Citizens’ Task Force on Wind Power (CTFWP) is a coalition of citizens from around the state drawn together in the common purpose of advocating for responsible, science based, economically and environmentally sound approaches to Maine’s energy policy. Wind power on Maine's priceless scenic landscape does not achieve these results.
Statewide wind organization contacts:
Various Wind Groups
Richard McDonald - President & Director of Communications, Saving Maine
Friends of Maine's Mountains
Friends of Maine's Mountains
P.O. Box 10171
Portland, ME 04104
Phone (Brad Blake): 207-219-8059
5 MOST COMMON MYTHS
ABOUT WIND POWER
1. Wind Power will help Mainers to get off foreign oil.
2. Wind Power in Maine will reduce CO2 emissions from fossil fuel plants which will help fight global warming and improve air quality.
3. Fossil fuels are finite and ever more costly, while the wind is infinite and free.
4. Wind Power is providing jobs and a much needed boost to Maine’s economy.
5. Wind power will heat our homes and charge our electric cars, enabling a transition from heating oil and gasoline.
INDUSTRIAL WIND POWER IN MAINE'S MOUNTAINS IS BAD POLICY
Towns considering wind projects need to understand industrial wind power's reliance on massive government subsidies (our tax dollars) for its existence. When political support for industrial wind power dries up and the subsidies are removed all of the "tangible benefits" towns believed they would get indefinitely will disappear. The limited liability shell corporations that own the wind turbines will abandon these projects, having received handsome upfront returns on their investments. Lack of funds to remove the turbines and restore the sites, due to the DEP's failure to require set aside of these funds will leave towns with no ability to remove the turbines, or deal with the long term environmental consequences of high mountain clearing and road building.
2. Environmental - "The promise of wind power is false, but the damage is guaranteed. The Governor's plan will destroy 50,000 acres of forest land - the size of 39,000 football fields."
This website may reproduce or have links to copyrighted material the use of which has not been expressly authorized by the copyright owner. We make such material available, without profit, as part of our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, economic, scientific, and related issues. It is our understanding that this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided by law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
The Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine is a coalition of citizens advocating responsible, science based, economically and environmentally sound approaches to Maine's energy policy including a stop to the spread of harmful industrial scale wind complexes in our state. The primary purpose of this website is to allow like minded individuals to help this cause by sharing information and experiences and educating those seeking information. Those represented by the CTFWP are outspent and out-resourced by the powerful corporate interests that are using all their powers to site industrial scale wind complexes throughout Maine's countryside and waters. The CTFWP thus values this site as an important communications tool and is concerned that it be used in a manner that helps further the CTFWP's cause. All comments and other submissions are subject to approval. By submitting comments as well as other material, you are agreeing to relinquish any subsequent rights of ownership to your material by submitting it on or to this site. This entitles granting the administrator the right to display any information or material you submit to this site. The administrator has the right to edit, remove, or deny access to content that is determined to be, in his sole discretion, unacceptable.
Mainers are throwing away their heritage by continuing to industrialize the skyline and it saddens me to see this happening, which is why I signed on to this site. I recently clicked on and signed a petition opposing the Bowers Mtn project and was disturbed to find it linked to an anti-2nd amendment petition and other socialist propaganda. I moved to Maine for the scenic beauty, sporting opportunities and freedom. I love Maine. Please don't make me have to move to Texas or Idaho. I'm getting too old. I couldn't find an option for opting out of this site so, I will simply block any further emails. Thank you.
Check out Falmouth MA.
Here is some more on wind energy balancing.
Regarding hydro plants balancing wind energy, this is done by the Bonneville Power Authority in Oregon, in Spain and Portugal, and in Norway and Sweden as a service for Denmark.
Hydro plants normally operate following the daily demand or in base-loaded mode; i.e. near constant output.
Almost all hydro plants are not designed for balancing wind energy (vary their outputs up and down to counter the ebbs and surges of wind energy), and many of them could not be redesigned without great expense.
In any case, hydro plants exist in only the few areas, whereas wind energy is almost everywhere.
The 20% David refers to is wind energy penetration; i.e. the contribution wind energy makes to the annual energy supply of the NE grid; 20% of 130,000 GWh = 26,000 GWh.
For comparison, Lowell Mountain production = 63 MW x 8,760 hr/yr x 0.32 = 177 GWh/yr. It would take 147 Lowell Mountains to have 20% wind energy on the NE grid, at a capital cost of 147 x $160 = $23.5 billion, plus grid modifications of about $17-24 billion, plus additional gas turbines for balancing.
For comparison, NE annual nuclear energy is about 32,000 GWh and the plants are fully paid for.
All together an expensive, noisy, visually-damaging, environmentally-damaging and health-damaging nightmare that produces expensive energy at about 2-3 times NE annual average grid prices.
Note: The instantaneous CF during high wind speeds would be about 2.5 x 0.32 = 0.8, i.e., the wind output during one hour would be 147 x 63 MW x 0.8 = 7.4 GWh and the next hour it might be 4.0 GWh, i.e., for short periods of time, almost all energy on the grid would be wind energy, almost all the base-loaded/load-following plants would have to reduce their outputs and the existing gas turbine capacity of the NE grid would NOT be able to balance its variations during such short periods.
That means wind energy curtailment is required (done by feathering the blades or stopping wind turbines); already practiced in many areas with wind turbines, such as Texas, Colorado, Bonneville, Germany, the UK, Ireland, etc.
The average energy supply during one hour on the NE grid = 130,000 GWh/yr/(8,760 hr/yr) = 14.8 GWh; at night it is about 10 GWh, during peak daytime hours it is about 18 GWh.
