E-mail
Print
A wind farm proposed in mountainous Western Maryland that proponents say could be the first to be built in the state got an airing Wednesday before state regulators, where it ran into increasingly familiar turbulence from some residents concerned about safety and environmental effects.
Synergics Wind Energy wants to erect up to 20 turbines atop Backbone Mountain near Oakland in Garrett County. Wayne Rogers, chairman of the Annapolis-based company, said he's ready to start construction in the spring, assuming the state Public Service Commission gives the more than $50 million project the green light.
The three-member commission, which oversees gas and electric companies, has given the go-ahead in the past year to two other wind farms proposed in Western Maryland. One project has been stalled by unspecified economic issues while the other got waylaid by local restrictions requiring, among other things, that the turbines be kept well back from homes, schools and historic sites. The state is now studying whether to allow turbines to be planted in the Atlantic Ocean off Ocean City.
A Synergics spokesman said the company's proposal represents a test of whether Maryland would produce substantial wind energy, at least on land. The 400-foot-tall turbines would be strung along a high mountain ridge that's been timbered, next to a now-inactive coal mine and with an electricity transmission line nearby.
"If you can't do it here, I don't know where you can do it," said Frank Maisano, a Washington representative for the Maryland company.
Aiming to get away from burning climate-warming coal and other fossil fuels to provide power for Maryland's residents, the state is pushing wind and solar energy projects as it shoots for getting 20 percent of all power from renewable sources by 2022. Malcolm Woolf, director of the Maryland Energy Administration, said he anticipates the Synergics project could be the first built in the state because developers already have a contract to supply electricity to Delmarva Power.
But a handful of Garrett residents and property owners made the trek to Baltimore to voice their concerns or outright opposition to the project.
Victor Fickes, a retired software engineer who lives in Southern Maryland, said one of the proposed turbines would be less than 1,200 feet from the second home he built on the mountain. He and other property owners failed to get a Garrett Circuit Court to block the project or require that the turbines be built farther from their fence lines. Saying he was worried about noise, low-level vibrations and the possibility a turbine could topple or fly apart, Fickes appealed to the state commission to require that the towers be kept at least 2,600 feet from his home.
"This commission ... is our last and only hope that our government will protect us," he said.
Jon Boone, an Oakland artist, railed against the project, contending it could hurt people and wildlife while delivering little reliable energy. He also criticized the commission for supporting a 2007 law that relaxes state review of such projects for environmental and safety issues. Douglas Nazarian, the commission chairman, expressed discomfort with the law but said there was little regulators could do about it. Synergics officials countered that they had met all local and state requirements. The risks of turbine accidents are remote, they contend, and keeping the nearest turbine 400 feet from an adjoining lot owner's fence line is an adequate safety setback.
The commission is expected to rule later. Last year, the panel approved 28 turbines elsewhere on Backbone Mountain that were proposed by Clipper Windpower. But the California-based company has yet to move forward. A spokesman said last fall that the firm was still trying to secure financing. Attempts to learn the project's status Wednesday were unsuccessful.
The Public Service Commission also approved a proposal to put 25 wind turbines on Dan's Mountain near Frostburg. But in June, Allegany County commissioners adopted new rules for commercial wind farms, requiring that turbines be kept at least 2,000 feet from homes and 5,000 feet from schools or historic sites. Wind companies also would have to pledge funds to dismantle turbines if they go out of business.
An official with US Windforce, the Pennsylvania-based firm proposing the $142 million project, said it could not go forward under the new rules.
Synergics Wind Energy wants to erect up to 20 turbines atop Backbone Mountain near Oakland in Garrett County. Wayne Rogers, chairman of the Annapolis-based company, said he's ready to start construction in the spring, assuming the state Public Service Commission gives the more than $50 million project the green light.
