Wind turbines fit with farms

From an editorial in the Wisconsin State Journal:

Congratulations to the Columbia County Board for recognizing last week that wind turbines complement farmland preservation.

The board agreed Wednesday that farmers in the towns of Randolph and Scott can lease small amounts of land to We Energies for wind turbines without violating their state agreements to keep their land in agricultural production.

The board's decision is wise because the turbines will give each farmer thousands of dollars in extra income to keep their farm operations going. And the amount of land taken out of production for turbine foundations and access roads will be miniscule compared to the total size of cropland that will remain.

We Energies also has agreed to buy two homes from neighbors who were concerned about living within a quarter mile of some of the turbines.

That means this exciting wind project in northeast Columbia County can now move forward with 90 turbines scattered across some 17,000 acres of productive farmland.

We Energies started developing the site, called Glacier Hills Energy Park, last week. It's located about 50 miles northeast of Madison.

The energy company hopes to fire up the wind park by the end of next year or early 2012. It will produce enough clean energy to power 45,000 homes.

Wisconsin's wind industry is just taking off, and more clean energy is needed to reduce Wisconsin's reliance on dirty coal and gas that's imported from other states and foreign countries.

Obey seeks $2M for projects, including renewable energy

From an article by Nathaniel Shuda in the Stevens Point Journal:

In his last batch of funding requests before his retirement, U.S. Rep. Dave Obey, D-Wausau, is seeking almost $2 million in earmarks for Portage County.

Four of the 85 projects Obey submitted for consideration in the 2011 federal budget are specific to the county, with several focused on central Wisconsin and others on statewide projects.

Despite being a retiring congressman, the likelihood Obey's projects will get funding remains relatively high, given his seniority in the House of Representatives and position as Appropriations Committee chairman, said Ed Miller, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.

"It's more difficult when you're going out of office, but given that he's the chairman of the committee, I think he's going to handle it well," Miller said.

Among the projects, which the Appropriations Committee and full House and Senate still must approve, are funds to help the UWSP Institute for Sustainable Technology, Project Learn Program, redevelopment in the city of Stevens Point and the continued reconstruction of Highway 10.

Among other projects in central Wisconsin is an expanded renewable energy center at Mid-State Technical College.

Mid-State's board of directors recently approved a $2 million renewable energy center at its Wisconsin Rapids campus, but that could more than double if Congress approves another $4.5 million Obey requested for the project.

"It will allow us to basically complete the whole project," said Al Javoroski, dean of Mid-State's technical and industrial division, who still expressed some hesitation after Congress rejected a $20 million request in 2009.

"The big picture is we're going to do what we need to (in order) to support our renewable energy initiative."

State should study impact of biomass plant

From an editorial in the Wausau Daily Herald:

The group of citizens who are working to stop a proposed biomass plant near the Domtar paper mill in Rothschild have been working to cast doubt on virtually all of the claims made about the project -- environmental claims, economic claims and so on.

Of their concerns, the questions around the plant's environmental impact are the most serious, because the air emissions have the potential to do the most harm.

Domtar and We Energies have answered them in some detail, and we have no reason to doubt their analysis of the plant's impact. Still, there's no getting around the fact that those companies have an economic incentive to spin the facts in a way that is most beneficial to their project.

That's why we all would benefit from an environmental impact statement on the project by the state and federal governments. It would provide a solid and independent expert analysis of the project.

The regulations governing these projects are arcane, but the essence of the argument is easy to understand: The state Public Service Commission, sometimes in conjunction with the Department of Natural Resources and federal agencies, has the capacity to prepare an independent assessment of the real environmental effects of the proposed project. This includes the impact of emissions, noise and other factors.

By statute, that analysis is automatically triggered for any power plant generating 100 megawatts or more. The proposed biomass plant will generate 50 megawatts, so an environmental impact statement is not required.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be completed. Fifty megawatts of electricity still is a major power plant. An environmental impact statement would add an important expert perspective to the local discussion about the plant. This is a big project, and a relatively new technology. It bears scrutiny.

Biking to work good for health, environment

From an article by Jake Miller in the Marshfield News-Herald:

Four dollars a gallon was enough inspiration for Steven Uthmeier to ditch the car.

Several years later, and in the midst of national Bike-to-Work week, the 56-year-old still bikes to work almost daily, huffing it into Marshfield on an old Schwinn that's made for a commute, not for looks.

Uthmeier cruises in from Hewitt, making a round trip of about 11 miles each day to and from home and his desk at Ministry Saint Joseph's Hospital.
Inhumane gasoline prices sparked his interest, but how Uthmeier feels after a ride has kept him going. He's refreshed and refocused.

"After I got into it, I felt better," Uthmeier said. "Then I was actually doing it for the exercise also, and I found on the way home after I finished a day of work it was very decompressing and relaxing."

Biking to work is by no means the primary mode of transportation and it isn't without inherent risks. There's the off-chance you'll be hit by a car, or you may get a flat at the most inopportune time.

Marshfield has continued to develop its network of bike trails, which for people like Uthmeier, has made the ride nearly as safe as it's going to get. He's only riding in traffic for about a mile before he reaches the path along Veterans Parkway.

"You do have cars going 45 (mph)," Uthmeier said, "but as soon as you get to the boulevard it's just beautiful."

He typically bikes to work from April to October, unless a heavy rain or snow storm hits.

Report: Coal use saps Wisconsin's economy

From an article by Larry Bivins in the Stevens Point Journal:

WASHINGTON -- Wisconsin is the nation's fifth most coal-dependent state for generating electricity, according to a report released this week.

Because the state has no coal supplies of its own, it spends hundreds of millions of dollars a year to import the fuel for power generation. Coal imports accounted for 68 percent of all power used in the state in 2008, research by the Union of Concerned Scientists found.
Wisconsin spent $853 million in 2008, or $152 per person, to import 25 million tons of coal from nine states, according to the report released Tuesday.

The state ranked 12th in the amount spent and in the amount of coal imported. Wyoming, which provided 40 percent of all U.S. coal in 2008, received $702 million of Wisconsin's money.

Coal-fired plants are the nation's biggest source of carbon dioxide, the primary greenhouse gas that leading scientists say is causing global warming. Carbon dioxide emissions pose a danger to public health as well as the environment.

The Union of Concerned Scientists report, "Burning Coal, Burning Cash: Ranking the States that Import the Most Coal," covers 38 states that are net importers of domestic and foreign coal. Those states spent $27.7 billion on domestic and foreign coal imports in 2008, the latest year for which figures were available from the U.S. Energy Department.
Wyoming, West Virginia and Kentucky produce most of the domestic coal burned in U.S. plants.

The report's authors conclude that all states would be better served if the money spent on coal were diverted to the development of renewable energy and energy-efficiency programs.

Time Of Use Program can cut electricity costs

From a story by Brittany Earl on WSAW-TV, Wausau:

There are ways you can cut your electricity costs.

Wisconsin Public Service offers a variety of programs to help you save money.

For example the Time Of Use Program, helps people who use their electricity between 10PM and 7AM which are off peak hours. But you should always call in and speak to a representative first to make sure your lifestyle fits the program.

Kelly Zagrzebski of Wisconsin Public Service says, "You want to make sure your flexible, that you can do your laundry if you have an electric hot water heater during the off peak hours or if you have a electric heater."

If you stick to the off peak hours time frame, you could save between 5 and 20 percent, possibly even 50 percent if you're strict.

$45 million in bonding OK'd for Rapids wind blade factory

From a blog post by Tom Content on JSonline:

Energy Composites Corp. will receive $45 million of tax-exempt bonds to assist in the construction of its wind power blade factory in Wisconsin Rapids, Gov. Jim Doyle’s office announced.

The company is receiving Recovery Zone Facility Bonds, which the facility is eligible for under a law that passed earlier this year that allows the state to maximize federal bonds to help fund projects.

Energy Composites, which employs 67 people, projects that its expansion will create up to 600 jobs.

The company’s factory is designed to produce up to 1,500 utility-scale wind blades per year, for use in both onshore and offshore wind farms.

Energy Composites said in a statement that it has completed the purchase of land in Wisconsin Rapids for its new factory. Two different properties were acquired -- a 54-acre parcel for the 535,000-square-foot factory and a 41-acre parcel for the company’s logistics center.

The $54.4 million investment will be the first factory in North America designed to produce blades up to 65 meters long, which could position the company to deliver blades for large turbines both on land and offshore, according to the governor’s office.

Site improvements by the city of Wisconsin Rapids are under way, and the city has committed $7.5 million in development incentives toward the project.

PSC sets hearings on state-side wind siting rules

From a news release issued by the Public Service Commission:

MADISON – The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) is seeking public comment on the proposed wind siting rules, issued today by the PSC. The proposed rules will ultimately result in uniform wind siting standards for local units of government in Wisconsin and ensure consistent local procedures for regulation of wind energy systems. . . .

2009 Wisconsin Act 40 (Act 40) requires the PSC to promulgate a variety of rules that specify the conditions a city, village, town, or county (political subdivision) may impose on the installation or use of a wind energy system. If a political subdivision chooses to regulate such systems, its ordinances may not be more restrictive than the PSC’s rules. The PSC will also consider the restrictions specified in these rules when determining whether to grant a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a wind energy system over 100 megawatts.

The PSC established docket 1-AC-231 to conduct the rulemaking under Act 40. Act 40 requires the PSC to conduct this rulemaking with the advice of the Wind Siting Council. The Wind Siting Council is an advisory body created by Act 40. The Wind Siting Council members have begun to provide input to Commission staff concerning these rules during a series of meetings in early 2010. The PSC will seek comments from the Wind Siting Council on the proposed draft rules issued by the Commission.

Any person may submit written comments on these proposed rules. Comments on the proposed rules will be accepted until July 7, 2010, at noon (July 6, 2010, at noon, if filed by fax). The comments are considered when staff is drafting the rules.

The PSC will hold hearings to take testimony from the public regarding the proposed rules in the Amnicon Falls Hearing Room at the Public Service Commission Building, 610 North Whitney Way, Madison, Wisconsin, on June 30, 2010. Act 40 requires that hearings regarding these rules also be held in Monroe County and a county other than Dane or Monroe, where developers have proposed wind energy systems. The PSC will also hold public hearings on these proposed rules at City Hall, Legislative Chambers, 160 West Macy Street in Fond du Lac on June 28, 2010, and Holiday Inn, 1017 East McCoy Boulevard in Tomah on June 29, 2010.

More information on the Wind Siting Council and the wind siting rulemaking pursuant to Act 40 can be found by visiting the Commission’s website and clicking on the Electronic Regulatory Filing System (ERF) at http://psc.wi.gov. Type case numbers 1-AC-231 in the boxes provided on the ERF system. To comment on the proposed rules, click on the Public Comments button on the PSC’s homepage and scroll down to select Wind Siting Rulemaking.

Weston 4 power plant must cut particulate pollution

From an article in the Wausau Daily Herald:

ROTHSCHILD — The massive coal-fired power plant Weston 4 must limit the visibility of pollutants leaving its main smokestack but does not need tighter controls for other emissions, an appeals court ruled today.

A three-judge panel of the District 4 Court of Appeals agreed with the Sierra Club that the state Department of Natural Resources erred when it did not require the smokestack for the plant’s main boiler to follow a federal visibility standard for pollutants on its air pollution permit.

Limiting the visibility of emissions effectively limits the amount of harmful particulate matter that becomes airborne. The DNR and the plant’s operator, Wisconsin Public Service Corp. of Green Bay, argued the visibility standard was unnecessary because emissions of particulate matter and sulfuric acid from the boiler were controlled in other ways.

The appeals court sided with the environmental group, which argued that the visibility standard was clearly required under the Clean Air Act. The rule will require continuous monitoring to ensure the pollution leaving the smokestack meets an opacity standard — that it is much closer to invisible than a thick black cloud of dust.

The court rejected the Sierra Club’s argument that the plant needs to install different technology to further reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. The court found the limits set by the DNR were appropriate.

The $774 million plant near Wausau opened in 2008. It is owned by WPS and Dairyland Power Cooperative of La Crosse, and they say it is one of the cleanest coal plants in the nation.

The Sierra Club says it is nonetheless one of the largest pollution sources in central Wisconsin and has fought for years to strengthen the air permit.

County takes steps toward energy efficiency

From an article by Cara Spoto in the Stevens Point Journal:

Hoping to reduce Portage County's carbon footprint and save a little money in the process, county leaders will start work this month on a strategic energy plan.

The Smart Energy Team, led by Portage County Executive Patty Dreier and County Board Chairman O. Philip Idsvoog, has a goal of having a plan in place by Dec. 1. Toward that end, the group has received $12,000 in capital improvement dollars, along with a $4,500 grant, which may be used to hire a consultant.

Jennifer Stewart, community development educator with the University of Wisconsin-Extension in Whiting, said the first phase of the planning process will largely consist of taking a snapshot of how much energy the county consumes and in what ways.

"What we have talked about doing at the first meeting is reviewing the scope of the committee's charge and start identifying first steps," Stewart said.

From there, the team will draw on the knowledge of experts and its members, including Planning and Zoning Director Jeff Schuler, Facilities Director Todd Neuenfeldt and the chairs of the finance and space and properties committee, to establish a set of goals for consumption, alternative energy use and conservation.

Options for achieving such goals could include retrofitting buildings, altering building operations, purchasing energy-efficient equipment, using alternative energy sources and educating employees.

Impressions of the Wind Siting Council’s Tour of Wind Developments

The Wind Siting Advisory Committee, created to advise the Public Service Commission on statewide wind siting standards, toured Blue Sky Green Field Wind Energy Center and Forward Wind Center on May 4, 2010, to gain first hand knowledge of turbine impacts.

Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin's executive director, prepared the following commentary on his impressions of the tour:

Impressions of the Wind Siting Council’s Tour of Wind Development in Fond du Lac County

Stop 1 – Home of Larry Wunsch, council member, pilot, and wind project opponent

A member of the Wind Siting Council and a critic of windpower, Larry lives on a 60-acre parcel located on the northern edge of the Forward project along Hwy F. On his 60 acres you’ll find a six-year-old 2,200 square-foot house, a hangar, a airplane, an airstrip, and 50 acres of rentable ag land, all zoned agricultural. The property is for sale; the asking price is $600,000. You can take a digital tour of his property by visiting http://www.fdlairstrip.com. Observe that not a single turbine shows up in any of the images on his web site. As you will appreciate later on in this document, editing out the wind turbines was not an easy feat to pull off.

Fourteen of the 15 council members were present at Larry Wunsch’s house. Also gathering there were PSC staff, a film crew from WI Public Television, Bill Rakocy’s partners at Emerging Energies (Tim Osterberg and Jay Mundinger) a smattering of local wind critics (Gerry Meyer and Curt Kindschuh), two WINDCOWS representatives from Manitowoc County (Dave and Lynn Korinek), Lynda Barry from Rock County, furiously taking notes, and a few others whom I didn’t recognize.

I came a few minutes late, and missed some of Larry’s opening remarks. From what I gleaned from others, Larry mentioned that he poured much if not all of his personal savings into acquiring this property some 11 years ago. Between the appearance of his property and the tidbits of information he provided yesterday, I would characterize Larry’s parcel as investment property on which he built his dream house, which is set back about 100 yards from the road. The property tax levy on his 60-acre parcel is quite modest -- $5,400 per year. At some point in the future, his plan was to subdivide the ag land into residential properties.

The wind was blowing from the west-southwest. My educated guess is that the winds were clocking in about 10 – 14 miles/hour.

The closest turbine to Larry’s house is located practically due west at a distance of 1,100 feet. I honestly could not hear the wind turbine from where I stood, about 50 feet east of the house. I was surprised by this, because I had stopped at the Blue Sky Green Field operations center on the way to Larry’s house, and there I could clearly hear the Vestas V-82 turbine that is 1,100 feet away from the building entrance.

There was no shadow flicker to experience, due to the generally cloudy conditions at Forward as well as the time of day. There was no missing the visual impact of the Forward project looking south from where we gathered, which was in front of Larry’s hangar. There were easily 50 turbines viewable from that vantage point. Moreover, off in the eastern horizon, the Cedar Ridge turbines were plainly visible, although their visual impact was slight compared to the panorama of Forward turbines from east to west. Since he owned the property before the wind turbines were constructed, the change in his south-facing viewshed must have been dramatic, to say the least.