If, as shown above, wind is contributing 7.4 GWh one hour and 4.0 GWh the next hour, it follows almost all base-loaded generators have to reduce their outputs which is inefficient and almost all gas turbines are in inefficient, part-load-ramping mode, unless part of the wind energy can be sent to other grids.
But, these other grids likely also have high wind speeds and may not want the energy; hence the wind energy curtailment.
It also follows that during part-load operation of base-loaded plants, and part-load-ramping operation of balancing plants, much extra fuel is used and much extra CO2 is emitted, as has been proven, based on measured operating data of the grids of Ireland, The Netherlands, Colorado and Texas.
Those measurements show that at higher wind energy penetrations, the fuel consumption and CO2 emissions actually are greater than without wind energy on the grid.
At lesser wind energy penetrations, there ARE reductions of fuel and CO2 emissions, but they are not anywhere near to what is claimed by wind energy proponents.
That makes expensive wind energy ($ spent/kWh generated) a dubious method of reducing CO2 emissions. Much less expensive energy efficiency ($ spent/kWh reduced) is FAR superior to any renewable regarding CO2 reduction.
Your wind myths article is very good.
One item you omitted is the OCGT and CCGT balancing plants.
As wind speeds are highly variable and wind energy is proportional to the cube of the wind speed, a doubling of wind speed causes an 8-fold increase in highly-variable wind energy. As a result, wind energy consists of irregularly-spaced, sporadic spurts varying in amplitude and duration. Wind energy by itself would be a disturbing influence on the grid. However, if combined with the energy from balancing plants, it would be seen by the grid as a constant-output, base-loaded plant.
The balancing plants, usually consisting of quick-ramping gas turbines or hydro plants, would need to ramp down when wind energy surges and ramp up when wind energy ebbs to ensure a near-perfect balance of supply and demand is maintained on the grid. The balance needs to be maintained to minimize excessive frequency and voltage deviations from target values to avoid brownouts and blackouts and to avoid overloads.
The balancing plants would need to operate at a percent of rated output. That mode of operation is very inefficient for gas turbines and ramping up and down at a percent of rated output is even less efficient. This results in significantly increased Btus/kWh and increased CO2 emissions/kWh.
As the wind energy penetration percentage increases, the balancing energy percentage will also increase, i.e., an increasingly larger percentage of the energy on the grid will be produced in an inefficient manner which will require significant electric rate increases.
Grids which already have a significant capacity of utility-owned, quick-ramping plants may have sufficient spare balancing capacity to accommodate up to about 3 percent of wind energy penetration.
On the New England grid, currently with about 0.5% penetration, the presence of wind energy is not yet "noticeable”, according to ISO-NE personnel. The main reason the increased Btu/kWh and CO2 emissions/kWh are not yet noticeable is because of a lack of proper measuring and recording of power plant operating data.
As wind energy penetration becomes larger, say 1%, wind energy variations WILL become noticeable, especially during unstable weather with very large wind energy ups and downs within a few hours.
Dispatch value: About 10 - 15 percent of the year, wind speeds are too low (less than 7.8 mph) or too high to produce any wind energy. Most of a year’s wind energy production is at night during the winter, almost nothing during summer, the remainder during spring and fall. Accordingly, wind energy has zero dispatch value to ISO-NE, the New England grid operator.
However, wind energy does have SCHEDULING value; in Texas about 8.7% of the installed wind turbine capacity.
Hello. My name is Penny Melko and I just sent an email to contact your representative. The bill is in committee as of today, Nov. 20, 2011. This isn't spam. (I hate wind turbines!)
NO to Industrial Wind/Solar Renewable Tax Credits thru 2016
Contact your Representative TODAY. Please send this to everyone in the U.S. who will oppose this – all wind opposition groups, friends, whoever.
Urge your Representative to oppose the Production Tax Credit Extension Act H.R. 3307 (Subsidies for “green” energy projects)
If you follow this link you will be taken to govtrack. There you will see the referenced H.R. 3307. Next to it you will see a box which says SPEAK UP AT POPVOX. This is one of the very few letter forwarding sits that I recommend. When you click on that box you will be taken to popvox where you can support or oppose a bill. You can also add comments. You will need to register an account but it is well worth the time since you may very well start using this site to express your opinion on other bills in Congress. If you comment you will not need to put your name at the bottom of the comment section, they will add that in for you. Here is the link:
H.R. 3307: American Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit Extension Act of 2011
A bill in the U.S. Congress: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the renewable energy credit.
More about the Bill
Bill to extend U.S. wind energy tax credit goes to committee
U.S. Representatives Dave Reichert (R-WA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) have introduced a bill to extend the current wind production tax credit, which expires at the end of 2012, through 2016.
Posted on: 11/7/2011
U.S. Representatives Dave Reichert (R-WA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), members of the tax-writing House Committee on Ways and Means, on Nov. 2 introduced the American Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit Extension Act (H.R. 3307). This bipartisan bill extends the tax incentive for the production of wind power, geothermal power, hydropower, and other forms of renewable energy through 2016. The bill is currently in the House Ways and Means Committee.
H.R. 3307 provides a clean, 4-year extension of the existing production tax credit for wind, biomass, geothermal, small irrigation, landfill gas, trash, and hydropower. It was created in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and has frequently been extended in year-end packages of expiring tax provisions, as well as in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The current incentive is set to expire next year for wind and in 2013 for other renewable energy forms. Advocates note that historically, at least six to eight months before the tax credit expires, financial lenders hesitate in providing capital for projects because of the uncertainty cr
© 2023 Created by Webmaster. Powered by
You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!
Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine