Appeal Hearing Put on Hold

At the last moment, a public hearing on April 1st was delayed by Eliu Romero. His weapon of choice was a temporary restraining order, and his accomplice was Judge Paternoster of Raton. Eliu complained that the hearing was a hardship for him because it might go on for up to 3 days, he said.

The assembled county officials, attorneys and planning staff immediately set about recusing Judge Paternoster, and they spoke of bringing suit against Eliu for monetary damages because he failed to inform anyone in advance about the restraining order.

When the restraining order expires, the County Commission will reschedule the public hearing regarding an appeal filed by members of the community after the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing in December 2008.

Public Hearing Slated for April 1

On April 1st and 2nd, the Taos County Commission will begin to hear appeals from groups and individuals in response to the Planning and Zoning board's December findings regarding Taos Wind Farm. At least two attorneys representing those opposed to PnZ's decision will make opening statements, followed by a video review of the September and December public hearings. The second day should be more lively as the commission grapples with the loaded question, "Did PnZ violate the county Land Use Regulations in recommending preliminary approval of this project?"

Planning Department senior staff found the project to be utterly incompatible with neighboring properties, which is a big deal. (Lacking traditional zoning, Taos County relies on mutual compatibility in deciding land use and recommending variances.) But the PnZ board decided that because the project was "special", it had their blessing no matter what the County code required.

We do not expect this issue to be settled at the commission level, but rather in District Court before a neutral judge.

The public hearing will begin at 9:00 in the Commission Chambers on Albright Street in Taos.

Taos Wind Farm Update

In December the Planning and Zoning commission appeared to ignore their own land use regulations by paving the way for Taos Wind Power, Inc. to proceed with a wind farm concept northwest of Taos, subject to numerous but vague conditions.

Since that time, opponents have filed an appeal to that decision with Taos County. The Taos County Commission now has 60 days to hold a public hearing on the appeal. At this point, the legal issue is not whether the wind farm idea has merit, but whether the planning commission acted outside their authority and violated land use regulations designed to protect the surrounding landowners and the environment. Plans for the wind farm may not move forward until this appeal has been resolved and the rights of all parties, including nearby residents, have been secured.

While Taos Wind Power, Inc. has a right to pursue a legitimate business, it's highly doubtful that financing such a controversial project in a marginal wind area will be possible given our nation's dismal economic climate. Throw in a model sustainable community and a scenic wilderness area as "neighbors", and any sensible investor will balk. Now with the possibility of official misconduct looming over the planning commission, and even the most stalwart financier is likely to walk.

Planning Commission Bitten by Horsefly

A recent article "Taos Busy But Bent" takes the county Planning and Zoning Commission to task over their unlawful decision to grant preliminary approval to Taos Wind Farm. My favorite quote follows, although the entire article at www.taosdaily.com. is worth reading. The Horsefly always provides illuminating background information on the people and events in our community.


"It was theatre of the absurd. The real casualty of the evening was “reason.” Much as I like them and respect their community service, Rudy and Bill should now resign from the LUDC task force revision committee. There’s no way to spin or interpret their interpretation of the regs..."

SF New Mexican Reports on Commission Decision

Here is today's follow up article on the Taos Wind Farm hearing from December 9, 2008. Read the full text here.

Strange that the reporter, who was informed about this matter, did not choose to mention that the "31 conditions" for approval were never read into the record, and so the public has no idea what those conditions are, or if they may be subject to change before being recorded. That the commission made this oversight smells fishy. That the report didn't mention the odor implies the SF New Mexican wants to keep their noses out of Taos County politics...

Commission Rules They're Above the Law

The Taos County planning commission ruled against the advice of senior county planner Edward Vigil, who had recommended denials for all three applications by Taos Wind Power: the height variance, landscaping variance and the major use permit. In his assessment Mr. Vigil said that the application could not fall within the county's land use regulations, especially the visual compatibility and "use compatibility"regulations, since it clearly was not compatible with the existing residential area. He also said the the applicant would not be able to meet all five regulatory criteria for either of the variances which are mandatory for being approved.

