subscribers.

Back in 1999, the year both programs were launched, MGE and WE customers paid an extra 3.33 cents and 2.04 cents/kWh, respectively, for the renewable energy they sponsored. Come January 1st, MGE and WE will likely share the dubious distinction of being the only utilities in the country offering renewable energy at a higher rate than they did in the 1990’s. So much for progress.

Adding insult to injury, renewable program subscribers will be subject to general rate increases approved by the PSCW this November. The utilities sought higher rates to recover the costs of retrofitting older coal-fired power stations with modern pollution controls. The fact that the renewable generators leveraged by program participants will never need pollution control retrofits is wholly disregarded in determining the size of the premium.

This is unquestionably a subsidy that flows from program participants to all ratepayers.

How did this happen?
Since 1999, renewable generation costs have tumbled, while productivity has improved.
A frustrated program subscriber might well ask: If base utility rates are going up, and the cost of renewable electricity is declining, why are premiums going up instead of down?

The short answer is that wholesale electricity prices have sagged in recent years, owing to a combination of unsustainably low natural gas prices, stagnant demand, and rapid expansion of wind power displacing higher-cost generation. In contrast, the price of renewable energy procured under long-term contracts held steady. When prices dropped in the wholesale market beginning in late 2008, the gap between system energy and renewable sources widened.

Though accurate, the above explanation is deeply unsatisfying, because the wholesale “market” is concerned about one thing only: the marginal cost of producing electricity into the grid. Nothing else matters, including the expenditures approved by the PSCW to reduce emissions from older generators. Even though retail customers wind up footing the bill for those upgrades, the wholesale market does not treat pollution control retrofits as marginal costs. Not one cent paid by ratepayers for these expenditures is reflected in the prices that renewable generators compete against.

The net effect of this disconnect is to artificially suppress the price of electricity from older and dirtier generators relative to newer and cleaner electricity producers. Real markets factor in the cost of upgrading and replacing capital equipment that manufacture the product bought by customers. What we have instead is an artificial contrivance that sacrifices long-term considerations like clean air, resource diversity and regulatory risk for the short-term reward of low prices.

Indeed, it would be difficult to design a more punitive market structure for renewables than the one we have at present.

‘Swimming up a waterfall’
Pricing renewable energy against a market operating in real time also undermines a valuable attribute of renewable energy, namely its inherent price stability. In this environment, the only way a customer can directly benefit from a fixed-price energy source like solar is to self-generate at his or her premises to reduce consumption of grid-supplied electricity.

In setting the premium size, the PSCW relied on pricing data at a time when the regional wholesale market was near its cyclical bottom. Electricity prices are now edging upward as forward prices of natural gas have rebounded from historic lows earlier this year. It’s a safe bet that wholesale electricity prices will continue to increase in 2013.

This sets up the very real possibility that WE and MGE will collect more revenue than is necessary to cover the cost spread between system energy and the renewable energy supplies servicing their customers. Unfortunately, the next time the base premium for each utility can be adjusted is January 1, 2015.

For at least a century now, fossil fuels have been the default resource option for most utilities. Against this institutional bias, switching to renewable energy is akin to swimming upstream. But given how far backward the PSCW bent to accommodate utilities’ continued reliance on coal and natural gas, quite a few renewable energy subscribers may balk at the prospect of swimming up a waterfall.

In fairness to MGE and WE, the price hikes approved by the PSCW went well beyond the incremental increases proposed by the two utilities. That’s because the agency relies solely on the wholesale “market” metric described above that filters out all societal benefits from the equation. To the agency, renewables are another source of electrons that deserve no special consideration. And, in reaching its decision, the PSCW disregarded the potential impact that abrupt price hikes might have on customer participation.

Programs outliving their usefulness?
A significant loss in subscribership would be a regrettable outcome if the programs were still viable vehicles for leveraging new sources of renewable energy. Sadly, that is no longer the case.

Earlier this decade, WE and MGE pulled the plug on a popular feature of their programs, specifically the special solar energy buyback rates that were funded with participant dollars. This innovation, which spurred the installation of hundreds of solar electric systems in their territories, succeeded in elevating MGE and WE’s stature while achieving the aims of their participating customers. However, when the utilities eliminated their solar incentives, they also removed the principal rationale for subscribing to their programs.

It seems quite clear that the current crop of voluntary renewable energy programs have outlived their usefulness. They are stagnating under a market structure that distorts and amplifies their true costs as well as a regulatory climate that greatly discounts their benefits to ratepayers. What were once dynamic vehicles for increasing supplies of renewable energy are now little more than feel-good marketing exercises running on autopilot. The value proposition to customers just isn’t there anymore.

There is nothing out there to prevent utilities from revitalizing their green pricing programs and making them useful once again. Such an undertaking, however, would require them to do something they haven’t done before: present an affirmative case for adding more renewables into their energy mix.

To do that effectively, utilities would need to recognize that the fossil energy path leads to a dead-end and that renewables ought to be the default resource option going forward. From that starting point, designing a program in which modest customer premiums actually result in additional supplies of renewable energy should be a simple and straightforward exercise.

It’s the very least a responsible utility should do to reduce the impact of generating electricity on the one planet we are privileged to call home.

Michael Vickerman is program and policy director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization. RENEW Wisconsin is a member of RE-AMP, which also publishes Midwest Energy News.

Find the original article post here.

Company and Local Officials Team Up to Advance “Epic” Wind Project

Immediate release

October 15, 2012

More information

Michael Vickerman

608.255.4044, ext. 2

State’s largest customer-owned renewable energy system breaks ground in Dane County

(Madison) – Within a day after receiving the go-ahead from the Springfield town board, heavy construction equipment broke ground on Epic Systems’ Galactic Wind Farm, a six-turbine facility along U.S. Highway 12 in western Dane County.  The 10- megawatt project should begin producing power by year’s end.

Epic Systems’ project, the third customer-owned windpower installation to go forward this year, will be larger than the two-turbine Cashton Greens project in Monroe County and the two-turbine Waxdale project in Racine County.  Organic Valley and Gundersen Lutheran completed their Cashton project earlier this year, while S. C. Johnson is building its Waxdale project, which should be operational in December of this year.

“Epic’s project came together because of four factors: a company committed to long-term sustainability, a spirit of cooperation among town and county officials, strong local support, and a favorable tax climate,” said Michael Vickerman, program and policy director for RENEW Wisconsin, a nonprofit advocacy organization promoting renewable energy use in Wisconsin.

Epic also owns and operates Wisconsin’s largest solar electricity facility on its Verona campus, which it completed this summer.

The Springfield town board approved Epic’s project on a 5 to zero vote.  No one at the board meeting expressed any objections to the project.

“I can easily foresee other sustainability-minded Wisconsin companies pursuing wind turbines to produce electricity for their own operations, as long as Congress acts quickly to extend the federal Production Tax Credit, which levels the playing field between wind energy and fossil-fuel generation,” said Vickerman.

           

END

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) that leads and represents businesses, and individuals who seek more clean, renewable energy in Wisconsin.  More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Wind project proposed for Dane County

It's official - Check out this article from Steven Verburg in the Wisconsin State Journal:

Epic Systems plans six wind turbines northwest of Madison

Dane County's first array of commercial wind turbines will rise hundreds of feet above the rolling hills along Highway 12 northwest of Madison under plans Epic Systems of Verona hatched over the last four weeks.

The plan had to move quickly so that Epic can take advantage of federal tax credits that expire Dec. 31, said Bruce Richards, the medical software manufacturer's director of facilities and engineering.

Six turbines — each with three 135-foot blades spinning atop a 262-foot tower — will be visible from the tall buildings in Downtown Madison, including the Capitol, and the electricity they generate will help Epic offset most of its energy needs on its sprawling Verona campus.

. . .

A geothermal system heats and cools the Verona campus, and solar panels already generate electricity. The addition of the turbines will mean the company can provide about 85 percent of its own energy needs by 2014, Richards said.

"What sticks out to me is Epic's incredible commitment to renewable energy," said Dane County Executive Joe Parisi, whose administration has expedited permits for the company.

Morse Group president Lou Rotello said his company will serve as engineering, procurement and construction contractor on the project, which will employ about 75 construction workers.

The site is a good one in part because almost all of the homes that could be affected by noise or flickering shadows from the turbine blades are occupied by family members of the landowners who are leasing their land for the towers, Rotello said.

The ridge isn't the windiest spot in the county, but studies indicate it will be gusty enough to spin the blades at 27 percent of their full-speed capacity each year, Rotello said.

