I walked out of last night’s meeting with more questions than I came in with. As I write, it is Tuesday morning the 23^rd and I am in touch with how much I don’t know about electricity, transmission, taxes and the way government works.

One thing I really want to understand is the reality of wind power’s intermittent energy. Because sometimes the wind doesn’t blow, there has to be backup power and that means a coal plant has to back up the wind towers because for some reason it is easier to increase the power on short notice at a coal plant than it is for other energy plants. Erich Bachmeyer told me last night that when the wind is blowing the backup coal plant will still be producing electricity, but it will produce two percent less energy because of the 50 wind towers he’ll be putting up in Prattsburgh. I want to find out exactly how this works and if the coal plant really is cutting production back by the amount produced by the towers or whether it is a percentage of the amount (is that what spinning reserve means?)

What was a little unsettling was that one of the reps from NYSERDA who was in the audience (i.e. not on the panel) was totally confused when I tried to speak to him about this. He did not know that the wind turbines need to be backed up. He thought (as I did before I started spending my life reading about wind turbines) that the electricity was just fed into the grid and was then in a general pool of electricity to be used where needed. In fact, GWH already has contracts with specific places to provide a certain amount of energy and if the wind doesn’t blow then the backup energy (the coal plant) has to be used.

The following is a summary of the notes that I took during and after the meeting. It was a two hour meeting and a lot was brought up. I may write this in sections as I have time and post it to the website in that way. Even though this is long I would urge you all to read it through if you weren’t at the meeting and even if you were. I will probably send it to the people on my e-mail list before it gets posted. Terry is in New Jersey as I write and may not be able to work on the website for a couple of days. I am in Prattsburgh with a computer but not the address book that enables me to send e-mails easily. So please bear with me.

It was confirmed that two Board members – I believe they are Mr. Moesch and Mr. Hall – have family members who have signed leases with either Ecogen or GWH. Harold McConnell said he didn’t know anything about that , but Tom Hagner said yes that was the case. The question was raised whether this was a conflict of interest, but no one on the panel chose to respond.

FORMAT: This was meant to be an informational forum. There were Seven people on the panel. From left to right they were Peter Keane from NYSERDA, Jeffrey Peterson from NYSERDA, Erich Bachmeyer from Global Winds Harvest, Harold McConnell, the Prattsburgh Town Supervisor, Tom Hagner from Ecogen, Donna Campbell, who is on the town board but was speaking as a home owner and a researcher and Alice Sokolow who was also speaking as a home owner and a researcher.

Each panel member gave a brief summary of why they were there or what their project was about or what their concerns were. After each of them spoke the audience wrote down their questions on index cards which were collected. Glenn Lambertz, a local resident and a WHAM News Anchor, selected the questions to ask and did his best to keep the answers to the point. I believe he tried to get in as many questions as he could without duplicating them, but since he himself professed to know almost nothing about the project that did get in the way when a question was not answered adequately. He did press a few times and he did try for clarification, but when I was sitting there with knowledge that I was not allowed to share it was frustrating. Alice Sokolow did her best to point out discrepancies. She came loaded with facts, minutes, and quotes from NYSERDA’s own literature.

-------- Jeffrey Peterson from NYSERDA explained that NYSERDA was there because they have given a grant to Global Winds Harvest contingent on their passing a SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act) review. NYSERDA tries to help companies develop renewable energy and gives them financial incentives to do this. They like wind because it is a local energy source – (however the electricity is being sent to Westchester and New York City). He explained that GWH will be paid only when they get the wind project going.

He also said that NYSERDA was there to listen to what people had to say. I found that a little frustrating since, in fact, they were not getting to listen to what people had to say due to the format.

--------Peter Keane from NYSERDA explained that when a state or local agency participates in a project like this there must be a review. Now I understand that GWH is getting money from NYSERDA, but Ecogen is not. However Ecogen also has to go through a SEQRA review, and I’m not sure why.

NYSERDA is what is called the Lead Agency in the project of GWH since the town is not making ordinances or in any way planning the scope of the project. I believe that other State Agencies like the DEC as well as the Finger Lakes Land Trust are supposed to review the project and determine whether the project passes their environmental standards. Mr. Peterson said that NYSERDA is rarely a lead agency because local towns usually take on that responsibility for their citizens. He said that NYSERDA prefers NOT to be the lead agency, but in this case they have no choice.

He emphasized that NYSERDA does not have the authority to determine whether the project happens – they can only say whether they will give financial incentives to the companies based on the SEQRA review. So the question is raised – if the SEQRA review shows that this would not be a great thing for the environment and NYSERDA actually decides not to give GWH money, then can they still go ahead and build? Is there any state agency who could say, Wait a minute here, this project is not great for the environment and should not go ahead.

