Comments - Fishermen seek delay in Gulf of Maine offshore wind planning - Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine2024-03-28T22:27:38Zhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=4401701%3ABlogPost%3A184592&xn_auth=noGREEN NEW DEAL reported to be…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-04-18:4401701:Comment:1849132020-04-18T00:24:55.407Zarthur qwenkhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/arthurqwenk
<p>GREEN NEW DEAL reported to be the First Death of the Wuhan Flu.</p>
<p>GREEN NEW DEAL reported to be the First Death of the Wuhan Flu.</p> It would be interesting to se…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-04-17:4401701:Comment:1846762020-04-17T15:07:28.381ZPenny Grayhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/PennyGray
<p>It would be interesting to see actual schematics of the proposed anchoring/cabling underwater to keep these machines from floating away. This will close down the fishing for sure and impact whales as well, I would think, both the underwater cabling and the infrasound.</p>
<p></p>
<p>It would be interesting to see actual schematics of the proposed anchoring/cabling underwater to keep these machines from floating away. This will close down the fishing for sure and impact whales as well, I would think, both the underwater cabling and the infrasound.</p>
<p></p> First Experimental Floating W…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-04-17:4401701:Comment:1848442020-04-17T13:17:57.416ZWillem Posthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/WillemPost942
<p><strong>First Experimental Floating Wind Turbine in Norway</strong></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/deep-water-floating-offshore-wind-turbines-in-maine" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/deep-water-floating-offshore-wind-turbines-in-maine</a></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Equinor (formerly Statoil, a Norwegian government controlled company) launched the world's first operational deep-water, floating…</p>
<p><strong>First Experimental Floating Wind Turbine in Norway</strong></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/deep-water-floating-offshore-wind-turbines-in-maine" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/deep-water-floating-offshore-wind-turbines-in-maine</a></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Equinor (formerly Statoil, a Norwegian government controlled company) launched the world's first operational deep-water, floating large-capacity wind turbine in 2009. The turbine trade name is “Hywind”.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The wind turbine consists of a 120 m (390 ft) tall tower, above the sea water level, and a 60 m (195 ft) submerged extension below the sea water level, with a heavy weight at the bottom to keep the wind turbine steady and upright, even with very high waves and strong wind conditions. The design was tested and perfected under storm and wind conditions simulated in a laboratory.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The 2.3 MW wind turbine is mounted on top of the tower. It was fully assembled in a deep-water harbor near Stavanger, Norway.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It was towed to a site 10 km (6.2 mi) offshore into the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%C3%85m%C3%B8yfjord&action=edit&redlink=1">Amoy Fjord</a> in 220 m (720 ft) deep water, near <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stavanger,_Norway">Stavanger, Norway</a>, on 9 June 2009, for a two-year test run, which turned out to be successful.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>First Commercial Floating Wind Turbine Plant in Scotland</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Hywind Scotland project is the world's first <strong>commercial</strong> wind turbine plant using <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floating_wind_turbine">floating wind turbines</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It is located 29 km (EIGHTEEN MILES) off <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterhead">Peterhead</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland">Scotland</a> to minimize visual impacts from shore.</p>
<p>It has five Hywind floating turbines with a total capacity of 30 MW.</p>
<p>It is operated by Hywind (Scotland) Limited, a joint venture of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equinor">Equinor</a>, Norway (75%) and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masdar">Masdar</a>, Kuwait (25%).</p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p>In 2015, Equinor received permission to install 5 Hywind turbines in Scotland. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Manufacturing started in 2016 in Spain (wind turbine, rotor), Norway (tower, underwater base, assembly), and Scotland (various parts)</p>
<p>The turnkey capital cost was <strong>$263 million</strong> for five 6 MW turbines, or $8,767/kW.</p>
<p>They were designed to float on the surface, with about 180 m (600 ft) <strong>above</strong> the sea water level and 80 m (265 ft) submerged <strong>below</strong> the seawater level.</p>
<p>Total steel weight is about 2300 metric ton, total ballasted weight is about 20,000 metric ton.</p>
<p><strong>Heavy weights in the bottom of the submerged parts serve to keep them steady and upright.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The turbines were assembled at <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stord">Stord</a> in Norway in the summer of 2017, using the specialized <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saipem_7000">Saipem 7000</a> floating crane, and then towed to the north of Scotland by sea-going tugboats.</p>
<p><strong>Make sure to see the videos showing the crane assembling the entire wind turbine</strong>.</p>
<p>Nothing like that exists in Maine, or in the rest of New England.</p>
<p>That means offshore wind turbine assembly and servicing would largely be performed by foreign companies, which already have built the infrastructures and other facilities during the past 25 years.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUlfvXaISvc" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUlfvXaISvc</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmkA6hbJ_j8">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmkA6hbJ_j8</a></p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQVU7UaMuck" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQVU7UaMuck</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The huge, sea-going, specialized, crane (14,000-metric ton lifting capacity) is required for partial assembly on land and final assembly in an area close to shore with a very deep harbor, before towing, fully assembled, to the site.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The finished turbines were towed to Peterhead, Scotland. <span> </span></p>
<p>Three <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suction_caisson">cup anchors</a> hold each turbine in place.</p>
<p>About 2400 meter of chain is required, weighing 400 metric ton, for each turbine.</p>
<p>The Hywind Scotland project was commissioned in October 2017.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Hywind Wind Turbines for Demonstration Purposes in Maine</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Hannah Pingree and other Maine's wind bureaucrats in state government are engaging in mindless prattle, eager to do the bidding of various multi-millionaires and foreign companies that may be providing some wining/dining boondoggle trips to “view the Hywind turbines” in Norway and Scotland.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The turnkey cost of those two Hywind turbines would be about $10,000 per kW, versus NE ridgeline wind at $2,000/kW, and regular offshore, south of Martha’s Vineyard, at $4,000/kW.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/iso-ne-study-of-1600-mw-of-future-offshore-wind-during-a-16-day">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/iso-ne-study-of-1600-mw-of-future-offshore-wind-during-a-16-day</a></p>
<p><strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>That would be at about $120 million for a two 6 MW Hywind wind turbines, plus whatever facilities would need to be built in Maine to support the project.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The turnkey capital cost of the wind turbine plant in Maine would be much higher, because Maine does not have the experience of the Norwegians and the specialized equipment and specialized ships, and other facilities. It would be very costly to build those facilities and ships in Maine, or elsewhere.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>600-ft Tall Hywind Turbines Highly Visible From Mohegan Island, Plus Infrasound</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The 600-ft tall Hywind wind turbines would be highly visible from Mohegan Island, if they were located TWO MILES east of the island.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>At that distance, the problem would not be just cyclical, audible noises keeping people awake, but also low frequency infrasound, which can travel many miles, and passes through walls of houses, and can be felt but not heard, and has been shown to have adverse health impacts on people and animals.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-turbine-noise-adversely-impacts-nearby-people-and-animals-1" target="_blank">http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-turbine-noise-adversely-impacts-nearby-people-and-animals-1</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>The FAA-required aviation beacons would be clearly visible during nighttime. BTW, they would need to be located about 15 - 20 miles away from Mohegan Island to be unobtrusive to the Islanders.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Here is a research report of daytime and nighttime visibility of wind turbines that are about 3 to 4 MW and about 500 ft tall. See URL with photos.</p>
<p><a href="http://visualimpact.anl.gov/offshorevitd/docs/OffshoreVITD.pdf" target="_blank">http://visualimpact.anl.gov/offshorevitd/docs/OffshoreVITD.pdf</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><em>“Study objectives included identifying the maximum distances the facilities could be seen in both daytime and nighttime views and assessing the effect of distance on visual contrasts associated with the facilities. Results showed that small to moderately sized facilities were visible to the unaided eye at distances greater than 42 km [26 miles (mi)], with turbine blade movement visible up to 39 km (24 mi). At night, aerial hazard navigation lighting was visible at distances greater than 39 km (24 mi). The observed wind facilities were judged to be a major focus of visual attention at distances up to 16 km (10 mi), were noticeable to casual observers at distances of almost 29 km (18 mi), and were visible with extended or concentrated viewing at distances beyond 40 km (25 mi).”</em></p>
<p> </p>
<p>One has to feel sorry for all the residents of Mohegan Island, but the bureaucrats in Augusta, Maine, do not care about that, because there are not enough votes to stop them. Those bureaucrats are hell-bent to use federal and state grants, subsidies, taxpayer and ratepayer money of already-struggling Joe and Jane Worker to save the world, and to enrich a host of multi-millionaires seeking tax shelters. See Appendix.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Some Questions</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>Who are these Aqua Ventus multi-millionaire owners pushing for this expensive project?</p>
<p>How much would be the subsidies?</p>
<p>What would be the energy cost/kWh?</p>
<p>How long would the project last before it would have to be repaired?</p>
<p>How would it be repaired?</p>
<p>Would any special ships, facilities be required?</p>
<p>Does Maine have the required, at least 100-meter, deep-water port?</p>
<p>Is anyone looking at the entire picture on an A to Z basis, or are Maine bureaucrats just dreaming/prattling about castles in Spain?</p>
<p>Does anyone think the Norwegians would not want to make money to maintain/service and provide spare parts for their Hywind wind turbines?</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Extremely Adverse Impact on CMP Electric Rates</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>LePage’s energy director, Steven McGrath, has focused exclusively on the cost of electricity from the <strong>demonstration project</strong>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The rate is at least FOUR TIMES above wholesale market value, reflecting the custom design and experimental nature of the platforms.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>It would start at 23 cents per kilowatt-hour in the first year, escalating at 2.5% per year to 35 cents after 20 years.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The PUC estimates it would add up to $208 million over the term, or about $10.5 million a year from Central Maine Power ratepayers. Maine Aqua Ventus had calculated the extra cost would add 73 cents a month to the average household electric bill, in the first year of operation, more thereafter..</p>
<p> </p>
<p>That is a total rip-off, because Massachusetts pays only an <strong>average </strong>of 8 - 9 c/kWh over the life of the project.</p>
<p>Main bureaucrats need to learn from Governor Baker.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>NOTE</strong>: The above prices should be compared with NE wholesale prices, which have been about 5 c/kWh since 2008, courtesy of abundant, domestic, low-cost, low-CO2 electricity from gas at about 5 c/kWh, and low-cost, near CO2-free electricity from nuclear at about 4.5 - 5.0 c/kWh.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This project is insanity on STEROIDS.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>One has to feel sorry for the already-struggling Joe and Jane Workers in Maine who will ultimately pay for all this.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.pressherald.com/2018/04/01/effort-to-build-offshore-wind-industry-in-maine-may-hinge-on-73-cents/?rel=related" target="_blank">https://www.pressherald.com/2018/04/01/effort-to-build-offshore-wind-industry-in-maine-may-hinge-on-73-cents/?rel=related</a></p> The country doesn't have any…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2020-04-17:4401701:Comment:1847352020-04-17T12:43:28.557ZJohn F. Husseyhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/JohnFHussey
<p>The country doesn't have any extra money to waste, with a little bit of luck the President and the next Congress will kill off the tax dollar sucking SCAM that is "offshore wind"! </p>
<p>The country doesn't have any extra money to waste, with a little bit of luck the President and the next Congress will kill off the tax dollar sucking SCAM that is "offshore wind"! </p>