Post #: 143
This company is serious. I wonder what hardware they'll be using. I figure they've got to be either making or thinking of making their own turbines.
I wonder what their competition is thinking?
E.ON takes first step into U.S. renewables markethttp://www.reuters.co...
Thu Oct 4, 2007 12:43pm EDT
FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Germany's E.ON (EONG.DE: Quote, Profile, Research), the world's largest utility, is taking its first step into the U.S. market for renewable energy with the takeover of wind farms there for $1.4 billion including debt.
With the acquisition of the American division of Ireland's Airtricity, E.ON is buying current and future projects with a total capacity of more than 7,000 megawatts in the United States and Canada, the German company said in a statement on Thursday.
"E.ON is late in renewables, but it makes clear it's strongly committed to picking up," London-based UBS analyst Per Lekander said. "Valuations in the area are high and can only be justified by the expectation of future projects."
The takeover is Chief Executive Wulf Bernotat's largest acquisition in the area of renewable energy and first in the sector outside Europe, as countries worldwide seek to lower their dependence on ever-costlier fossil fuels.
E.ON said in August it bought wind parks in Spain and Portugal for 722 million euros ($1.02 billion) in one of its first takeovers in the sector.
E.ON shares closed up 0.1 percent at 127.57 euros, while the German benchmark index DAX (.GDAXI: Quote, Profile, Research) ended the day down 0.1 percent.
The acquisitions complement the company's own projects in areas such as the North Sea.
The price includes $553 million in net debt and shareholder loans, E.ON said. The purchased division now operates wind farms with around 210 megawatts and another 880 megawatts will be installed by 2009, the company said.
Projects totaling more than 1,000 megawatts, which require $3.5 billion in investment, are in an advanced development stage, and plans for 5,000 megawatts -- including at locations in Canada -- are at an early development stage, E.ON said.
"It is a further step towards establishing a leading international position in the renewables business," E.ON said in the statement.
Airtricity said it would plough the proceeds of the sale of the unit into its European business, currently supplying more than 35,000 commercial customers.
In Europe, Airtricity operates wind farms in Ireland, Britain, the Netherlands and Germany and has plans to create a European "supergrid" of offshore wind power generators.
Airtricity has around 400 employees and had turnover of around 177 million euros last year.
Post #: 158
Power output, wind speed, material costs, noise due to flutter, etc., are all missing. It seems a PV solution would be better in many cases but there must be some instances this might be useful.
Perhaps on a tall building, which is always exposed to the wind, this product might somehow be deployed. (In addition to PV.) Perhaps in desolate wind swept locations that where weight is not an issue.
Working in Haiti, Shawn Frayne, a 28-year-old inventor based in Mountain View, Calif., saw the need for small-scale wind power to juice LED lamps and radios in the homes of the poor. Conventional wind turbines don?t scale down well?there?s too much friction in the gearbox and other components. ?With rotary power, there?s nothing out there that generates under 50 watts,? Frayne says. So he took a new tack, studying the way vibrations caused by the wind led to the collapse in 1940 of Washington?s Tacoma Narrows Bridge (aka Galloping Gertie).http://www.popularmec...
Frayne?s device, which he calls a Windbelt, is a taut membrane fitted with a pair of magnets that oscillate between metal coils. Prototypes have generated 40 milliwatts in 10-mph slivers of wind, making his device 10 to 30 times as efficient as the best microturbines. Frayne envisions the Windbelt costing a few dollars and replacing kerosene lamps in Haitian homes. ?Kerosene is smoky and it?s a fire hazard,? says Peter Haas, founder of the Appropriate Infrastructure Development Group, which helps people in developing countries to get environmentally sound access to clean water, sanitation and energy. ?If Shawn?s innovation breaks, locals can fix it. If a solar panel breaks, the family is out a panel.?