Despite his recommendation, the commission voted 5-2 in favor of approving Taos Wind Power's preliminary application with 31 conditions to be met before final approval is given. Those conditions were not enumerated at the public hearing, so we don't know what they entail. Eugene Sanchez and Ben Tafoya stressed the importance of obeying the existing land use regulations and going with Mr. Vigil's advice, but were outvoted.

We noted that two of the more outspoken commission members who had previously expressed numerous objections to the application were silenced this time around. Bill Thomas and Dennis Vasquez duly voted in favor of the project without offering any critique or asking the applicant any probing questions. Mr. Thomas did say he'd like one of the supposed 14 permanent jobs paying $80,000 per year. Their votes left more than one audience member wondering what might have happened since the last planning hearing to change their minds. Since they didn't venture to explain, we'll just have to assume the worst.

The commission was reminded repeatedly by Mr. Vigil and the assistant county attorney Bob Malone, as well as Chairman Ortiz that their decision would have to show a finding that all criteria for granting the variances had been met.

Nonetheless, the commission chose to disregard the county land use regulations and "give them a chance" to go ahead with this "innovative" project, which they reasoned was above the law since it was new and different, and therefore did not have to comply with regulations which Mr. Rudy Pacheco said "change all the time" anyway. "I write the laws", he continued after the meeting adjourned.

Land use regulations are institued to safeguard our health, safety and welfare. We are supposedly a nation of laws, with everyone afforded equal protection under them.

But tonight the worst of modern America was on display. Entitlement, arrogance, cronyism and ignorance ruled, while our regulatory protections were stomped on. We thought tonight was going to be about Taos Wind Power, but it turned out to be about one very broken regulatory system. Will the last one out the door please turn off the lights?

(edited 12/12 for accuracy and grammar)

Front Page News in Santa Fe

The Santa Fe New Mexican recently published an astute article on the Taos Wind Farm proposal and opposition to its construction. Although she paints the issue in broad strokes, Ms. Matlock does a commendable job of introducing the issue in a fair manner, and she raises valid questions about the feasibility of this project as well as its beneficiaries. (link to the article)

We look forward to her continued coverage of this issue.

Pickens' Wind Farm On Hold

Despite massive tax subsidies, T. Boone Pickens' plan for the largest wind farm in the world is faltering. Apparently, there just isn't enough venture capital to put wind under its wings, as stalwarts like GE are tightening their financing belts. And with oil and natural gas prices in the basement, the incentive for energy projects that require massive infrastructure just isn't there.

Sounds to me like a good time for smaller scale solar projects to flourish, especially in New Mexico's sunbelt areas like Taos. These also qualify for tax subsidies, but promote energy independence for more rural areas and rely less on a "grid" for energy delivery.

(Thank you to PR for the link!)

My Local Radio Heroes

Two local residents who oppose Taos Wind Farm recently appeared on the popular morning radio show "Breakfast with Nancy". Presenting issues that rarely get mainstream media attention, they called attention to the documented health and safety issues surrounding industrial wind plants located next to residential areas. They also highlighted the inefficiency of this power source and explained how the local power company would be unable to manage the erratic power coming from a wind facility of this size. Cudos for speaking the truth and not letting the issue be sidetracked into a debate about NIMBY vs. LARGER GOOD.

Thanks also for the plug about this blog site. Its sole purpose is to expose the dark side of wind power and to counter the propaganda which allows big corporations to profit at the expense of taxpayers and rural communities like Taos.

PTC Sneaks through Congress

After failing 17 times in Congress this year, the wind industry finally got to celebrate the renewal of the Production Tax Credits which were buried in the text of the much debated, but ultimately approved, financial "rescue" bill.

It's well known that without heavy taxpayer support, wind power is just not profitable or cost-efficient. Apparently, the wind industry and the financial sector have a lot in common.

article here

Re: A "Zoned" Application

Industrial Wind Action Group, a national watchdog organization, has taken Taos Wind Power to task in its latest editorial piece. Read what they have to say about this ill-conceived project by clicking here.

