Comments - More Expansion Creep - Record Hill/Roxbury Pond - Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine2024-03-28T18:15:47Zhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=4401701%3ABlogPost%3A59024&xn_auth=noDixfield dropped their morato…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2016-08-10:4401701:Comment:813842016-08-10T11:02:40.335Zalice mckay barnetthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/alicemckaybarnett
<p>Dixfield dropped their moratorium last night.</p>
<p>Dixfield dropped their moratorium last night.</p> tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2016-08-10:4401701:Comment:812892016-08-10T01:02:04.109Zalice mckay barnetthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/alicemckaybarnett
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494014724?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494014724?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494014724?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="750" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494014724?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024"/></a></p> tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2016-08-10:4401701:Comment:811922016-08-10T00:54:35.408Zalice mckay barnetthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/alicemckaybarnett
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494012000?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="576" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494012000?profile=original"/></a></p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494012000?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="576" class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1494012000?profile=original"/></a></p> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2016-08-10:4401701:Comment:814822016-08-10T00:53:31.367Zalice mckay barnetthttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/alicemckaybarnett
<p>$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$</p>
<p>$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$</p> Paula , the people of roxbury…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2015-11-10:4401701:Comment:700752015-11-10T20:25:58.286ZMonique Aniel Thurstonhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/moniqueaniel
<p>Paula , the people of roxbury are very informed , they know the process , they know the players, they know the playbook and they see King and Gardiner 's turbines every day . they can petition the town to remove the peak from the industrial zone . </p>
<p>Paula , the people of roxbury are very informed , they know the process , they know the players, they know the playbook and they see King and Gardiner 's turbines every day . they can petition the town to remove the peak from the industrial zone . </p> Under the wind siting law, th…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2014-10-29:4401701:Comment:594272014-10-29T15:03:17.365ZArt Brigadeshttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/ArtBrigades
<p>Under the wind siting law, this would be a "Community" wind project if it is as small as is implied. The state law favors it still, but locals have a say in it. One would hope that the Roxbury Town fathers have learned and heeded some hard lessons from Record Hill. Also, this site is just over the town line from Rumford, a town that endured a lengthy and brutal civil war over wind power, and that ultimately passed an ordinance protective of Rumford. But just over the town line? Sorry.…</p>
<p>Under the wind siting law, this would be a "Community" wind project if it is as small as is implied. The state law favors it still, but locals have a say in it. One would hope that the Roxbury Town fathers have learned and heeded some hard lessons from Record Hill. Also, this site is just over the town line from Rumford, a town that endured a lengthy and brutal civil war over wind power, and that ultimately passed an ordinance protective of Rumford. But just over the town line? Sorry. </p> Gary
"Conclusion: Richardson…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2014-10-29:4401701:Comment:590262014-10-29T14:51:16.288ZMartha thackerhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/Marthathacker246
<p>Gary</p>
<p>"<span>Conclusion: Richardson is either understating the number or turbines OR he's overstating the expected amount of electricity the project will produce. "</span></p>
<p><span>I would guess he is understating. During the permitting stage of Stetson I , First Wind reps. and LURC held several meetings for the locals. It was stated before Stetson I was built at one of these meetings that there would be 55 turbines. ..at the time they were trying to permit , I think, 38 , for…</span></p>
<p>Gary</p>
<p>"<span>Conclusion: Richardson is either understating the number or turbines OR he's overstating the expected amount of electricity the project will produce. "</span></p>
<p><span>I would guess he is understating. During the permitting stage of Stetson I , First Wind reps. and LURC held several meetings for the locals. It was stated before Stetson I was built at one of these meetings that there would be 55 turbines. ..at the time they were trying to permit , I think, 38 , for Stetson I. I did not hear this statement but two of my neighbors did. The First Wind rep. quickly walked back his inadvertent truthfulness.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>Another neighbor said that a friend of his who works for J Haynes said that they knew when Stetson I was approved that Stetson II would be too.</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span>And I think from past experience with flyers and printing out facts that flyers with pictures would not only be quicker but more effective. Like your idea of depicting the size of the proposed turbines.</span></p> Paula and Martha,
May I sugge…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2014-10-29:4401701:Comment:591272014-10-29T14:18:26.867ZGary Campbellhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/GaryCampbell
<p>Paula and Martha,</p>
<p>May I suggest a flyer that shows how large a 604' turbine would look on North Twin Mtn? According to the Maine Gazettteer North Twin Mountain is 2150' tall. According to Wikipedia Roxbury is at 725' above sea level. That means the topographic prominence of the mountain is 1425 feet. That's the apparent/visible height of the mountain. If they use a 5MW turbine that's 604' tall, the turbine would represent an additional 42% on top of the mountain. And yet the article…</p>
<p>Paula and Martha,</p>
<p>May I suggest a flyer that shows how large a 604' turbine would look on North Twin Mtn? According to the Maine Gazettteer North Twin Mountain is 2150' tall. According to Wikipedia Roxbury is at 725' above sea level. That means the topographic prominence of the mountain is 1425 feet. That's the apparent/visible height of the mountain. If they use a 5MW turbine that's 604' tall, the turbine would represent an additional 42% on top of the mountain. And yet the article says "Richardson described the wind turbine proposal as a low-impact project".</p>
<p>Low-impact indeed!</p> When I read this article my l…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2014-10-29:4401701:Comment:594252014-10-29T13:59:54.996ZGary Campbellhttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/GaryCampbell
<p>When I read this article my lie detector (aka BS meter) went off the scale. Consider the following two quotes:</p>
<p><em><br></br>"He (Richardson) said the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">three turbines</span> would be built..."</em></p>
<p><em><br></br>"He (Richardson) said they are trying to create a 3-acre wind project with turbines that would <span style="text-decoration: underline;">produce</span> between <span style="text-decoration: underline;">7.5 to 15 megawatts</span> of…</em></p>
<p>When I read this article my lie detector (aka BS meter) went off the scale. Consider the following two quotes:</p>
<p><em><br/>"He (Richardson) said the <span style="text-decoration: underline;">three turbines</span> would be built..."</em></p>
<p><em><br/>"He (Richardson) said they are trying to create a 3-acre wind project with turbines that would <span style="text-decoration: underline;">produce</span> between <span style="text-decoration: underline;">7.5 to 15 megawatts</span> of energy.</em></p>
<p></p>
<p>Suppose Richardson is quoting the project's <span style="text-decoration: underline;">nameplate</span> capacity. That would translate into three turbines each of which would be nameplated between 2.5MW and 5MW. Gamesa's model G128 5.0MW onshore turbine is past prototype stage and is now being installed commercially in Europe. That turbine is <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>604 feet tall</strong></span> (see <a href="http://www.compositesworld.com/news/gamesa-installs-5-gw-onshore-wind-turbine-prototype" target="_blank">http://www.compositesworld.com/news/gamesa-installs-5-gw-onshore-wind-turbine-prototype</a>). </p>
<p>But Richardson said the turbines would <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em>produce</em></span> between 7.5 and 15 MW so he is obviously talking about the actual production output he expects. If we assume a generous 35% actual capacity factor, the total nameplate capacity would have to be between (7.5/.35=)21.43 MW and (15/.35=)42.86 MW. That would mean each of the three turbines would have to be either (21.43/3=)7.14 MW or (42.86/3=)14.29 MW models. As far as I know onshore turbines are not yet available that large.</p>
<p>Conclusion: Richardson is either understating the number or turbines OR he's overstating the expected amount of electricity the project will produce. Either way he's lying.</p>
<p>Let's hope someone on the Roxbury Board of Selectmen or the Planning Board know their basic arithmetic!</p>
<p></p> Roxbury knows industrial wind…tag:www.windtaskforce.org,2014-10-29:4401701:Comment:594232014-10-29T13:18:12.423ZArt Brigadeshttps://www.windtaskforce.org/profile/ArtBrigades
<p><span>Roxbury knows industrial wind power. They've been through the process, and for three years now they've lived with the 22 turbines on Record Hill and Partridge Peak. This proposed site on North Twin is just two miles down the line from the existing turbines on Partridge Peak. So essentially it would look like an extension of the Record Hill project. Like Record Hill, this site is just over eight miles east of the Appalachian Trail, so its visual impact is discarded. It would be 15…</span></p>
<p><span>Roxbury knows industrial wind power. They've been through the process, and for three years now they've lived with the 22 turbines on Record Hill and Partridge Peak. This proposed site on North Twin is just two miles down the line from the existing turbines on Partridge Peak. So essentially it would look like an extension of the Record Hill project. Like Record Hill, this site is just over eight miles east of the Appalachian Trail, so its visual impact is discarded. It would be 15 miles west of the turbines on Saddleback in Carthage and 12 miles west of Col. Holman Mountain in Dixfield. About 20 miles in the other direction, to the southwest, is the Spruce Mountain wind project. See the picture? They're connecting the dots, so to speak. Keep giving them subsidies, keep building transmission, keep mandating their product, keep loose laws in place, keep accepting the money….Maine is being nibbled away by these vultures.</span></p>