-------Erich Bachmeyer. He gave a summary of his small company’s beginnings and their commitment to wind energy as an alternative to coal and nuclear.

---------Harold McConnell said that the town felt that this would be a good source of revenue and the town wouldn’t have to provide sewers, schools roads, etc. He spoke of his concern for the environment and the need to have an alternative to fossil fuels.

---------Tom Hagner ---He told us that Ecogen has 6000 ACRES under contract with 400 acres being contiguous. The first phase of his project will be 79.5 megawatts. He is getting started with his SEQRA process.

-----Donna Campbell – Donna made it clear that she doesn’t intend to lease and has not been approached. She negated concerns such as bird kill, blade throw and blade detachment, saying that she’s more concerned about the gas pipeline. She thinks that the disturbance to the forest and the soil can be an opportunity to introduce new flora.

Her bottom line is that the economic situation in Prattsburgh is grim and these projects would bring needed revenue.

She felt visual impact was unimportant and pointed out that people probably were upset about phone lines and electrical power lines when they were first installed a hundred odd years ago. She got a round of applause

-------Alice Sokolow—Alice sat at the table with a stack of information that she has gathered and studied in the past month. During her brief talk she said that her concerns were with the permitting process.

She feels we should have a Mechanism for communication. There need to be Meetings for the affected/interested persons as well as the community at large so that Unresolved issues can be addressed

There needs to be a notification system that is known by the community at large and Informational meetings with new analyses as they become available

Time and place to suit the community

It should have been started from the beginning!

She pointed out that we have little protection at the State level. She said that what she was about was open government, with people knowing what was happening and being informed by local government (rather than a sign in a pizza parlor). Alice also got a round of applause. To my ears it was a slightly louder round of applause, but I am biased.

Okay, so now we are on to the question and answer session. People submitted their questions and while they were being collected Glenn (the moderator) said, “The devil is in the details and asked why people, including himself, in Prattsburgh do not have an understanding of the wind turbine projects. .” Jeffrey from NYSERDA responded that he didn’t know.

Harold said that he didn’t know either. He thought everyone knew, until a couple of months ago when the Advocates For Prattburgh approached him. He said that “we didn’t advertise it – we thought people knew what was going on.”

The first question Glenn picked to ask was: “Do any Board members stand to gain?” The answer was no. Of course later on the question was asked if any board members’ RELATIVES stood to gain, and the answer was yes.

HOW MUCH WILL MY LAND VALUES BE AFFECTED? Harold said he didn’t know, but nationwide studies said that property values went up near wind turbines. If you believe that I have a bridge I’d like to see you (RM)

Alice responded that it all depended on the location of the property and how close it was to the turbines. It also depends on what the value of the house was before. If it was a house that was valued for its view or its privacy then the decrease in property values would be greater than a house that was not particularly private or did not have a nice view. (See this web site for further information concerning property values plummeting near wind turbines).

Just as an aside, It has come to my attention that a property deal on Roloson road just fell through because the potential buyer found out about wind turbines going up across the street.

IF I’M NEXT DOOR TO A WIND TURBINE WILL I SEE IT AND HEAR IT?

At this point the answers were a little confusing. We were told that the wind turbines in Madison are noisier than the ones in Fenner. A person in the audience who’d visited wind turbines was asked for her opinion and she said they didn’t sound that noisy. Alice pointed out that according to NYSERDA, at the base, a wind tower is 80-90 decibels (how many people in the audience do you think understand how loud 80 decibels is or 50 decibels. I certainly don’t) At 1000 feet the noise would be 50 decibels (last winter Erich Bachmeyer told my husband and myself that the turbines would be 35 decibels at 1000 feet. There is a difference between 35 and 50) (In fact, each 3 dB amount to a factor of 2. 6 dB difference is a factor or 4, 12 dB is a factor 16, etc.) NYSERDA says that at one quarter of a mile the wind towers would be 35 decibels.

Peter Keane pointed out that NYSERDA would study this matter and look at noise a tad more scientifically than it was being discussed in the room last night. Alice pointed out that there doesn’t seem to be a permitting process and asked how there could be community input (as required by SEQRA) and Peter got visibly disturbed. He said, “What is this if not community input” Well, maybe he thinks there was community input, but I think it was not since I felt muzzled)

About now Alice pointed out that these two projects together total well over 80 megawatts of electricity and under the now defunct Article X would have required a more rigorous review than the SEQRA review. Peter responded that these two projects are not the same so there wouldn’t have been an Article X review. It is fascinating that Ecogen planned their project to be 79.5 megawatts – just under 80 megawatts, so he wouldn’t have had to comply with ARTICLE X. Isn’t that fulfilling the letter of the law, but not the spirit?

Alice asked what noise measuring process does NYSERDA use and how does a neighbor give input. She also pointed out during the decibel discussion that noise is louder depending on the background noise that is present and that the National Wind Council says there should be noise studies for normal background.

CAN A LANDOWNER END A LEASE IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY SHOWS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF NEGATIVES WITH WIND TURBINES?

Forgive me, but I think the answer was no but I’m not sure. I believe Hagner reiterated that people have signed 25 year leases.

I forgot to mention that earlier on Harold McConnell had said that the town will get half a million dollars from wind turbines. Now someone asked:

HOW DO YOU FIGURE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS?

Harold answered that the landowners would be getting $3000 per turbine, the town would get three thousand per turbine and the school would get the same.

Alice pointed out that at an April 29 2002 meeting the Board decided not to sign a contract with GWH and as of now there is no contract – nothing written down that the town will get $3000 per. Yours truly is totally confused about the money issue and the handout from Jeff Black, the school superintendent, only confused me more.

Glenn, the moderator now asked, IF WE HAVE NO ZONING, WHY IS THE TOWN INVOLVED – WHY DOES THE TOWN GET MONEY?

Peter from NYSERDA replied that the towers are a structure and they get taxed.

Alice pointed out that after fifteen years the landowner gets taxed. Yours truly does not know what that means. Does the landowner not have to pay taxes on their lease money for the first fifteen years? Does the landowner have to pay property taxes on the wind tower after fifteen years?

----

When asked if the wind towers were comparable to the ones in Fenner, Tom from Ecogen said his were fifteen meters (that’s about 45 feet) taller. Erich said they were comparable.

Now the question came up about birds and are they killed and Erich turned the conversation over to his sidekick in the audience who stood up and started quoting facts (and I had trouble hearing him) about the thousands of birds that were killed because of towers that were 500-700 feet tall (I was under the assumption that the ones in Prattsburgh are the tallest that can be put on land – that was stated at a previous meeting) and I think the gist of it was that “what can you do, birds die” but we’ve reduced the number.

Alice pointed out that the Fish and Wildlife Bureau has 57 pages of guidelines concerning birds and structures and I assume wind towers. She also mentioned that the Audubon Society (she spoke to someone there ) has not been involved in studies in this area and said they probably wouldn’t be done because they are too expensive.

-------

Both companies say that they have money in an escrow account to take care of bankruptcy, wind tower obsolescence, etc. How much money was not told to us nor whether inflation is covered.

I’m not sure what brought this about, but about now Alice pointed out that out west people are getting more money for their leases. Erich replied that the wind resource is better out west. This is when he said that his company pays a flat rate or a percentage which is totally the opposite of what he told Terry and me last winter. He went into a lengthy explanation about why his company doesn’t do that and then last night my mouth fell open as he said that yes in fact that is what they do.

In answer to a question about roads, Erich said his company repairs roads after the turbines are installed but once they are built there won’t be a lot of traffic. Hagner said nothing.

Someone asked about the lights and who would see them and where they would shine and the questioner felt his question was not answered in the least. WE found out that not all (hopefully ) turbines will have lights but no one knows yet. At night the lights will be red, in the day they will be white. We quickly moved on.

Now we discussed ice. Tom Hagner was adamant that ice is not a problem – there are sensors in the blade to shut it down.

Someone said there is liability insurance – I think Erich said that . Alice asked what would happen if a mechanic was working on a windmill and a tree from a neighbor’s property fell down and injured the mechanic. Would the neighbor then get sued by the wind farm factory?

About now we found out that two Board members have family members who have signed leases, but no one responded to the question as to whether this is a conflict of interest.

When asked what he would do with the money the town gets, Harold said he’d thought about paving the roads sooner than anticipated. Note he didn’t say they would actually do it.

CAN WINDMILLS REDUCE DEPENDENCE ON OTHER SOURCES? Now Erich spoke at length about greedy Americans and how we need to work on conservation. Note: not a direct answer to the question.

Jeff did point out that when wind is used, something else isn’t. that needs more study.

Erich and Hagner were both asked how come certain other towns decided not to let them build wind towers in their towns. Hagner was completely at a loss to understand why South Bristol said no. Erich made a comment about rich people with second homes not wanting to ruin their view.

And then the meeting was over – or at least my notes end.

Don’t you wish you’d been there?

Respectfully submitted, Ruth Matilsky