Frayne hopes to help fund third-world distribution of his Windbelt with revenue from first-world applications?such as replacing the batteries used to power temperature and humidity sensors in buildings. ?There?s not a huge amount of innovation being done for people making $2 to $4 per day,? Haas says. ?Shawn?s work is definitely needed.?
n a conventional wind generator, gears help transfer the motion of the spinning blades to a turbine where an electric current is induced. The Windbelt is simpler and more efficient in light breezes?a magnet mounted on a vibrating membrane simply oscillates between wire coils.
Post #: 162
This is just the start. Over the next few decades huge ocean wind farms will supply most of the worlds energy.
North Sea to Get 200 Wind Turbineshttp://www.iran-daily...
Engineers last week unveiled the largest wind turbines ever connected to the UK national grid: two massive generators that tower 300ft over the North Sea 15 miles from the Scottish coast. Now the project?s backers say they are preparing plans to construct 200 of these huge turbines, creating a gigantic wind farm with the capacity to provide power for an entire city.
Both the devices erected in water 150ft deep in the Beatrice oil field are fitted with three 200ft blades and can generate 5 megawatts of power, enough to supply a village with electricity, Guardian reported.
?We have shown this deep-water wind technology works, that it could be made to operate economically, and that it could be used to generate a significant amount of power far from shore and shipping lanes,? said Allan MacAskill, director of the Beatrice Wind Farm Project.
The project--backed by Scottish and Southern Energy and Canadian oil exploration company Talisman--has pushed wind technology to its limits. Designing the huge lattice jackets on which the turbines stand, and fastening these to the ocean floor, provided engineers with major headaches that took months to overcome.
?The turbines are German but the technology involved in fastening them to the sea bed, and making them work in deep water, comes from Scottish expertise gained from its North Sea oil work,? said Paul O?Brien, a renewable energy expert with Scottish Development International. ?We are good at putting things in the water and keeping them there.?
Developing wind farms far offshore may prove crucial in helping Britain cut its carbon emissions, as onshore wind farm projects are finding it increasingly difficult to get planning approval because opposition to them is becoming more entrenched and better organized.
Offshore farms cost more to build but produce more electricity because they usually stand in open, windier spots. However, current offshore farms can encroach on shipping lanes, affect seabird sanctuaries and disturb marine life, limiting the number of suitable sites.
Shallow-water offshore farms--such as the Kentish Flats farm in the Thames Estuary--miss out on some of Europe?s strongest winds: those that howl across the North Sea?s northern stretches. ?With the expertise we have gained with the Beatrice project, we can exploit winds that simply cannot be tapped by offshore turbines at present,? added O?Brien.
However, wind energy farms are not a simple panacea for the country?s energy problems. Last week the Beatrice turbines were being serviced but, if they had been operational, they would not have been turning. The North Sea?s winds were virtually non-existent, meaning no power would have been generated.
Opponents say such variability of output is a drawback of wind energy. But O?Brien insisted: ?If we can build big turbines far away from the shore, they will cause minimum upset and disruption. This is their future and that is why the Beatrice project is so important.?
Post #: 166
Well, yes, though I like the idea of turbines I don't like the idea of them blotting out your ocean views. Can't they be located further out so even on a clear day they are not visible?
110' 12 miles
120' 12.5 miles
130' 13 miles
140' 13.5 miles
150' 14 miles
160' 14.5 miles
170' 14.9 miles
180' 15.3 miles
190' 15.8 miles
200' 16.2 miles
300' 19.8 miles
500' 25.6 miles
1000' 36.2 miles
1500' 44.3 miles
2000' 51.2 miles
Here's an example of how to read it. We know from the article that the highest tip of the turbine blad will reach 440' above. So to hide that from a surfer on shore who is just paddling out require it to be 25.6 miles away. Or if we are only concerned with hiding the masts and not the blades, the wind farm must be at least 19.8miles away from shore. Now if we assume most people who look out live in one floor dwellings just above the tide and surf they'll be 40' or higher than high tide. So they'll need an additional 7.2 miles. You add the 7.2 miles on to the 25.6 and all of a sudden you realize those turbines have to be way 32.8 miles or more out there. More than likely most beaches around the world will have 10 story hotels, and there will be hills nearby too. As a general rule turbines would have to be built 75 miles out to sea if you didn't want them to be visible. Clearly, as anybody can see, this is not feasible.
