[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Start of a better wind ordinance  

Credit:  By Patrick Flynn | Chowan Herald | Jun 25, 2020 | www.dailyadvance.com ~~

During the regular June 13th County Commissioners meeting, I became aware of what Chowan’s wind ordinance really means.

Obviously it means text changes, amendments, deletions and same-ol’, same-ol’ political gamesmanship.

So, the first public comment was a letter from Apex Clean Energy that changing the wind ordinance wasn’t necessary. Their same denial was used during the Timbermill CUP hearing that commissioners swallowed hook, line and sinker. (They originally aided in drafting the current wind ordinance commissioners in the day approved.)

More commentary has the Navy considering an order to shut down some Amazon turbines because of low frequency (LF) Infrasound interference. The draft ordinance positively offers to reduce the acceptable sound threshold from 55 dB to 45 dB. (Unfortunately, LF Infrasound travels up to 14 km or nine miles, which still effectively negates improving sound threshold standards.)

More public comments illustrated that the European and U.S. industrialized world has adopted property setbacks to the tune of 10 times the height of a wind turbine. In any case, setback distances are being increased everywhere. Positive changes for the new ordinance, if approved, will measure setbacks from property lines rather than from actual dwelling locations.

A discussion to apply decommissioning escrow funds to approved turbine project issues after CUP approval will be addressed in the next Board of Commissioners’ meeting. Commissioner setback suggestions to be presented for public commentary are still lacking in my opinion because they are not 10 times the turbine height distance used in several European countries.

Modification to an approved wind permit was addressed. Shadow flicker influence was illuminated. Residential RF interference was addressed, as well as the cash bond needed for decommissioning purposes, which will need further investigation before text amendments are voted on.

Because Apex denies about anything negative regarding Big Wind energy an actual Amazon Wind project resident’s testimony refuted Apex’s positive Infrasound/RF scenario presented during the Timbermill CUP hearing or the recent June 13th public commentary. This contrasts our commissioners adopting Big Wind’s cavalier attitude, “any tax money is good”.

Unfortunately, the few tax dollars Chowan County might receive won’t approach the amount of money electric utility consumers will eventually have the honor of paying to host wind turbines in their county.

Commissioners approving a project and not the wind developers themselves bear majority responsibility for the additional millions of dollars for imposed Utility Commission cost requirements.

All-in-all, we have the start of a better wind ordinance. Nevertheless, my comments on the $30 million Utility Commission approved rate increase for NC Dominion Energy customers and their green energy infrastructure improvement construction should be addressed.

My other comment was about the thousands of Canadian geese and tundra swans whose total migration pattern has changed once the Amazon Wind facility was activated. Ultimately, utility customers will have to absorb the millions of dollars any new wind project will cost.

The comprehensive problem areas Big Wind generates means we will need to revise the wind ordinance for many years to come to be fair to everyone in Chowan.

Patrick Flynn is a business owner who lives in Paradise Road.

Source:  By Patrick Flynn | Chowan Herald | Jun 25, 2020 | www.dailyadvance.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.