The turbines have a capacity of 9.9 megawatts, which will qualify them as one of 10 "major" wind power generators in Wisconsin, said Deborah Irwin, the state Public Service Commission's renewable energy specialist.

Read the full article here.

Federal court supports wind developer, fines anti-wind attorneys

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 5, 2012
Contact: Jay Mundinger
414-736-9245

Lawsuit against Emerging Energies deemed “frivolous”, attorneys forced to pay $1,500

(Madison, Wis.) – Emerging Energies of Wisconsin, LLC, the developer of the proposed Highland Wind Farm, thought they had been legally wronged by wind farm opponents (The Forest Voice) and their attorneys back in 2011, and a federal court ruled they were correct.

In a decision dated September 30, 2012, District Judge William M. Conley ruled that the claims against EEW by leaders of the Forest Voice (Plaintiffs: Judi Beestman, Bill Dyer, Jeff Ericson, Brenda Salseg, Robert Salseg and Scott Voeltz) and their attorneys (Glenn Stoddard, Patricia Keahna) were “frivolous.”

 “…the court finds that plaintiffs’ claims against Emerging Energies…were ‘baseless or made without a reasonable and competent inquiry.’ ” – Judge William M. Conley

 “We have been completely transparent through this entire process as we’ve tried to bring clean, renewable energy to St. Croix County,” said Jay Mundinger. “Some very responsible town officials lost their jobs after initially approving our Highland Wind Farm project two years ago, and we’ve been fighting ever since. We feel a level of vindication here.”

The $250 million Highland project, as proposed, in the Town of Forest will generate 102.5 megawatts of electricity from 41 turbines – enough to power 30,000 homes. After receiving initial approval from the Town of Forest Board and its three members in 2010, they were all eventually recalled and the new board has been challenging the project to-date.

The federal ruling also found:

“…as officers of the court, Attorneys Stoddard and Keahna should have known they had no legal or factual basis to name Emerging Energies as a defendant…” – Judge Conley

The court ordered Stoddard to pay EEW $1,000 and Keahna $500 for their frivolous action.

Public Service Commission hearings for the Highland Wind Farm are scheduled to begin next week in Madison and the Town of Forest.

“We continue to believe this project will provide meaningful economic benefits and payments to the communities here and help Wisconsin develop cleaner sources of electricity for consumers,” said Mundinger.

Highland Wind Farm Specifics: 

• 26,550 acre project boundary 
• 41 turbine sites with 11 additional alternative locations
• 100 + member construction workforce  6-8 permanent employees for wind farm operations 
• 6,200 acres already under lease from property owners for turbine sites, access roads, distribution lines
• Connects to Xcel Energy’s 161-kilovolt transmission line near Forest-Cylon town line.

 -END-

Two wind farm open houses, Sept. 25 & Sept. 27

Learn more about two proposed wind farms in northeast Wisconsin. Ask questions of the development teams. Refreshments!

Beautiful Hill Wind Farm Open House
Tuesday, September 25
4:30-7:30 PM
Fox Hills Resort
250 Church Street
Mishicot, WI 54228

Windy Acres Wind Farm
Thursday, September 27
4:30-7:30 PM
Silver Creek Fire Department
W6566 Wisconsin 144
Random Lake, WI 53075

Grothman would take state backward

An editorial in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

No, Mr. Grothman, wind energy is not tearing the state apart, and in fact, most of the state's utilities are well-positioned to meet the state's renewable standard requirement in 2015. Increasing the use of renewable energy in Wisconsin is needed to reduce the state's reliance on fossil fuels and to thus meet the challenges posed by climate change. The state needs more wind farms and solar panels and other renewable sources - for energy reasons and for the jobs these industries can produce.

But Sen. Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend) wants to take the state backward, perhaps largely because he's heard from constituents upset over a proposed small wind farm in his district. He said he will introduce legislation to freeze the state's renewable energy portfolio at the 2012 level, despite the fact that most utilities are already prepared to meet the 2015 level of 10%. He said the 10% was a mistake, and that wind farm proposals tear "at the fabric of Wisconsin communities."

Grothman has a penchant for the overdramatic, but he's wrong on this. Where has he been? Has he missed the wind farms that have been going up all around the state? All he needs to do is take a trip from West Bend to Fond du Lac on US 45 to get an eyeful. They don't despoil the landscape and they haven't caused major problems for most neighbors. And they've certainly enhanced the state's energy portfolio.