Taos Wind Farm Still Becalmed

The following quote is from today's article at TaosDaily.com:

"...At last night’s Taos County Planning and Zoning Meeting, the wind farm projects proposed for Highway 64 on the west side of the gorge and Highway 285, north of Tres Piedras, will continue to blow in citizens' ears. According to the loyal opposition’s attorneys, the proponents “slipshod” application was short on facts and long on “trust us” promises. Due to the major development status of the projected $150 million wind turbine field and a lack of information and time to digest it, the P&Zers voted to continue the hearing until Dec. 9. They will seek more information from applicants and opponents. The loyal opposition lives in the neighborhood of the proposed industrial wind operation.

The applicants made it clear they did not want to spend the money prior to approval on the Land Use Development Code requirements for major development, due to the expense of studies. Taken as a whole, the LUDC major development section can be compared to an environmental impact study. At last night’s meeting, it appeared as if the opposition had spent more money on research, attorneys, and experts than the applicants. Since the attorneys for the opposition consistently cited the LUDC and the applicants’ lack of response to its provisions, it seems that they are laying the groundwork for an appeal if the P&Zers approve the project. The applicants are relying for the most part on convincing citizens and the commission that they are taking a giant step toward providing renewable energy as the antidote to wars for oil. Naturally, there are proposed economic benefits in the proposal.

The wind farm battle is a good example of how differently green energy enthusiasts and eco folks view the world. Currently, the opponents live in self-sustaining off-the-grid small-is-beautiful homes. Meanwhile, the proponents have a little of the “save the world” syndrome about them. It’s the eco-freaks v. the ecoists. I’m not sure which enviro is which. Where are the tree huggers when we need them? "

Location, Location

(article here)

From the Oklahoman, an excellent article describes how investment money flows to the best wind locations. It also details how prospective investors evaluate those locations, including an independent verification of all wind data gathered from anemometer towers. The article goes on to say that once excellent wind resources have been proven, then other restrictions must be analyzed, e.g. proximity to conservation areas, homes, telecom links and radar facilities.

Based on the above criteria, Taos Wind Power's site hasn't much going for it. With marginal wind, lack of transmission infrastructure, home owners' opposition, microwave link towers and nearby aviation radar facilities, in addition to a well-known proposed national conservation area surrounding the site, it will take a most gullible investor to finance this project.

Wind Farms Put Pressure on Bats

BBC article here

Bats are among the most documented and visible casualties from wind turbines around the world. Now researchers are beginning to understand why: air pressure changes resulting from the spinning blades explode their lungs. Like humans, bats have fragile balloon-type lungs which are vulnerable to damaging air pressure changes.

In Yancey, A Bitter Wind

Associated Press article here.


In a New York town, wind turbines have splintered families and friends. Up to 75 landowners have leased property to Maple Ridge Wind Farm, the largest in New York state, to the tune of $6,600 per turbine per year. The town has seen economic benefits because of this, but at a cost.

Comparing Maple Ridge with the Taos Wind Farm, it becomes obvious that Taos County will not benefit in the same was Yancey, NY. It so happens that all the land being leased to Taos Wind Power is actually owned or leased by the wind developer's family. Not one other land owner will share in the "wealth" generated by the wind. Just another aspect to this sleazy scheme.

Mommy, Can We Photoshop Them Out?

So Maui's got a wind plant in one of its most scenic spots, where tourists gather to photograph the beaches and the humpback whales. The local PTB sited this 20-turbine mess on a state conservation ridge line, visible from nearly everywhere people gather. The developer, UPC of Massachusetts, is such a good corporate neighbor that it even has photos of the endangered Hawaiian nene on its website. Do these people have no shame?

And the benefits? It generates about 9 percent of Maui's electricity, but further wind projects are on hold because no one can figure out how to integrate additional wind power into Maui Electric's delivery system. It's just too erratic.

Given Maui's abundant solar resources, it's a shame that such an inappropriately sited project was given the "green" light. But greed is ubiquitous. Like they say in Hawaii, even the missionaries who came to the islands to do good ended up doing quite well. Kinda like the wind developers.