How far can you see on a good day with clear skies? I'd say probably not more than 20 99% of the time. Maybe it comes down to what the visibility is in the area you are building in. Also on how shallow the ocean floor is. I think the Kennedy's and other fat cats will have to be reasonable. Learn to live with the turbines on the horizon...
Cape Cod Commission denies Cape Wind applicationhttp://www.reuters.co...
Fri Oct 19, 2007 11:34am EDT
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Cape Cod Commission in Massachusetts Thursday denied Cape Wind's application to bury electric cables needed to connect its proposed 420-megawatt offshore wind farm in the Nantucket Sound to the state power grid.
Cape Wind said in a release that it would challenge the Commission decision. The Cape Cod Commission is a local organization created by the state in 1990 to manage growth and protect Cape Cod's natural resources.
Sen. Ted Kennedy and many residents who own coastal property from where they could see the wind turbines on a clear day oppose the project along with some environmental groups concerned about disrupting the patterns of migratory birds and the potential effect on local sea life.
The project's supporters, who include other environmental groups, meanwhile claim it would provide renewable energy, improve air quality, lower electricity costs and increase the reliability of the power grid.
Although the wind farm would be located in federal waters, the transmission lines connecting the project to the grid crosses land controlled by state and local authorities.
The Commission said it did not have enough information to make a decision. Local papers said Cape Wind could offer to provide more information to the Commission or appeal to the state to override the local authorities, or both.
"The Commission's denial based, not on the merits but, on claims that Cape Wind provided insufficient information does not square with the record," Jim Gordon, president of Cape Wind, said in a release.
CAPE WIND HISTORY
Energy Management Inc, of Boston, the developer of Cape Wind, proposed in 2001 to build the offshore wind farm, on Horseshoe Shoal in Nantucket Sound.
At that time, Energy Management hoped the project, expected to cost more than $500 million, would start generating electricity in 2004.
The project consists of 130 General Electric Co 3.6 megawatt wind turbines, capable of generating over 400 MW, which is enough to supply about three-quarters of the electricity needs of Cape Cod and the islands of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket.
The turbines, located more than 5 miles away from the Cape Cod coast, will stand about 440 feet from the surface of the water to the tip of the blade.
Due in part to an increase in global demand for steel and wind turbines, Cape Wind now expects the project to cost about $1 billion and the permitting process to continue through 2008 or beyond.
The lead federal agency needed to approve the project is the Minerals Management Service, a bureau in the U.S. Department of the Interior. MMS manages the nation's natural gas, oil and other mineral resources on the outer continental shelf.
MMS has said it expects to issue a draft report on the project later this autumn.
If approved, it would take Cape Wind about 18 months to construct the wind farm.
Post #: 170
This link has many interesting points:http://www.delawareon...
I'm not sure what to make of them but they are good to keep in mind:
- "On average, the offshore wind project would account for only 125 megawatts of power sent to Delmarva initially. As a result, the backup plant typically would provide most of the project's 300-megawatt output." - seems to me there's an easy enough answer. Build four times the number of turbines and build power lines to other states so power can be exported or imported as needed.
- "Sen. Harris B. McDowell III, D-Wilmington North, said that the Bluewater project itself relies on unproven systems, and should stand or fall on its own without subsidies from Delaware or forced support from Delmarva". Just how unproven? And stand on it's own? Sounds like another politician bought by lobbyists.
- "They want to put it offshore so the people dont hear the noise the generators make! That noise will ride the towers down to the waters and send the local fishery miles away which could be an eco disaster! Another reason cape cod, fishing capitol has said NO!" I wonder if there is any truth to that.
- "This is why we deregulated - to get away from the inefficient, public funded, price fixed monopoly. Now Delmarva has a reason ot keep rates low - to make money. ". Uh, didn't Dennis Kuccinich prove just the opposite when he didn't give in and had a bloody fight on his hands. He ultimately won big supplying power much cheaper than what it would have been deregulated.