Given the success of these efforts, the rising concerns over climate change and the potential jobs that are at stake, Grothman should pull back on his threat to take Wisconsin backward.

Speak up for wind at Sheboygan County meeting, Sept. 4

Anti-wind forces plan to flood the meeting of the Town of Sherman (Sheboygan County) board to protest a four-turbine project proposed by Emerging Energies, a Wisconsin company.

The town board members need to hear from pro-wind advocates like you!

Can you possibly attend a pre-meeting at 5:30 on September 4 at Kettleview RE?

Maureen Faller, co-owner of Kettleview RE, wrote a terrific guest column to lay out the benefits of wind energy, and she will lead the pre-meeting to give you ideas for what you might say if you want to speak during the public hearing.

You don't have to say anything, if you don't want to. Your presence will speak volumes!

The anti-wind forces ran ads in local papers to turn rally more people to their obstructionist effort.

We're up against well-funded, well-organized zealots!

Speak up for wind!!

Town of Sherman wind farm good for community

A letter to the editor of the Sheboygan Press written by Maureen Faller, a member of the board of directors of RENEW and co-owner of Kettle View Renewable Energy:

It is not surprising that the proposed Windy Acres Wind Farm project in the Town of Sherman has become a highly emotional debate. However, as a citizen, tax payer and small business owner in the Town of Sherman, I am concerned about the vast amount of misleading information that is being circulated throughout our community.

We’ve been barraged with flyers of burning wind turbines, yet the likelihood of this occurring is less than .001% based on 165,000 wind turbines installed worldwide. By comparison, our local fire department was dispatched to two car fires this month alone.

We’ve heard about the wind turbines affecting our property values, however an independent study conducted by the firm Poletti and Associates recently concluded otherwise. In Kewaunee County, which hosts two of the oldest commercial wind projects in the United States, their report suggests no statistically significant effect on the sale of homes or construction of new homes. Furthermore, there is no credible evidence that existing wind development in Wisconsin has depressed property values statewide. In fact, according to data compiled by the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance on property values and levies, in Fond du Lac County, equalized valuation actually increased by 1.2% during that time, while Dodge and Kewaunee counties managed smaller declines than the statewide average during that period.

We’ve been told of the ensuing health effects that will plague our families and animals. However, thorough studies by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and Massachusetts Department of Public Health, the Australian Government National Health & Medical Research Council, the Chief Medical Officer of Health of Ontario, Canada and the United Kingdom have each concluded that wind turbines do not pose a health threat. More recently, Kitty Rhoades, the Deputy Secretary of the State of Wisconsin Department of Health Services and Governor Walker appointee, could not have been more clear when she affirmed Wisconsin’s stance that the “levels of noise, flicker and infrasound measured from wind turbines at current setback distances do not reach those that have been associated with objective physical health effects.”

No significant impact from proposed Emerging Energy wind farm in St. Croix County

From a story by Jeff Holmquist in the Pierce County Herald:

Developers of the proposed Highland Wind Farm in the Town of Forest, Wis. will not be required to complete an environmental impact statement.

The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin issued a decision on the possible EIS requirement on July 25.

While the five-page document outlines several potential impacts that the wind farm project could have on landowners and the surrounding landscape, its conclusion is that there is “no significant impact” expected from the proposal.

Forcing an EIS typically slows down the approval process for such projects. With last week’s decision, final approval of the 41-turbine wind farm might come in the next few months.

Jay Mundinger, founding principal of the Highland Wind Farm project, said he was very pleased with the news.

Highland developers have worked with expert consultants to design and install the project in such a way that it would have little or no impact on the community, Mundinger said. He said the PSC apparently recognized that is the case as well.

“We’ve worked hard to protect the environment,” he said.

The PSC’s preliminary environmental assessment acknowledged that the large turbines would “affect the visual character” of the township. There may also be some increase in “ambient noise” near the turbines and “shadow flicker” (the blinking created on homes as the sun is blocked by the twirling blades) when the project is installed, the report concedes. There would also likely be some bird and bat losses as a result of the turning turbines, the report states.

But taking everything into consideration, the report’s author, Environmental Planning Analyst Kathy Zuelsdorff, concluded that the impacts are “typical of modern wind projects” and “would not result in significant environmental effects on the human environment.”

