Resource Library Category: Vermont (27 items)
Documents presented here are not the product of nor are they necessarily endorsed by National Wind Watch. This resource library is provided to assist anyone wishing to research the issue of industrial wind power and the impacts of its development. The information should be evaluated by each reader to come to their own conclusions about the many areas of debate.
Green Mountain Power threatens eminent domain for transmission lines
Source: Wilschek, Joslyn
Primmer Piper Eggleston & Cramer, PC
Re: Easement to Green Mountain Power Corporation and Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc.
Over the past few months, Karen Kotecki and others, on behalf of Green Mountain Power Corporation (“Green Mountain Power”) and Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc. (“VEC”) have been in contact with you, in writing and/or through phone conversations, explaining the need to acquire additional rights on an existing VEC easement across your property. The rights relate to a transmission line upgrade by Green Mountain Power and VEC between Lowell and Jay, Vermont which will allow the interconnection fo the Kingdom Community Wind Project to the bulk transmission grid, as well as enhance the reliability and efficiency of the electric grid in this area. As of the date of this letter, we have been unable to secure the necessary updated easement across your property.
Green Mountain Power and VEC would very much like to work with you informally at any convenient time to discuss these additional rights and prepare the necessary documents. It is our hope to resolve the acquisition of the updated right-of-way won your property in the near future. Because of the importance of this project and the proposed timeline to get it built, we need to hear from you soon. If we are not able to do so, we will have to initiate condemnation proceedings. This requires that we file a condemnation petition with the Vermont Public Service Board. The timing of the filing would be sometime late April or May, 2011.
The first step in the condemnation preparation process requires Green Mountain Power to hire an appraiser to show the Public Service Board the “before” situation (with the line as it now exists) and the “after” situation (with the upgrade and/or replacement poles), to determine if there will be any monetary difference between the two. An appraiser will most likely contact you in early February if the issue remains unresolved.
We would very much prefer to work this out with you informally rather than going through the condemnation process. Please contact me as soon as you can via phone at 802-223-21-2 or e-mail, jwilschek@ppeclaw.com to set up a time to talk about his.
Sincerely,
~~~
Joslyn Wilschek
Health, Human rights, Maine, Noise, Ontario, Regulations, Vermont, Wisconsin •
Comments on Robert McCunney’s testimony on behalf of Green Mountain Power
Source: Pierpont, Nina
Green Mountain Power has applied for a permit to erect 21 wind turbines on Lowell Mountain, Lowell, Vermont. Rebuttal testimony of Robert McCunney on behalf of Green Mountain Power Corporation was filed on November 22, 2010 — Summary of Testimony: Dr. McCunney responds to claims by Department of Public Service witness Mr. Kane, Albany witness Mr. James, Lowell Mountains Group witness Mr. Blomberg and others concerning the health and related impacts of sound. He also supports the Board’s approved sound standard for wind projects.
Among other comments, Pierpont notes how McCunney repeatedly emphasizes the relative inaudibility of low-frequency noise and infrasound, implying that therefore it can not be a problem, and how he describes recent research describing how the inner ear filters out infrasound so that indeed we don’t hear it, but denies its neural communication to other physiologic systems than conscious hearing. See: Salt A. N., and Hullar, T. E., “Responses of the ear to low frequency sounds, infrasound and wind turbines”, Hearing Research, 2010 Sep 1, 268(1-2):12-21; and Salt, Alec, “Infrasound: Your ears ‘hear’ it but they don’t tell your brain”, presentation, Symposium on Adverse Health Effects of Industrial Wind Turbines, Picton, Ontario, October 29-31, 2010.
She also notes how he cruelly dismisses individually variable sensitivity as reason to ignore the problem rather than face it with concern, and how he lumps wind turbine noise in with other “modern-era” noises despite clear evidence that annoyance is much greater for wind turbines at lower sound levels. See
Pedersen, E., and Waye, K. P., “Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise–a dose-response relationship”, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2004 Dec, 116(6):3460-70; and Pedersen, E., “Human response to wind turbine noise — perception, annoyance and moderating factors”, Dissertation, 2007, Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Göteborg University Sahlgrenska Institute.
Sterling College letter to stop ridgeline wind development
Source: Sterling College faculty, staff, and students
We are a group of 29 faculty and staff (a clear majority) and 80 students (an overwhelming majority), of Sterling College and we are calling for a suspension of the process on the Kingdom Community Wind Project and a moratorium on other proposed ridgeline industrial wind projects in the state.
As a small environmental college in Vermont, we value the Lowell Mountain range as a wilderness classroom and we stand behind our mission of environmental stewardship. While we support renewable energy in the form of wind, we want the Vermont Public Service Board to reconsider the ridgeline site of this project for environmental, community, and energy related reasons.
Large-scale industrial wind development on Vermont ridgelines will create permanent changes to the topography of the mountains, further fragment wildlife habitat, and potentially cause erosion and runoff into local watersheds.
The development of wind turbines on ridgelines is in contradiction with the character of the state and the heralded environmental laws such as the Billboard Law and Act 250, which prohibits development at 2,500 feet elevation. (With elevations up to 2,625 feet, the placement of 400-plus foot turbines on the Lowell Mountains would in many sites exceed the 2,500 ft Act 250 criteria.)
There is division in the local communities about the project’s benefits and impacts. Local residents need to know more about these so-called “community” wind projects and they should have a say in the consideration of these projects. While there have been a limited number of informational sessions with representatives from Green Mountain Power Corporation, these meetings are not sufficient sources of objective information. Beyond attending a public hearing, public involvement in the Section 248 process is limited. Individuals and communities are at a disadvantage even if they attain party status, lacking the financial resources of major corporations.
We fully support renewable energy but frequently find the discussion about cutting greenhouse gas emissions turned into a pro-wind versus anti-wind debate. We believe that saving energy through conservation, supporting small scale solar and wind projects, and investing in clean-air transportation will help us best cut our carbon emissions in Vermont.
We, the 109 undersigned, urge the Public Service Board to look closely at the impacts of ridgeline development for industrial wind projects by starting with a halt to the Kingdom Community Wind Project in the Lowell Mountains.
Download original document: “Sterling College letter to stop ridgeline wind development”
Impacts of Wind Power on the Northfield Ridge
Source: Groom, Carol; Smith, Annette; and Luce, Ben
Annette Smith of Vermonters for a Clean Environment and Ben Luce of Lyndon State College are guests on the Carol Groom Show, Mad River Television, Waitsfield, Vermont, August 17, 2010. They cover the many issues of industrial wind development on mountain ridges, including the many impacts on communities and the environment.