- "Bluewater has never built a single wind mill on land or sea. The off shore wind farm that was recently killed in Long Island was a Bluewater project. After New York did all of the studies that Delaware has failed to do they found that the real costs would be nearly triple what Bluewater was claiming and that major parts of their plan, principally transmission, had so many technical flaws that the entire thing would likely fail to produce any energy.". Anybody know what flaws he's talking about? Are these studies available? http://www.vestas.com...
- "How about that the wind turbine manufacturer, Vesta, has halted production on the turbines Bluewater was planning to use because they don't work. How about that they don't have a replacement turbine for it and are only just starting the design phase to come up with one." I'm starting to think this guy is full of it. If he knows so much why is he not referencing the sources. I think he's full of it but still it's best to find out the details. It looks like Vesta had problems and fixed them according to their site. However I wonder if they had so many problems how can they possibly have confidence they will last for 20 years. Perhaps there's some serious digging that needs to be done here to find the truth.
Post #: 172
BP erecting turbines on their own property. The article suggests they will be using 2MW turbines. What are the factors in choosing 2MW vs higher MW turbines? Isn't bigger always better?
BT Unveils Plans to Develop Large Wind Farms in UK
October 19, 2007
Source: Clean Edge News
BT recently unveiled plans to develop wind farms aimed at generating up to 25 per cent of its existing UK electricity requirements by 2016. The wind farm scheme represents the UK's biggest corporate wind power project outside of the energy sector.
The project, costing up to £250m, will bring together third party funding and renewable energy partners to safeguard future supplies of clean, green energy for BT as part of the company?s strategy to reduce carbon emissions.
BT is one of Britain?s biggest consumers of electricity, with an annual requirement of around 0.7 per cent of the UK?s entire consumption. BT?s wind farms could generate a total of 250MW of electricity ? enough to meet the power needs of 122,000 homes or a city the size of Coventry. This would prevent the release of 500,000 tonnes of CO2 each year compared with coal generation ? equivalent to a quarter of a million return air trips to New York.
BT is currently identifying high wind-yield sites on or adjacent to BT-owned land for development with the aim of generating power from 2012 onwards. It was confirmed recently that BT has applied for planning permission for test masts at Goonhilly Satellite Earth Station in Cornwall, Wideford Hill Radio Station in Orkney and Scousburgh Radio Station in Shetland.
Subject to planning consent and suitable sites being secured, BT?s wind farms would have a total installed generating capacity of around 100MW by 2012, equivalent to around fifty wind turbines, with the remaining 150MW targeted by 2016.
Hanif Lalani, BT Group Finance Director, said: "There is a pressing need for industry to cut carbon in ways that make business sense. BT has already achieved a 60 per cent reduction in its carbon emissions, and is committed to reducing them further to 80 per cent by 2016. Our wind energy plans play an important part in reaching that target.
"Broadband technology is already cutting the need to travel, through home working and video conferencing. This makes sense for our shareholders, and also for our staff and customers who are looking to us to work in a more environmentally friendly way."
John Hutton MP, Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform said: "Tackling climate change while ensuring we have enough energy for the future is one of the biggest challenges of our time. BT's initiative is a great example of how businesses can contribute and help us meet our ambitious target to dramatically increase the amount of energy we get from renewable sources. I hope that other organisations and individuals will be inspired to match their commitment."
Jonathon Porritt, Co-Founder and Programme Director of Forum for the Future, added: "This is an enormously significant decision for BT - and for every company that sees BT as a recognised leader on sustainability issues. It's a substantial investment, guaranteeing very low carbon energy for BT for the foreseeable future, and precisely the kind of decisive, ambitious intervention that more and more companies are going to have to come forward with."
BT already benefits from the UK?s biggest green electricity contract, and in January 2007 BT extended its deal with nPower and British Gas Business.
Post #: 178
It's interesting how they estimate SD could supply 55% of the nations electricity and how the AWEA thinks someday wind could supply 25% of the nations power. Is that 25% of the nations electricity or total power consumption?
Also, I've never seen any mention of 7.4GB turbines before. That would be quite a turbine.
If there are enough turbines on the planet would they dampen the damage done by storms, preventing the extreme winds?
Monday, October 29, 2007http://yankton.net/st...
Story last updated at 12:36 am on 10/29/2007
Wind Farm Plan Still In The Works
By: Joe Kafka
Associated Press Writer
PIERRE -- Plans for the world's largest wind farm, proposed to be built in South Dakota, have become more grandiose.
South Dakota is officially rated No. 4 in the nation for the potential capacity to make electricity from wind, although the ranking is more than a decade old. Many industry officials believe the Great Plains state is the windiest of all.
Clipper Windpower of Carpinteria, Calif., intends to erect enough wind turbines in several South Dakota counties to produce up to 6,000 megawatts of electricity, said Bob Gates, the firm's senior vice president of commercial operations.
That would be eight times larger than the biggest wind farm in the world, a 735-megawatt FPL Energy facility with 421 turbines stretching across three Texas counties.
Clipper Chairman and Chief Executive Officer James Dehlsen told The Associated Press in 2004 the company intended to develop a $3 billion wind complex with 1,000 turbines that could produce 3,000 megawatts of juice in South Dakota.
But as envisioned now, the project would be twice as large and cost $6 billion, Gates said.
Taking into account that the wind doesn't always blow or is too light or strong at times to operate turbines, a 6,000-megawatt wind farm could supply enough power for an average of about 1.6 million homes, based on data from the American Wind Energy Association.
Clipper makes 2.5 megawatt turbines, and it would take 2,400 of them to produce 6,000 megawatts of electricity. However, the firm continues to develop more efficient turbines and is part of a project to build 7.5 megawatt turbines for an oceanic wind farm off the coast of Britain.
Clipper officials are not saying exactly where the proposed mega complex will be located in South Dakota, but they indicate it will be built in stages.
"I think each stage would eclipse the size of the previous one," Gates said.
If Clipper can find a buyer for the electricity, the project could get under way in a couple of years, he said.
Huge amounts of extra electricity cannot be moved out of South Dakota until more transmission lines are developed, however.
"To do big-time wind, you need to put in upgraded and new transmission capabilities," Gates said.
Gates, president of the American Wind Energy Association, met recently with Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., about the future of wind development in the nation.
Thune hopes an energy bill pending in Congress will extend a federal tax credit for the wind industry. The incentive of 1.9 cents per kilowatt hour, initially approved in 1992, is to expire at the end of the year. It typically has been extended by only a year or two, but Thune said Congress should either make it permanent or extend it for four or five years at a time.
Many companies are interested in building wind farms, and South Dakota stands to land several of them if the tax credit is extended and the transmission bottleneck can be fixed, he said.
"They know that we have an unlimited resource," Thune said. "South Dakota is the windiest state in the nation. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory has estimated that South Dakota has enough wind potential to provide 55 percent of all the electrical needs in the country."
NREL says South Dakota has good to excellent wind resources consistent with utility-scale electrical production. It specifically points to hills east of Pierre, ridges along the eastern and northeastern border, hills in south-central South Dakota near the Nebraska border and many mountain crests in the Black Hills.
The energy bill, which has passed both the House and Senate and is awaiting congressional negotiations on differences, includes an amendment from Thune that would promote the establishment of special corridors to move wind-produced electricity from its source to high-demand population areas.
"It would create an interstate highway for wind," the senator explained. "Right now, we've got a transmission system that makes it difficult to get electricity from one area of the country to another. We need a corridor where you can easily move energy anywhere."
Cumbersome and complex regulations and many fees now govern the movement of electricity, Gates said. Wind energy will be hampered unless the system is streamlined and transmission capacity is substantially increased, he said.
"We've got to build electrical transmission lines to bring the energy from where it's windy, largely in the Great Plains, to where the people are," the Clipper official said.
"This nation can make this happen if we merely choose to do so," he added.
The most efficient wind farm in the nation is located near Highmore, about 60 miles east of Pierre, Thune said. That FPL facility has 27 turbines and generates 40 megawatts of electricity.
"I think the sky is the limit for South Dakota when it comes to wind energy development and production and job creation," Thune said. "There's a tremendous upside here that hasn't been tapped. We've got the wind, and there are folks who want to develop it."
The Department of Energy said the nation's wind-power capacity increased by 27 percent last year, but wind farms operating in 36 states account for less than 1 percent of the U.S. power supply.
The American Wind Energy Association believes 20 percent of the nation's power could come from wind someday.
According to the association, Texas leads the nation in wind power, followed by California, Iowa, Minnesota and Washington.
Post #: 179
Sounds like there are three issues:
1) People don't like the looks of windmills
2) Possible noise.
3) Epileptic seizures from the shadows the blades cast?!
Perhaps the government should wage a propaganda war to encourage people to like the looks of windmills. It can even be a dirty campaign like FEMA did with the fires here in San Diego last week.
Turbines should be rated for power and noise. We need to know this.
I find it hard to believe epileptics may have seizures from the shadows blades cast. What's next, artists stigmatized by color contrasts?
Posted Oct 27, 2007; 4:00 PM http://www.wisinfo.co...
Calumet County families, neighbors battle over windmills
By Susan Squires
Post-Crescent staff writer
Giant windmills won?t appear in Calumet County for years ? if ever. Just the same, their phantom silhouettes are a very real part of the county?s landscape.
?It?s like the Revolution and Civil War put together,? says Calumet County Supv. Don Schwobe, who has held one elected office or another in county or town government for 40 years.
Two out-of-state developers are scouting sites for three wind projects in Calumet County, where breezes clock 13 to 14 mph at 110 feet. The 100 or so 400-foot turbines would be the largest erected to date in Wisconsin, and the still unbuilt windmills have set off a battle over property rights ? mostly between farmers and residential property owners.
?It?s just mean. Mean,? Schwobe said. ?Back and forth between those who want towers and those who don?t. It?s a shame. Families against each other. Neighbors against each other.?
Signs of trouble
The conflict began about a year ago with a county wind energy ordinance some property owners thought too lax.
It escalated over the summer when organized opposition began running full-page ads in the local weekly newspaper, listing the names of property owners who might lease land to wind developers.
Then came the ?Good neighbors don?t host 400-foot wind turbines? yard signs.
?When those signs went up, that was like punching us in the face,? Brothertown farmer Dan Lisowe said.
His farm is a test site for Midwest Wind Energy, one of the developers.
Lisowe is one of a small group of property owners who could earn roughly $8,000 a year for every turbine their land can support. ?This farm has been in our family since the 1930s and we?ve farmed it the best we know how and been the best neighbors we know how.?
The opposition fears the industrial turbines will ruin the county?s rural character, and that local governments either don?t have the power or don?t have the will to stop them.
Legislation the state passed in 2005 requires utilities to generate 10 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2015. It also limited local governments? regulatory authority to protecting health and safety.
?We believe we?re the only thing that stands between big companies and big government and the public,? Charlestown resident Ron Dietrich said. Dietrich is a spokesman for the opposition group Calumet County Citizens for Responsible Energy, which has adopted Don Quixote as its icon.
?So that?s why we view ourselves as the underdogs. If we don?t become vocal and take action we?re going to be run over and bulldozed and people are going to wonder, ?How did that happen???
The group helped persuade county officials in September to impose a 120-day moratorium on wind farm applications and permits while a committee evaluates the turbines? potential impact on groundwater and neighbors? health. Opponents cite studies that suggest flicker from turbines? blades can trigger epileptic seizures and that noise from wind farms can affect human health.
?It?s one thing if a resident in the county wants to put a windmill to have some renewable energy for their residence,? said Ric Van Sistine, a Town of Woodville hobby farmer involved in another opposition group, Calumet County Advocates.