U.S. wind group: No evidence to support Sen. Lasee's anti-wind claims

From a commentary in the Fond du Lac Reporter by John Anderson, director of siting policy for the American Wind Energy Association:

Wisconsin State Sen. Frank Lasee’s recent statements regarding the potential health effects of wind turbines are not supported by numerous government and peer-reviewed studies in the U.S., Canada, Australia and the U.K.

The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and Massachusetts Department of Public Health recently published the “Wind Turbine Health Impact Study: Report of Independent Expert Panel.” Most notably, the authors of this report concluded:

• There is no evidence for a set of health effects from exposure to wind turbines that could be characterized as “Wind Turbine Syndrome.”

• Claims that infrasound from wind turbines directly impacts the vestibular system have not been demonstrated scientifically. Available evidence shows that the infrasound levels near wind turbines cannot impact the vestibular system.

• The strongest epidemiological study suggests that there is not an association between noise from wind turbines and measures of psychological distress or mental health.

• None of the limited epidemiological evidence reviewed suggests an association between noise from wind turbines and pain and stiffness, diabetes, high blood pressure, tinnitus, hearing impairment, cardiovascular disease, and headache/migraine.

• Scientific evidence suggests that shadow flicker does not pose a risk for eliciting seizures.

State review contradicts anti-wind senator's assertions

From the above letter written by Kitty Rhoades, deputy secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Health Services:

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services has reviewed the scientific literature on the issue of wind turbines and health, and we will continue to do so as new studies are published. Our review of cunent scientific knowledge indicates that levels of noise, flicker and infrasound measured from wind turbines at current setback distances do not reach those that have been associated with objective physical health effects. The Department has considered previous requests to conduct formal epidemiologic studies in Wisconsin, and Division of Public Health staff have discussed this issue with colleagues at UW School of Medicine and Public Health, other state health departments, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, we have been unable to identify a study design or methodology that could provide a constructive conclusion to the individual concerns that have been raised. If such a study were performed, we would review its methodology and findings. [Emphasis added]

Cashton Greens Community Wind Project Plows New Ground

Immediate release: July 18, 2012

More information:
Michael Vickerman Director, Program and Policy
608.255.4044, ext. 2, mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

 Two-turbine project sets a number of firsts for Wisconsin

 A vision of Wisconsin’s renewable energy future came to life with the dedication today of the two-turbine Cashton Greens Wind Farm, Wisconsin‘s first community wind development. This five megawatt project rises alongside Organic Valley Cooperative’s distribution center in this village 40 miles southeast of La Crosse.

Owned by La Farge-based Organic Valley Cooperative and Gunderson Lutheran Health System, La Crosse, Cashton Greens will generate enough electricity to offset the energy use for Organic Valley’s corporate headquarters and distribution center, as well as 5% of Gundersen Lutheran’s energy needs.

“This ground-breaking community wind project represents a number of firsts for Wisconsin,” said Michael Vickerman, director of programs and policies for RENEW Wisconsin, a renewable energy advocacy organization.

“Cashton Greens is both Wisconsin’s largest customer-owned renewable energy installation and the largest ever to receive a grant from Focus on Energy, the state’s energy efficiency and renewable energy program,” Vickerman said. It is also the first wind project permitted following the enactment of Wisconsin’s three-year-old wind siting law (2009 Act 40).The Village of Cashton approved the project in June 2010.

“RENEW and all of our members salute the team of Organic Valley, Gundersen Lutheran, and the village of Cashton for their audacious commitment to energy independence,” said Vickerman. “They are plowing ground that will result in new renewable energy systems supporting Wisconsin’s economic vitality while protecting its environmental health.”

“This project clearly shows that Wisconsin energy customers are eager to move forward to reduce their use of fossil fuels. Rather than wait for their utilities to act, many of them are now taking the initiative and installing systems to supply their own businesses and residences with clean renewable energy produced,” he said.

Organic Valley is America’s largest cooperative of organic farmers and one of the nation’s leading organic brands. Gundersen Health System provides health services to its patients at is hospital and clinics throughout west Wisconsin, southeast Minnesota, and northeast Iowa.

-END-

RENEW Wisconsin is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization that leads and represents businesses, organizations, and individuals who seek more clean renewable energy in Wisconsin. More information on RENEW’s Web site at www.renewwisconsin.org.