The moral of the story is that you can't count on people to do the right thing, even when it seems most obvious.

Wind Energy is a Failed Technology

Here is one of the most concise and informative articles we've seen to date.

Denmark and Spain are now withdrawing subsidies for wind energy, as it has proven to be expensive, inefficient and environmentally unsound. Onshore and offshore projects are being cancelled across Europe, even as big wind developers are looking to increase their stake in the U.S. to replace the lost business.

Senate Breaks Wind Before Recess

The U.S. Senate this week again denied an extension to the Production Tax Credit for wind energy.

Unless the Senate agrees on an extension, the PTC will expire at the end of 2008. In the three years the PTC was not renewed (1991, 2001 and 2003) new wind energy development declined by up to 93%. The PTC was ultimately renewed and made retroactive in each case; however, as oil-drilling Republicans face wind-ravaging Democrats, it could still be an interesting fight as 2008 draws to a close. Meanwhile, wind developers are frantically trying to get their projects up and running before the deadline. Poor things.

Wind turbines found to cause sickness

Wind turbines found to cause sickness

Apparently Texas has just recently discovered Wind Turbine Syndrome and Vibro-Acoustic Disorder. For more information check out http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com

PSC pulls plug on renewables program

PSC pulls plug on renewables program

"...An audit last year found that most of the $9.5 million collected from more than 38,000 customers, who paid an additional $9.75 a month to participate, was going toward administrative costs of the program such as salaries, office expenses, business travel, research, marketing and public relations..."

The Florida program had been subcontracted out to Green Mountain Energy of Austin, Texas.

NY Probes Conflict of Interest Between Wind Companies and Local Boards

Click here for the article.

Senate Democrats call for extension of renewable energy tax incentives this month

If this passes, wind developers will have until 12/31/2009 to place their industrial projects in service and live off the largesse of the American taxpayer. Between federal and state incentives, the entire industry is now 65% taxpayer financed. Yet the profits are reaped by private investors, not passed on to the public. It's no surprise then that during years in which the tax credits expire, the wind industry experiences a 93% drop in private investment.

The real irony here is that one of the goals of the bill is to reduce our dependence on expensive foreign oil. Someone forgot to tell the politicians that in America we don't use oil for electricity. Never have, never will.

Western Enviromental Law Center Update

I just got a call back from Erik Schlenker-Goodrich of the WELC.

He said that they are too busy right now to take on this case - they have work to keep them busy through November.

More disturbingly, he said that it isn't their kind of project. The Center is pro alternative energies and it would put them in a difficult position to be seen to be against wind power. I explained that the community is also for alternative energy but that this wind farm is being proposed by amateurs with no regard for the surrounding land, wildlife and communities.

In short, he was resistant to what I was saying and clearly knows less about the realities of wind power than we do.

I then brought up the need for experts to speak on our behalf, and I had to press him about it:

Erik: We don't have any experts on staff.
Me: I understand that but I thought your office called on experts for cases you handle.
Erik: Well we don't have any experts locally.
Me: That's fine, they don't need to be local we would pay for them to come and represent us, we just need to find them.

As you can tell, even though he is too busy he wasn't even helpful.

I called Carol Neelley's office and advised her of what to expect when Erik calls her - which he said he would still do. Hopefully we will get some recommendations for an expert or two but I think that that is the most we can expect from the WELC.

Stuart.

Got Experts?

According to Howard, the next hearing will be September 9th. We haven't much time available to us, and we need to start lining up our expert witnesses. We've discussed the important issues and the flaws in the permit application. Now it's time to start thinking about who you know that can testify for us in one of these areas. Don't wait. Contact your colleagues, friends and associates and ask for referrals to acousticians, engineers, government agency representatives (U.S. Fish & Wildlife, Dept of Transportation, NM Game & Fish, NFS, BLM), physicians, geologists, hydrologists. ) If you know anyone whose life has been impacted by an industrial wind plant, get in contact right away.

There are already four wind plants operating in New Mexico. I'm going to start digging for information right there.

One Great Bumper Sticker

.

