Union man details how council wrote wind rules
UNION TOWNSHIP — A local man who worked on the state council to write wind siting rules says the slanted make-up of the committee toward the wind industry created a disservice to the process.
The resulting rules likely will increase local dissent and resistance to proposed projects, which he predicts will end up in court, said Doug Zweizig, who co-chaired the wind siting council.
"I don't know what's going to happen, but I don't think it's going to be pretty," said Zweizig, who also is vice-chair of the Town of Union Plan Commission and worked on a special committee to write the town's wind ordinance.
The wind siting council this week released its report that serves as recommendations to the state Public Service Commission.
Zweizig was one of four council members that disagreed with portions of the report and wrote a minority opinion that was attached to the end of it. The minority report states concerns over the failure "to address the realities of the effects of large wind turbines on nearby populations, to bring quality information into critical areas and to explore the economic implications of locating an industrial facility next to a residential area."
The process
Legislators approved a bill last fall to allow the PSC to create rules to regulate wind projects statewide instead of the patchwork of local ordinances.
The council drafted its report over the last four months, and the three PSC commissioners will consider the report, the full record and all public and stakeholder comments before issuing the final rules, said Lori Sakk, legislative liaison for the PSC.
Then the presiding officer of the state Assembly and Senate will have 10 days to refer the rules to a committee, which would have 30 days to schedule a hearing or request to meet with the agency. If neither action is taken, the rules are promulgated and become law.
The law said the council members needed to be representatives of specific categories, including the energy industry, uncompensated landowners, wind developers, real estate agents, medical and research experts, environmentalists and local government.
But, "that's not the way the appointments were made," Zweizig said.
Whenever the PSC had any leeway, someone with ties or a supporting opinion to the wind industry was appointed, he said.
Sakk responded by saying the council members were appointed according to the statutory eligibility requirements established by the state Legislature.
Zweizig said his impression is that wind industry advocates were frustrated with towns such as Union, which has an ordinance for a half-mile turbine setback, so they went to the state to override the local ordinances. They got the legislation, he said, and since the PSC already was supportive, a council was put together to rubber stamp the desired outcome.
"What that did in terms of group process, meant that the majority never really had to explain itself very much … or talk through issues," Zweizig said. "They didn't have to do that because they knew they had the votes."
Council Chairman Dan Ebert said in a letter accompanying the report that the council had "significant discussions" on many recommendations "in the spirit of working toward consensus." He said the recommendations reflect input from all council members, but acknowledged there were areas that the council did not reach a consensus.
The council's report states a turbine should be sited so:
-- It is set back from homes 1.1 times the maximum blade tip height, which would be 440 feet for the 400 foot turbines, Zweizig said.
-- It creates no more than 40 hours of shadow flicker on a home. If it's more than 20, the operator is required to provide mitigation, which can include putting blinds up in a house, Zweizig said.
-- The noise it creates is no more than 45 decibels at night and no more than 50 decibels during the day.
Zweizig said some council members lacked concern for health problems associated with living too close to turbines. He and others tried to point out that people are abandoning their homes because of health problems stemming from the noise and shadow flicker.
That's why council member Larry Wunsch, who lives within 1,100 feet of a turbine in Fond du Lac County, is trying to sell his property, Zweizig said. Wunsch also was among the four minority opinions on the council.
"He did whatever he could to let those on the council know those are the circumstances," Zweizig said. "They never asked him a question. They never said, 'What is this like?' They just waited him out, knowing that in the end they would just outvote him."
Local wind projects
The status of proposed projects in Union and Magnolia townships is unclear.
EcoEnergy was developing both projects, including signing on landowners, before it sold the rights for both to Acciona in 2007, said Jason Yates, contract manager with EcoEnergy in Elgin, Ill. The proposed projects back then included three turbines in Union and up to 67 in Magnolia.
Wind measurement towers were put up in both townships: Magnolia's went up in April 2007 at County B and Highway 213 and Union's went up in late 2008 at County C and Highway 104.
The Magnolia tower came down this spring at the end of the 36-month contract, landowner Tom Drew said. Since then, Drew said the only thing he heard from the company was that it was waiting to see the results of the state's new wind siting law.
In Union, the town permit for the tower expired last fall, and Acciona has decided to remove the tower, supervisor George Franklin said. It will be removed this fall after the corn that surrounds it is harvested, he said.
The Acciona North American website does not list any Wisconsin projects under its "In the works" projects. Acciona could not be reached for comment.
Evansville turbine begins operation
The new wind turbine in Evansville should be operational early this week, if not already, after possibly being struck by lightning.
The Northwind 100 arrived at the city's wastewater treatment plant on Water Street in June. After running for only a couple days, the turbine stopped working late on the night of July 21 or early on July 22, said Eve Frankel, marketing and communications manager at Northern Power Systems.
"We believe that it was potentially due to a lightning strike, but it's still under an investigation," she said.
The manufacturer is fixing parts on the turbine and ruling out causes, she said.
The repair shouldn't cost the city, City Administrator Dan Wietecha said, because it would be covered under the warranty or insurance.
Frankel said lightning striking a turbine is an "unusual occurrence," though Wisconsin seems to have more lightning strikes than other regions.
The tower height on the 100 kilowatt turbine is 120 feet and each blade is 37 feet. The turbine is part of the $7.2 million effort to upgrade the wastewater treatment facility.
Aug 16, 2010 at 2:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
evansvillehousewife, I agree I really don't see this thing up and running in even 10 years, look right from the start it's a money pit.
( even though I am sure they must have insurance on it for this sort of thing.)
Aug 16, 2010 at 12:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Wiegand, it's clear you don't support the propeller style wind generators but what is your stand in general for alternative energy? Also, is there a style blade that is safer for flying creatures that they should be using?
Aug 16, 2010 at 12:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Andrew........... Deflection from the issue will not work here. It only works with those possessing limited IQ's and cognitive thinking skills. The propeller style wind turbine and this industry are nothing but bad news.
Aug 16, 2010 at 11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
And, Mr. Weigand, how are the wildlife in the gulf doing?
Aug 16, 2010 at 11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
The Turbine Peddlers Represent Green Fraud...........Message from a Wildlife Biologist
Below is factual information covered up by the wind industry and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for over 25 years. This came from a report put together by Ornithologists in Poland. The link for this report is on Poland's Wind Energy web site. To my knowledge it is the only example of the true bird mortality impact ever made public by the wind Industry.
http://www.psew.pl/en/guidelines_for_ass...
4. Development of wind projects is likely to cause:
a. Bird mortality caused by collisions with operating turbines and/or elements
of auxiliary infrastructure, in particular overhead power lines;
b. Decrease in population due to loss and fragmentation of habitats caused
by deterring effect of the wind turbines and/or development of
communication and energy infrastructure related to operations of the wind
turbines,
c. Disturbance to populations, in particular to short- and long - range bird
migrations (the barrier effect).
5. Mortality caused by collisions and loss of habitats are key in terms of likely
adverse effects on birds populations.
6. The extent of effects on bird population is diversified, depending mainly upon
the location of the wind turbines – from almost no or negligible effects on life
expectancy of bird population, to significant effects with significant loss of
habitats and high mortality caused by collisions.
Most people are not aware that Europe has sustained large declines in both local and migratory bird populations over the last 20 years. These declines coincide with the installation of tens of thousands of propeller style wind turbines.
Aug 16, 2010 at 11:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
The Turbine Peddlers Represent Green Fraud...........Message from a Wildlife Biologist
Remember this.........when the propeller style wind turbine is introduced into their habitats, it becomes the number one cause of death for rare and endangered bird species. Despite deflective statements from the wind industry, cats, cars, windows, buildings, etc. are not the problem. These mortality factors did not kill off the Red Kite populations that have disappeared from Germany and Italy. The prop wind turbines have killed them off.
At the current rate of wind farm development, dozens of bird species will soon face extinction from this diabolical source of energy. The truth is no bird or bat is safe around a propeller-style wind turbine and the cumulative impacts..... devastating.
Regardless of how many are built, energy from the inefficient propeller style wind turbine will NEVER even come close to solving North America's energy needs. Communities need to be told this before they embrace these killers.
Communities also need to be told that the day is coming when far superior wind turbines, without the flawed deadly propeller design, will be implemented across the world. How long this will take depends on how long the bird/bat mortality lie is perpetuated the wind industry.
Aug 16, 2010 at 11:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
The Turbine Peddlers Represent Green Fraud...........Message from a Wildlife Biologist
There is growing worldwide opposition the deadly propeller style wind turbine for good reason. There has been a corporate/government cover-up for over 25 years concerning the extreme danger they pose to birds and bats. For those that have not seen it, take a look at the YouTube video “fatal accident with vulture on a windmill”. A Griffon Vulture gets smashed out of the sky by the innocent looking blades of a propeller style wind turbine. The wind turbine in the video is spinning at just 12 rpm or about half speed. After seeing this you will understand what is coming to the local and migratory bird populations, all over the world.
In Canada, a recent study of bird and bat mortality at Wolfe Island’s 82-turbine wind farm found 600 birds and more than a thousand bats were killed by the windmill blades in a six-month period.
None of this should come as a surprise. Over the last 25 years in Altamont Pass, more than 2,000 golden eagles have been killed by the blades of the propeller-style wind turbine. The corrupt wind/oil industry (they are one in the same) paid experts to say it was just an aberration and that Altamont was unique. It is a lie.
The corrupt U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is part of this green fraud. They deliberately looked the other way while wind farms were built in the habitat of the condor and whooping crane. They chose not to prosecute many thousands of wind industry violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. They even helped write and pass the “No Surprises” clause into federal law, which gives this industry a free pass for killing endangered species. There is no difference between them and the corrupt MMS
The most insidious impact from the use of propeller style wind turbines, is the slaughter of migratory Birds. The negative footprint from wind energy is far greater than the obvious. A perfect example is the Whooping Crane that travels 2500 miles only to be chopped up in the thousands of spinning blades along their migration route. The critically endangered Egyptian Vulture is another migratory victim of these turbines.
Paid off experts fraudulently cite collisions with power lines as being the primary reason. This same fraudulent excuse was given for missing Condors in California. Now the condor is regularly fed at feeding stations far away from the turbines to keep them alive.
Aug 16, 2010 at 11:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Proof That The Fix Is In
How much more proof do you need to realize the fix is in. It is happening all over the country. So why would any honest person ever trust a single thing these crooks say.........Especially in an Environmental Impact Report. I am a wildlife biologist and every EIR I have ever seen from this industry has been BOGUS. This is exactly why people have to get organized and reject the propeller style wind turbine. The industry (Wall Street and Oil) will not move away from these mass killers unless they are forced to. Across the world organized efforts by concerned citizens are winning battles every day against this industry. They want to put a stop to the millions of birds are slaughtered each year by these turbines. Especially the rare and endangered species. I encourage everyone to research this. If they do, they will find that the industry is corrupt to the core and these turbines have a tremendously negative environmental footprint.
Aug 16, 2010 at 10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Wow. Letting the foxes guard the henhouse. Great call, idiots.
This type of legislation is insane.... they are basically giving landowners the shaft. Putting BLINDS up in a house? Really? What about the rights of the owner to enjoy their property in peace?
Rodgersfan- I agree that it is hilarious. On the other hand, the turbine is in town proper where not only citizens, but police and firestations must put up with the noise, flicker, and interference. I give it a few years before they take it down. It may give the health/peace issues some credence, however.
Aug 16, 2010 at 10:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
I thought wind power was going to be the energy savior? If there are so many problems, why is the Government pushing it so hard?
Aug 16, 2010 at 8:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
The Committee that was formed in Union put many,many hours in on studying wind turbines and safety issues. They put everything in to finding the truth about the safety of these monsters. They should be applauded.
I find it hilarious this monster in Evansville may have got hit by lightening. Costing them money already, not that it was really going to save them any.
I wonder if Mayor Decker kept the receipt for it?
She should have put that money towards the youth center in town.
But no, just more foolish spending.
Aug 16, 2010 at 8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
You could put a wind turbine in JANESVILLE and have plenty of power with all the wind bags in janesville. LOL.
Aug 16, 2010 at 7:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
I want to thank Mr. Zweizig for his continued dedication and hard work concerning this issue. I applaud his openness concerning the wind siting council. This topic is not about whether or not you support wind power, or if it could create jobs. Safe siting was supposed to be the number one topic, but the focus on safe siting has been a back burner issue. Our state government has let us down again. This smoke and mirrors siting council was just a formality. There was absolutely no chance a citizen friendly set of recommendations would come from them.
Listening to regular people who have had their lives destroyed by improper siting would have been a great incentive to modify existing rules. It also would have admitted that the previous siting standards were wrong. So, here we are, three years later, and nothing has changed. We the people my butt.
Aug 16, 2010 at 6:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
SarahB1-Good one!!
Aug 16, 2010 at 5:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Health care (transformation) is one of the best issues this current administration has done thus far. With this change individuals will have the opportunity to seek professional and quality health care services. Who would want to return to the days of the horse and buggy, b/w tv sets, manual typewriters, pac man, you get the point? That's about how old the health care system was in the USA. Each day the news is filled with social tragedies in which lives are taken at the hands of known acquaintences and/or family members. Our society is stricken with the institutions of white collar crime permeating throughout this great nation and greed which tends to strike at the very fabric of our country. If you are looking for affordable health insurance check out http://bit.ly/9fDY7U . I hope everyone will soon recognize and use the resources made by this transformation to seek professional medical attention as the need arises rather than turning to illegal and criminal activities to resolve their issues.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.