Business group asks senator to end "unsubstantiated attacks on wind"

From a news release issued by the Wisconsin Energy Business Association:

Wisconsin Businesses Call on Sen. Lasee to End His War on Wind 

Unsubstantiated attacks on wind industry are preventing economic growth across Wisconsin 

In another attempt to hinder wind development and economic growth in Wisconsin, state Senator Frank Lasee (R-De Pere) is demanding that the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin revisit the state’s uniform wind siting rule, PSC 128—a rule that is the product of years of work by the Commission, a citizen advisory council, and industry experts. His most recent attacks are based on the demonstrably false claim that wind energy facilities cause adverse health impacts.

“Senator Lasee’s ongoing hostility towards Wisconsin’s wind industry is preventing real economic growth,” said Chris Kunkle of the Wisconsin Energy Business Association. “National companies looking to invest in Wisconsin’s economy see these unwarranted and baseless attacks and continue to stay out of Wisconsin.”

Medical professionals are unwavering in their repeated analysis that there is no discernible correlation between wind energy generation and negative health impacts. This was stated most recently in a report to the Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health that definitively concluded there is “no foundation for a set of symptoms that is called Wind Turbine Syndrome” and was also recently affirmed by Wisconsin’s Department of Health Services (DHS). . . .

RENEW responds to Sen. Lasee's latest, meaningless anti-wind joust

In his latest anti-wind publicity stunt, State Senator Frank Lasee (R-De Pere) brought a few of his constituents to Madison to ask the PSC for relief from the supposed impact of the Shirley Wind Farm on their lives.

In response to Lasee on Madison's WKOW-TV, RENEW's Michael Vickerman said:

"Sen. Lasee has been waging an ideological war against wind power for a long time," said Michael Vickerman of the green energy group Renew Wisconsin.

Vickerman believes that is what is really behind Sen. Lasee's crusade, adding that no credible studies have found what the people from Shirley are claiming.

"The one prepared for the Massachusetts Department of Public Health specifically says 'we cannot find any foundation for a set of symptoms that is called Wind Turbine Syndrome,'" said Vickerman.

Additionally, Vickerman made the following rebuttals during the entire interview:

1. The Shirley project was approved five years ago by the Glenmore Town Board. The PSC had nothing to do with that project. The PSC has no jurisdiction over this facility. The statewide siting rule took effect after the Shirley project was placed in service. This is political grandstanding, pure and simple.

2. Sen. Frank Lasee has been conducting an ideologically driven war against windpower for years. Supporters of his anti-wind crusade include the WI Realtors Association (WRA) and several wealthy landowners living in Brown and Calumet County.

3. The adverse health effects claimed by Sen. Lasee were scrutinized by a group of independent health experts under the aegis of the Massachusetts Dept. of Public Health. The experts concluded that there is no scientific basis for concluding that wind generation impairs public health.

4. There is absolutely zero evidence substantiating WRA’s contention that wind generation has reduced property values in Wisconsin.

5. Sen. Lasee has two other wind projects in his district, both in Kewaunee County. These two installations, placed in service in 1999 and totaling 31 turbines, are the oldest continuously operating windpower projects in the state. No one in Kewaunee County has reported any kind of health effects from these turbines. Yet Sen. Lasee refuses to acknowledge that fact. Nor does he acknowledge the degree of community acceptance there that has evolved over the projects' 13 year-lives.

6. I characterized the wind opposition as a small but vocal minority that either does not exist in neighboring states or is less well organized there.

7. Lasee’s tireless advocacy on behalf of forces opposed to windpower has caused nationally prominent wind developers to leave the state in search of greener pastures.

Glacier Hills Wind Park open house, July 18, Cambria

Glacier Hills Wind Park, located in the towns of Randolph and Scott in Columbia County, is designed to generate 162 megawatts of electricity, equivalent to the electricity used by approximately 45,000 average residential homes annually. The site consists of 90 wind turbines. Construction of the project began in May 2010. On Dec. 20, 2011, Glacier Hills Wind Park was placed into commercial operation.

WE Energies invites you to visit our facility and learn more about wind energy.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012
3 - 7 p.m.
Glacier Hills Wind Park
N7844 County Hwy H
Cambria, WI 53923

Tours will be given approximately every 30 minutes. Please stop by at your convenience during the tour hours listed above. No reservations required. The turbine is located a short walking distance from the parking area.

Please wear sturdy shoes suitable for walking on gravel.

Manufacturing the future TODAY

A welcome video from AWEA to those attending WindPower2012 in Atlanta.