From www.wind-watch.org:

"Designed by Preston McClanahan, Savoy, Mass., who has kindly made it available for the use of National Wind Watch and friends.
Order from mmathews@victorystore.com. Example price is 125 stickers for US$162.50. Note that this is the printer; smaller orders may not be possible. National Wind Watch hopes to make this sticker available for small orders soon. "

Judith Gap Wind Farm Taking Toll on Bats, Birds

An estimated 1,200 bats, most of them probably just passing through Montana, were killed after striking wind turbines at the Judith Gap Wind Farm between July 2006 and May 2007, according to a post-construction bird and bat survey. The number surprised Invenergy, which owns the farm, as well as government and private wildlife experts. "It's killing 1,200 bats a year and that's a lot more than anybody anticipated," said Janet Ellis of Montana Audubon, a bird conservation group. ...The study estimates that 406 birds, or 4.52 birds per turbine, were killed during the study period.

July 20, 2008 by Karl Puckett in Great Falls Tribune

Excerpt: "...The Fish and Wildlife Service is encouraging wind farm developers to complete preconstruction bat monitoring using acoustic and radar detectors, in addition to post-construction monitoring.
"There's no getting around it, (turbines) do kill birds and they do kill bats," said Kevin Van Koughnett of Calgary-based TransAlta Wind, which has wind farms 250 miles north of Great Falls in Pincher Creek, Alberta. The Fish and Wildlife Service is encouraging wind farm developers to complete preconstruction bat monitoring using acoustic and radar detectors, in addition to post-construction monitoring.
"There's no getting around it, (turbines) do kill birds and they do kill bats," said Kevin Van Koughnett of Calgary-based TransAlta Wind, which has wind farms 250 miles north of Great Falls in Pincher Creek, Alberta..." (emphasis added)

Full text of article reprinted here:

http://www.windaction.org/news/16930

Life Under a Wind Plant - Parts I and II

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNxvkrgoPLo&feature=related


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_utFV2ukOtU

What the Politicians Aren't Telling Us About Wind Power

Below is an excerpt from My View: What Politicians Aren't Telling us About Wind Power, by Richard Allison, Santa Fe New Mexican 07/13/08 (Thanks for passing this along, bluebird!)


"...None of our politicians want to talk about the cost of wind-power generation. Wind-power generation is one of the most expensive forms of electric-power generation. I am in favor of varied sources of power generation, but only after everyone realizes what it is going to cost. The fact is that wind power is between 20 percent and 30 percent more costly than conventional power production. PNM is right in the middle at a 25 percent premium. If you don’t believe me, just look at the much-touted PNM Sky Blue program on its Web site. The additional cost for signing up for this program is $.0169 per kilowatt hour, or $1.69 per hundred kilowatt hours. This is 25 percent more than their base rate. I am really not up to paying 25 percent more on my electric bill because my ’97 Honda still needs to be fed gasoline to get to work. My energy dollar only goes so far. The politicians are not telling us that wind power can never be used to base load a power generation system. What happens when the wind does not blow, which frequently happens for days at a time even in our windy New Mexico? The base load generation must pick up the slack and this happens a lot. So, unless we are willing, which I am not, to turn off the lights when the wind does not blow, the base load generation must keep expanding. This is where the cost gets exorbitant. For every dollar invested in a megawatt of wind power generation, PNM must also have in reserve or under construction a megawatt of base load capacity. In other words, PNM must spend the money to build two power stations rather than one: the wind farm and coal/nuclear base load plant. Both the wind power farms and base load generation must be maintained, which again doubles the maintenance cost. PNM is also entitled to a return on its investment, as it is a publicly held company that must return a profit to the investors. If it were not for the tax incentives both the state and federal governments give to wind generation, power companies including PNM simply could not afford to build wind farms..."

How the Big Boyz Think About Wind

Notes from Wind Power Finance and Investment Summit, II
February 7, 2008
San Diego, California

Questions and Answers, in their own words...

http://kirbymtn.blogspot.com/2008/03/notes-from-wind-power-finance-and_01.html