The three-member commission, which oversees gas and electric companies, has given the go-ahead in the past year to two other wind farms proposed in Western Maryland. One project has been stalled by unspecified economic issues while the other got waylaid by local restrictions requiring, among other things, that the turbines be kept well back from homes, schools and historic sites. The state is now studying whether to allow turbines to be planted in the Atlantic Ocean off Ocean City.
A Synergics spokesman said the company's proposal represents a test of whether Maryland would produce substantial wind energy, at least on land. The 400-foot-tall turbines would be strung along a high mountain ridge that's been timbered, next to a now-inactive coal mine and with an electricity transmission line nearby.
"If you can't do it here, I don't know where you can do it," said Frank Maisano, a Washington representative for the Maryland company.
Aiming to get away from burning climate-warming coal and other fossil fuels to provide power for Maryland's residents, the state is pushing wind and solar energy projects as it shoots for getting 20 percent of all power from renewable sources by 2022. Malcolm Woolf, director of the Maryland Energy Administration, said he anticipates the Synergics project could be the first built in the state because developers already have a contract to supply electricity to Delmarva Power.
But a handful of Garrett residents and property owners made the trek to Baltimore to voice their concerns or outright opposition to the project.
Victor Fickes, a retired software engineer who lives in Southern Maryland, said one of the proposed turbines would be less than 1,200 feet from the second home he built on the mountain. He and other property owners failed to get a Garrett Circuit Court to block the project or require that the turbines be built farther from their fence lines. Saying he was worried about noise, low-level vibrations and the possibility a turbine could topple or fly apart, Fickes appealed to the state commission to require that the towers be kept at least 2,600 feet from his home.
"This commission ... is our last and only hope that our government will protect us," he said.
Jon Boone, an Oakland artist, railed against the project, contending it could hurt people and wildlife while delivering little reliable energy. He also criticized the commission for supporting a 2007 law that relaxes state review of such projects for environmental and safety issues. Douglas Nazarian, the commission chairman, expressed discomfort with the law but said there was little regulators could do about it. Synergics officials countered that they had met all local and state requirements. The risks of turbine accidents are remote, they contend, and keeping the nearest turbine 400 feet from an adjoining lot owner's fence line is an adequate safety setback.
The commission is expected to rule later. Last year, the panel approved 28 turbines elsewhere on Backbone Mountain that were proposed by Clipper Windpower. But the California-based company has yet to move forward. A spokesman said last fall that the firm was still trying to secure financing. Attempts to learn the project's status Wednesday were unsuccessful.
The Public Service Commission also approved a proposal to put 25 wind turbines on Dan's Mountain near Frostburg. But in June, Allegany County commissioners adopted new rules for commercial wind farms, requiring that turbines be kept at least 2,000 feet from homes and 5,000 feet from schools or historic sites. Wind companies also would have to pledge funds to dismantle turbines if they go out of business.
An official with US Windforce, the Pennsylvania-based firm proposing the $142 million project, said it could not go forward under the new rules.
Digg
Twitter
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Just a few NIMBY complaints, which the media loves to headline, until you read the report and discover it amounts to nothing major and the typical lazy written news story. No real additional perspective as to any substantial positions pro or con to the issue of emerging clean energy initiatives.
The greater perspective of wind energy projects is if this type of clean energy production were to scale up to even a 10% portion of Maryland%u2019s energy usage requirements, what would it mean to reach that capacity? A hundred or maybe even a thousand wind energy sites like the one in this story. That%u2019s the real news storyline. Would the NIMBY complaints be so resistive as to kill off moving in that direction? If that would be the case, which I think is likely, then wind energy as a serious clean energy solution will not gain traction.
Which at that point begs to ask, are the government regulators mandating reserved funds be secured to take down these installations if they prove unprofitable? Hence the relics of these experiments do not leave a scaring landscape in its wake. But I guess news reporters are not clever enough to think through these types of issues to ask & report the answers to better questions.
marco01 (10/15/2009, 7:20 PM )