Michigan Wind Energy Report Generating Some Sparks

Capitol Confidential ^ | 11/5/2013 | Jack Spencer

[MichCapCon]

The state's new renewable energy report is available in draft form, but to some, what it says is secondary to how it is being described by the wind energy industry, which is financed in part by taxpayer subsidies.

A final version is scheduled to be released Nov.4, which coincides with the American Wind Energy Association's Wind Forum at East Lansing.

The draft report is already generating some sparks. Wind energy advocates claim the report paints a rosy picture of the future of wind power in Michigan. However, those who claim wind energy is neither cost-effective nor the best way of cutting emissions, say the report is not a positive one for wind energy producers.

"The findings in the report were, in reality, not positive for the future of wind energy production in Michigan," said Kevon Martis, director of the Interstate Informed Citizens Coalition, a non-profit organization focused on the impact of industrial wind turbines in the region.

Martis points to three examples where he says the draft report is being misrepresented by wind energy advocates.

First, he said wind energy advocates claim the study concludes that a 30 percent mandate is possible.

"What the study actually said is that 30 percent is 'technically' possible, but there would be a number of hurdles to overcome," Martis said.

Michigan currently has a 10 percent government imposed mandate that is supposed to be reached by 2015.

Second, wind energy advocates ignore the study's finding that the health impacts of wind turbines are real. Additionally, he said, they ignore the study finding that the required setback distance from homes should be increased to an extent that establishing future wind plants (or wind farms) could become problematic.

"This was a very significant finding in the study," Martis said. "In fact, the study recommends the setback distance be increased to two kilometers, which is a mile and a quarter. We agree with this completely."

Seventeen Michigan residents have filed a lawsuit pertaining to health issues associated with windmills, alleging dizziness, sleeplessness, headaches and other symptoms from the noise. A panel of experts appointed to work on the noise issue recommended a decibel level limit, but state officials ignored them and disbanded the group before it could write its final report. The head of a wind association discussed the recommendations with state officials and then told them to "delete these types of emails because of the possibility of FOIA requests," according to an email Michigan Capitol Confidential received through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Third, Martis said, the state report agrees with the IICC analysis that it is economically ignorant to compare the price of wind energy production with that of coal plants.

"The two are not interchangeable," Martis said. "It would be like trying to compare my Edsel with a goat."

Jim Dulzo of the Michigan Land Use Institute did not respond to a request for comment. To see what wind energy advocates are saying about the draft report, see here and here.

The federal government says the vast majority of Michigan is "poor" or "marginal" for wind power.

[NRA1995]

Place windmills near Detroit, seems like lots of hot air has been in that region.

[cripplecreek]

Its a freakin disaster. A MiCapCon report from before the 2012 election.

Most of Michigan is 'Poor' or 'Marginal' For Wind Energy

Proposal 3 would require that the state add as many as 13 times more wind turbines in Michigan than currently operate. Proposal 3 would mandate that 25 percent of Michigan’s energy come from renewable sources. Wind is expected to be the primary supplier of renewable energy if the proposal passes.
Advocates and experts predict 2,300 to 3,790 nearly 500-feet high wind turbines would have to be added to meet the 25-percent mandate. Michigan currently has 292 wind turbines in operation.



What this map doesn't show is how much more of the "prime" wind producing area is off limits for other reasons such as being parts of national parks, shipping lanes etc. Also there's the fact that it costs at least twice as much to erect windmills offshore.

Fortunately we defeated prop 3 by a wide margin but they still push forward.

[cripplecreek]

First, he said wind energy advocates claim the study concludes that a 30 percent mandate is possible.

We crushed a 25% mandate ballot proposal just a year ago.

[Yo-Yo]

I drove by the wind farm in Ithaca every weekend that we went up north from Lansing to Claire.

Sometimes they were spinning, sometimes they weren’t, and often the reason why they weren’t is because their electricity wasn’t needed on the grid.

But I do know that it’s a huge wind farm, and the turbines are also the largest I’ve seen.

I have no problem with the windmills as long as it’s a private company providing the financing and operation. Heck, I’ll even tolerate some startup subsidies from the State. But no way we need to create an artificial market by mandating a certain percentage of electricity must come from renewables.

Let wind live or die on it’s own merits.

[cripplecreek]

I have no problem with the windmills as long as it’s a private company providing the financing and operation.

And not one does it without taxpayer dollars and higher costs to consumers.

[CPOSharky]

It’s too bad there can’t be an electric meter for those wind and solar proponents that only operates on wind or solar. I.e., if the wind ain’t blowin’ or the sun ain’t shinin’ they ain’t gettin’ electricity.

[cripplecreek]

Wind is all about artificial demand increases through smaller supply.

If wind proponents really cared about green energy they would want to stop tearing out the dams and returning them to power generation capacity. They actually work all day every day and don’t need to be replaced every 10 to 20 years.

[wbill]

You're correct about dams.

A cheaper, faster, and proven way to save energy is to put money into our aging infrastructure. I've read articles that estimate simple updates would save between 10 and 30%. That doesn't *increase* our power generation capabilities, but it uses what we've got more intelligently.

Though the headlines "Linemen replacing antiquated, overutilized transformers" aren't as sexy as "Obama commands sun to rise, invents solar power, and saves the day".

[cripplecreek]

A well maintained earthen dam can last a century or more and the turbines nearly as long. In that same amount of time you’ll replace a wind generator at least 5 times at an ever increasing cost.

With dams the problem is with sedimentation but there are ways of dealing with it without dredging. One of the things we’ve looked at locally is laminar flow aeration. The main cause of sedimentation is half decayed vegetable matter settling to the bottom of the lake where there is no oxygen and no further decay as a result. What laminar flow aeration does is injects tiny bubbles of air into that low oxygen sediment causing the decay to continue.