No one had any difficulty hearing Larry or any other speaker during the tour stop. Maybe others were able to perceive sound coming from the turbines, but I certainly wasn’t. We were able to make out a plethora of other sounds while we were there, including a very loud plane flying overhead, occasional bird chatter, random mooing of cows and, at one point, a helicopter buzzing over the turbines. The bucolic sounds of the countryside were in no way disturbed or distorted by whooshing noise. . . .

Stop 2 – Blue Sky Green Field Operations Center

On the way to the operations center, the clouds broke up and the sun shone through. We assembled at the operations center, where We Energies’ Andy Hesselbach delivered a brief presentation on WE’s generation profile and the construction of the Blue Sky Green Field in 2007-2008, and its performance since. The turbines were achieving availability ratings of 99% or better. According to Andy, wind farm production was tracking close to preconstruction estimates, and that April had been a good month for wind. (An aside: it was a hell of a good month for solar too. . . .)

The overall impression conveyed by the We Energies-Vestas team is that Blue Sky Green Field is a well-managed project and that We Energies is a responsible project owner, effectively balancing the objective of maximizing facility output with the obligation to be a good neighbor to area residents.

After the presentations were concluded, the group walked to the turbine closest to the operations center. As we approached the turbine we spotted two red-tailed hawks wheeling above the turbine, looking not the least bit alarmed. The wind started to pick up then.

The turbine door was opened and a few Council members and PSC staff stepped inside. Others gathered about 200 feet from the turbine to talk. Even though everyone was quite conscious of the whooshing blades (and an audible chirping sound with each revolution), we were able to converse with each other without having to raise our voices or cup our ears. Not far away, one of the Council members, a wind opponent, was listening to messages on his mobile. No one, including the opponents, seemed troubled by our proximity to the turbine. Given how quick they are to misrepresent the contents of the Vestas safety manual, they seemed not at all worried about what harm might befall them being only 200 feet from a spinning industrial monster. The two WINDCOWS representatives were tagging along and they didn’t seem the least bit fazed either.

A Cruel Month for Clean Energy

A commentary
by Michael Vickerman, RENEW Wisconsin
May 4, 2010

Renewable energy businesses and activists entered the month of April with high hopes of seeing the State Legislature pass the Clean Energy Jobs Act (CEJA), a comprehensive bill designed to propel Wisconsin toward energy independence, along the way creating thousands of new jobs and strengthening the sustainable energy marketplace. This comprehensive bill would have raised the renewable energy content of electricity sold in Wisconsin, while stepping up ratepayer support for smaller-scale renewable energy installations throughout the state.

Unfortunately, on April 22, the State Senate adjourned for the year without taking action on the Clean Energy Jobs Act bill, effectively killing the measure and leaving hundreds of businesses and individuals who campaigned for the bill empty-handed.

If life imitates poetry, then the line that opens T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land—“April is the cruelest month”—aptly encapsulates the evolution of a campaign that overcame many obstacles in the final weeks only to be undermined by the unwillingness of Senate leaders to schedule a vote on the bill. The sense of anticipation that began the month was swept away by a combination of personal feuds, extreme partisanship, and increasingly polarized public attitudes toward climate change. That the bill’s demise coincided with the 40th anniversary of Earth Day was seen by supporters as an especially cruel twist of fate.

It certainly didn’t help matters that the some of the state’s most politically entrenched constituencies banded together to fight CEJA at every stage of the process. Among the hard-core opponents were Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, the Paper Council and the Farm Bureau. Their vociferous opposition scuttled bipartisanship, eliminating the possibility that a Republican legislator would vote for the bill.

Working hand-in-glove with vitriolic right-wing radio talk show hosts, the opposition supplied their grassroots faithful with a smorgasbord of exaggerated claims, hyperbole, outright fantasy, and pseudoscience. Though the analysis purporting to document the opposition’s assertions set a new low in academic rigor, it succeeded in its aim, which was to plant the seeds of fear among certain legislators about the ultimate cost of this legislation before the bill was even introduced.

Working just as vigorously for the Clean Energy Jobs Act, a broad spectrum of interests answered the requests for help. Whether they were one-person solar installation businesses or Fortune 500 corporations like Milwaukee-based Johnson Controls, CEJA supporters wrote letters, made phone calls, and corralled their legislators at the Capitol on several days during March and April.

In dozens of face-to-face meetings with their representatives, CEJA supporters made the case for this bill by bringing out their own experiences as business owners, farmers, educators, builders, and skilled tradesmen. They presented a local and highly personal angle to the clean energy policy debate that many legislators had not appreciated before. Their passion and energy were instrumental in giving this bill a fighting chance for passage at the end of the session. Unfortunately, the campaign could not overcome the pique of the Senate Democrats.

One legislator who kept pushing this ambitious bill up the legislative hill until the very last day was Assembly representative Spencer Black, who was one of the four principal authors of the measure. CEJA supporters are indebted to Rep. Black for his vigorous leadership and his determined efforts to round up support among his compatriots for passing this bill.

Two rays of sunlight did manage to pierce through the heavy clouds at the close of April, prompted by the dedication of the two largest wind turbines owned by Wisconsin schools. In each case, the school erected a 100-kilowatt Northwind turbine manufactured by Vermont-based Northern Power Systems. One serves Wausau East High School while the other feeds power to the Madison Area Technical College’s Fort Atkinson branch. The turbines will offset a significant fraction of the electricity consumed at each school.

Located well within the city limits of Wausau and Fort Atkinson, these 155-foot-tall wind generators eloquently testify to the breadth and depth of public support for renewable energy across Wisconsin. Next January, the Legislature will witness the return of clean energy supporters with similar legislation for strengthening Wisconsin’s renewable energy marketplace. In the meantime, we will be working hard to achieve a very different outcome.

END

Michael Vickerman is the executive director of RENEW Wisconsin, a sustainable energy advocacy organization headquartered in Madison. For more information on Wisconsin renewable energy policy, visit RENEW’s web site at: www.renewwisconsin.org.

Plover plant chosen for energy efficiency pilot program

From an article by Nick Paulson in the Stevens Point Journal:

A Plover food processing plant has been chosen as one of 50 companies to participate in a state pilot program to help manufacturers improve their next-generation initiatives.

Foremost Farms USA, which makes whey products at its Plover plant, will take part in a $1.75 million program run through the Wisconsin Manufacturing Extension Partnership.

State energy auditors will canvass the Foremost plant to look for ways the company can save energy.

"Does it make sense to invest in a more energy-efficient system?" The company hopes to find out, communications director Joan Behr said. "We'll be able to tap the expertise of these folks."

After working with the auditors and determining what changes need to be made, each company will apply to the Wisconsin Department of Commerce for the money to complete the sustainability initiatives.

PSC advisory panel visits wind farms

The Wind Siting Advisory Committee, created to advise the Public Service Commission on statewide wind siting standards, toured Blue Sky Green Field Wind Energy Center and Forward Wind Center to gain first hand knowledge of turbine impacts.

MREA, Molepske, Jr., Lassa to be honored by UWSP College of Natural Resources

From an article in the Stevens Point Journal:

A local renewable energy organization and two local state officials will be among those honored next week by the College of Natural Resources at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.

The Midwest Renewable Energy Association and state representative Louis Molepske, Jr. have been named co-recipients of the 2009-10 Environmental Leader Award. In addition to his involvement as a member of the CNR's Advisory Board, Molepske, Jr., also serves on the Assembly Committee on Agriculture, Committee on Natural Resources, and Committee on Fish and Wildlife.

The MREA promotes renewable energy, energy efficiency and sustainable living through education and demonstration and sponsors the MREA Energy Fair, the nation's longest running energy education event of its kind.

The award honors individuals and organizations that have made significant contributions to maintaining the integrity of our ecosystems. Candidates are nominated by the faculty and selected by the CNR Dean’s Council.

State Senator Julie Lassa is one of five individuals to receive the CNR’s 2009-10 Outstanding Contributor Award for her longtime support of college programs, most recently her efforts to secure state funding for core staffing in UWSP’s promising initiative, the Wisconsin Institute for Sustainable Technology.