?But it?s a whole other thing when they talk about a 400-foot wind turbine with lights and moving parts. I believe there are serious health and safety issues that need to be considered above anything else,? he said.
Town of Stockbridge farmer John Nadler thinks the health and safety protests are a ruse by the opposition groups farmers often call ?the one-acre people.?
?They bring the health and safety issue in and the water issue in,? he said. ?They don?t want the windmills to spoil the view. I?m sorry, but they don?t own the view. That view was given to you by your neighbor. You didn?t buy the view.?
Nadler has talked to the wind farm developers, but he hasn?t made up his mind yet.
?I?m 53,? he said. ?How long am I going to milk cows? It?s a pretty nice retirement check, and it more than likely would allow us to keep ownership of the land, to keep it in farming. Would they rather look at 40 more houses??
Wisconsin utilities currently operate 55 industrial-sized turbines at five different sites in the state, according to the state Department of Administration?s Division of Energy.
Renew Wisconsin, a pro-wind nonprofit organization said another 19 are in the development or negotiation stage. Virtually all have faced opposition, but the battle in Calumet County has been among the most hostile Michael Vickerman, Renew Wisconsin?s executive director, has witnessed.
?The thing that really disturbs me is the lack of respect shown to the farmers in their community,? Vickerman said. ?This is thinly disguised class warfare, and it?s aimed at farmers who?ve worked the land for decades and decades.?
If anybody is interloping in Calumet County, it?s outsiders like Renew Wisconsin, the wind developers and the state and federal governments, Dietrich said.
?That implies that somehow the farmers were here first and working the land and these outsiders have come in and are telling them what they can and cannot do with their land,? said Dietrich, who has lived in Charlestown for about 10 years.
?The people on either side of the issue are the same people genetically or historically who have worked the land themselves. We got to this point because a lot of the work by the wind company was done behind the scenes and the people they signed up we don?t believe had all the information.?
For the record, he said, vandals have defaced some of the opponents? yard signs.
County Board Chairman Merlin Gentz has appointed a special committee composed of both proponents and opponents to evaluate studies on wind turbines and health.
?In the end, we?re still going to have regulations that govern the placement and operation of these facilities,? Gentz said.
?I just want to make sure we have looked at all of the data and all the angles necessary to protect the health and safety of our people. In the end, I?m sure there are going to be people who are jumping for joy and people who will be very disappointed.?
Meanwhile, Lisowe?s farm is off-limits to some turkey hunters who?ve used his land in the past. He and some of the other large landowners are thinking about cutting off access this season to snowmobiles, too.
?We feel like doing it to make a point,? he said.
Susan Squires: 920-993-1000, ext. 368, or ssquires@|postcrescent.com
Post #: 183
As the world passes America...
Sequoia Energy Secures $16 Million in Financing from Good Energieshttp://www.turbomachi...
TORONTO and WINNIPEG, Manitoba, Oct. 31
TORONTO and WINNIPEG, Manitoba, Oct. 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Sequoia Energy Inc., a Canadian renewable energy company focused on utility-grade wind energy projects and a pioneer in a "community first" approach, announced today it has closed a $16 million CDN financing investment from Good Energies, a leading investor in the renewable energy industry. With this investment, Sequoia will advance its current projects in Manitoba and Saskatchewan (Canada) and in North Dakota (USA) and expand to become a leading developer in the region.
"Just as the wind blows across borders, wind developers have to look beyond the lines on a map. Today's announcement is a commitment on both our parts to develop wind energy from Manitoba to Saskatchewan and south to the Midwest states," said Ron Diduch, CEO of Sequoia Energy. "We are very pleased that Good Energies recognizes Sequoia as the best strategic partner to advance wind energy in this region and that Manitoba is the best home base to advance that strategy."
Wind energy has become increasingly recognized in North America as a complementary enhancement to existing provincial and state energy systems and a highly valued benefit to sustaining local communities. Sequoia supports a community-centered approach and has invested significant resources to ensure that the company's wind projects preserve the integrity of established communities and integrates smoothly into existing energy systems.
"Sequoia is a successful Canadian wind power developer and has been instrumental in demonstrating the positive economic, environmental and social benefits of wind energy," said Jean-Louis Brenninkmeyer, a managing director at Good Energies and a seasoned investor in the wind development industry.
"The investment by Good Energies in Sequoia will greatly enhance the wind portfolio of our firm," added David MacMillan, a managing director at Good Energies in London and part of its global wind investment team. "Good Energies will provide Sequoia not only with the capital it needs to succeed, but we will also partner with management to provide them with our international utility-grade wind development expertise that we have gained from successfully bringing projects online in North America and Europe."
About Good Energies:
Good Energies (www.goodenergies.com) is a leading investor in the renewable energy industry, managing the renewable energies portfolio of the COFRA Group, a privately owned group of companies. The current market capitalization of its portfolio is more than $5 billion. Good Energies places its emphasis on the interrelated business areas of solar energy, wind energy, load management and green buildings. Good Energies operates globally with offices in London, New York, Toronto, Washington D.C., and Zug. The company invests in all life cycles of companies and pursues a long-term investment approach. Good Energies is guided by the 3-P-principle (3-Ps): people-planet- profit; being an investment firm it also aims to accelerate energy transition and strives to alleviate poverty by improving access to affordable renewable energy.
About Sequoia Energy:
Sequoia Energy Inc., (www.sequoia-energy.com) headquartered in Winnipeg, Manitoba is a leading Canadian renewable energy developer. Sequoia initiated the first Manitoba wind farm in St. Leon, Manitoba. This successful 99- megawatt project, demonstrated that wind energy is economically feasible in the region. The company has since become a leader in the industry with a number of new projects in development in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and North Dakota. Sequoia is focused on large-scale wind energy projects in western Canada and the U.S. Midwest. Sequoia's "community first" approach has been instrumental in demonstrating that wind energy is a safe, reliable, economically sound, environmentally and socially responsible source of energy for North America. Sequoia's business model is based on the importance of partnerships and collaboration. Its corporate goal is to facilitate a smooth introduction of renewable energy into established energy production and transmission networks, bringing new income and economic opportunity to rural areas.
Post #: 187
They plan to double their wind energy by 2010!
Two things stand out in my mind. The first is this is a short term projection. Meaning that it's pretty much already been planned totally out. The second item, they are setting the the market trends. Like big investors on the stock market. When they move everybody jumps on the same movement making it a winner. So this is very good news.
GE Energy Invests in New Texas Wind Projecthttp://www.monitordai...
Friday, November 02, 2007
GE Energy Financial Services announced that it is investing in a 120-megawatt wind farm in Texas with Invenergy Wind LLC, a global wind power developer.
Financial details were not disclosed.
Sited in a region known for oil and gas production, farming and ranching in Martin County in west Texas, midway between Fort Worth and El Paso, the Stanton Wind farm will employ 80 GE 1.5-megawatt sle wind turbines.
Started in the summer of 2007, construction is scheduled for completion by April 2008, when Stanton will annually produce power sufficient for 37,000 homes and avoid 285,000 tons a year in greenhouse gas emissions, compared to equivalent fossil fuel generation.
With this investment, GE Energy Financial Services holds equity in 51 wind farms worldwide, with a capacity to produce more than 2,550 megawatts of electricity. It plans to double its more than $2 billion of renewable energy investments by 2010.
The project interconnects with Oncor, the transmission affiliate of TXU, at the Midland East to Big Springs West 138 kV line. All power will be sold into the ERCOT market.
"This investment is a fresh example of how we're pursuing growth opportunities in Texas, with experienced developers such as Invenergy," said Kevin Walsh, Managing Director and leader of renewable energy at GE Energy Financial Services. "Stanton Wind brings the number of wind farms in which GE Energy Financial Services has invested in Texas to five, representing 770 megawatts."