[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Worthwhile Wind compliance with DNR called into question 

Credit:  Zachary Dupont | Globe Gazette | Aug 30, 2021 | globegazette.com ~~

On Monday morning, Worthwhile Wind’s compliance with the Iowa Department of Natural Resources was brought into question at the Worth County Board of Supervisors meeting.

The wind ordinance has been drafted partly in response to Invenergy’s Worthwhile Wind project, which aims to build a 30,000-acre wind farm in Worth and Winnebago counties.

Opponents of Worthwhile Wind have pointed to the negative impacts of wind turbines on the health and safety of county residents as a reason for more regulation. Proponents of the project claim there were no objections to the wind turbines until recently, and point to the $4.8 million in tax revenue the project would bring in for infrastructure improvements to the county.

Jeff Gorball, Worth County Planning and Zoning Commission chair, spoke at length in support of the proposed ordinance on wind energy. Gorball urged the supervisors to accept the ordinance rather than enter into a one-time agreement with Invenergy.

“Invenergy should be molding their project to fit and not vice versa,” Gorball said. “Let’s make no mistake, they’re here to put stuff in place and make tens of millions of dollars. … They’re not doing this to give us money, they’re doing it to make money, and they’re giving us some along the way. They don’t want to have to abide by any rules.”

Gorball was critical of Invenergy’s presentation to the Board of Supervisors on Aug. 9. In that meeting, Invenergy representative Mark Crowl said Invenergy had worked with the DNR extensively on compliance.

Gorball voiced his doubts, claiming Invenergy ignored recommendations regarding setbacks made by the DNR.

“The DNR gave strong recommendations to Invenergy, but looking at what Invenergy put together in the presentation they gave, it looks like they didn’t go along with those DNR recommendations,” Gorball said. “There are very significant differences between what the DNR recommended and what they actually did.”

According to Gorball, DNR recommendations ignored by Invenergy include:

  • A two-mile buffer for wildlife management areas. Invenergy did only one mile. 
  • A one-mile buffer for other protected areas. Invenergy did only half of a mile.  
  • A three-acre woodlands should have a one-mile buffer. Invenergy only did 1,000 feet. 
  • Eagle nests should have a five-mile buffer. Invenergy only did a one-mile buffer. 
  • Gorball also claims Invenergy has a different list of eagle nests than the one used by the DNR, noting Invenergy only lists two eagle nests within the project area while the DNR lists six.

    According to Gorball, 24 of the Worthwhile Wind turbines fall within an area the DNR recommended no turbines be placed.

    It remains unclear what the direction of the Worth County Board of Supervisors will be, with Supervisor A.J. Stone reluctant to give any details on how the supervisors felt, despite being pressed by Gorball.

    “Basically, we’re not prepared yet to sign any agreements,” Stone said of the current status of the wind ordinance. “Not until we can make sure any agreement benefits the county first, and Invenergy second.”

    However, in that Aug. 9 meeting, Supervisor Enos Loberg made his feelings known, taking Crowl to task at the end of his presentation.

    Stone did note that the supervisors are waiting to hear back from their legal representation before moving forward.

    Source:  Zachary Dupont | Globe Gazette | Aug 30, 2021 | globegazette.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 educational 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 via Stripe
    (via Stripe)
    Donate via Paypal
    (via Paypal)


    e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

    News Watch Home

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


    Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

    Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

    Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky