What else grows in spring? BigWind setbacks (in Indiana)

BigWind, in Ohio, wants you to believe that THEY are the victims. Victims of misguided legislation that handcuffs their opportunity for growth (Repeat, over and over, for years). We have repeatedly shown you examples of Ohio setbacks being too LENIENT with BigWind and today, we share, yet another below. Over and over again, once BigWind enters an area, residents become informed about the TRUTHS with this industry and how their business model is INtrusive into individual lives and rights. In Ohio, this concept is known as TRESPASS ZONING. Good luck to our Indiana neighbors…..

An ordinance was introduced Monday at the Montgomery County Commissioners’ meeting that would amend a section of the county code regarding wind energy conversion systems.

The changes would align the current code of ordinances with a proposed zoning ordinance released earlier this month after Akuo Energy threatened county commissioners with a lawsuit. The proposed zoning ordinance reflects the county’s new comprehensive plan and includes stricter regulations on wind turbines and wind farm development….

Commissioners had most recently made tweaks to the wind ordinance last year after months of debating and researching citizen concerns surrounding wind turbines. In the changes adopted by commissioners last July, noise levels generated by wind turbines were reduced from 60 decibels to 50 decibels. The new amendments introduced Monday would reduce noise levels further to 32 decibels. 

Minimum setback distances are altered as well, including 2,640 feet or five-times the height of the tower from any adjoining property line, road right-of-way, or overhead electrical transmission or distribution lines. And it establishes a 1-mile setback from any town, city or school. 

Changes also increased the distance of substations from residences, from 1,000 feet to 2,640 feet….

http://www.journalreview.com/news/article_3a631ada-6559-11e9-874a-d7f378351496.html


Advertisements

Ohio BigWind cries WOLF! We can learn from Indiana

Screen Shot 2018-10-21 at 4.15.23 PM

And many other states and locations!! BigWind has lobbied hard in Ohio for reduced setbacks, claiming they can’t survive with the current laws.  Yet, they seem to be planting and expanding throughout the state of Ohio…with expansion plans significantly greater. They cry wolf, that our setbacks are so restrictive. Really? Time and time again, we find examples of setbacks that are SIGNIFICANTLY larger than Ohio. Why? Where BigWind has planted, residents suddenly become wise. Wise about the realities that the industrial machines ARE noisy, DO affect the health of some, DO impact farmers, DO impact county roadways, etc. and DO NOT produce near the energy that they promised…Bravo Kosciusko county on terrific provisions within your ordinance!!….

We did it! We have a new model wind ordinance in Indiana! The new Kosciusko County wind ordinance passed unanimously on Tuesday, Oct. 16. Highlights include:
  • Setbacks to property lines of 3,960 ft. or 6.5 X the height of the tower, whichever is greater
  • Zero shadow flicker on a non-participant’s property
  • 32 dBA at property lines
  • Pre and post construction well inspections by a licensed well installer
  • Property value guarantees for everyone living within two miles of a turbine by two licensed appraisers of the Plan Commission’s choosing at expense of wind company
  • Prior to meeting with landowners in Kosciusko County to secure leases and holding private meetings with residents, the wind developer must notify every household and landowner within five miles of a planned wind project of their intentions to develop a wind farm in the area via certified letter. The wind developer must also contact the Kosciusko County Plan Director and inform the Kosciusko County Planning Commission of their intent to develop a wind farm in Kosciusko County prior to notice being sent to residents and landowners and prior to meeting with landowners to secure wind lease contracts in Kosciusko County.
  • The wind developer may not submit a memorandum of lease containing multiple lease contracts to the Kosciusko County Recorder. Signed wind lease contracts not submitted to the Kosciusko County Recorder’s office within 45 days of signing are null and void in Kosciusko County. (RES has not been recording leases in all of the Indiana counties where we are aware they have been getting leases signed.)
  • Large industrial wind turbines are only permitted in I-3 heavy industrial zones – because wind turbines are not agricultural!

Scroll down to page 47 to read the wind energy turbine updates Indiana county setback

Ordinance

BigWind gets beat Big in Ohio and Indiana

There is hope. As the truth about industrial wind turbines spreads, the people speak…through their votes. Do NOT get complacent, however, as BigWind has lobbyists who constantly approach our legislators.
We reported, yesterday that Van Wert County, Ohio, had a big win as their anti-wind Commissioner candidate beat a candidate who is a lease holder and was taking money for her campaign for the wind company. The numbers 72% to 28% win for their anti-wind candidate who was an incumbent. In our neighboring state, the good news was contagious….
ELECTION RESULTS: The “vocal minority” is the MAJORITY! Anti-wind groups win big in SIX Indiana counties fighting wind:
 
It was a very good night for almost all of our counties fighting wind. Huge victories in Fulton, Cass, Miami, Henry, Montgomery and Warren Counties last night as Pro-Property Rights Anti-Wind candidates swept the polls and sent a strong message to the powers-that-be that we are not backing down and will stand up for our rights! We are sad to report that our friends in Tipton County had a tough night but will continue the fight to keep new wind energy projects out of their county.
Key candidate wins for rural property rights include:
Henry County – biggest winner of the night! They won three seats on the County Council and a County Commissioner seat! They fought hard for the win and came out on top all across the board! Way to go, Henry County! It was truly a group effort. So proud to fight in Indiana with these fine people!

Fulton County – Fulton County needs to turn over the Area Plan Commission Board, and now has a good start. Two pro-wind officials on the Plan Commission – the surveyor and an appointed County Council member chose not to run again, (We believe because they thought they would lose based on pro-wind statements they have made to the anti-wind crowd that were not received well in the past).
The most contested race in Fulton County was Fulton County Surveyor, and we won! Also, on Fulton County Council – two were seats won by anti-wind candidates. One was a recently discovered anti-wind incumbant whose stance on wind energy we did not know until we sent out a pledge letter asking for candidates to promise to keep Fulton County wind-turbine free.
Miami County – Commissioner and detested RES Wind Land Lease Agent Josh Francis was running for County Council and was destroyed by his competition!
 
Cass County – a huge upset as one of the pro-wind Commissioner “Kings of Cass County” was dethroned with an anti-wind candidate! Also we were able to win a seat on the Cass County Council, and have an uncontested candidate who will also be running for County Council in the fall! Here’s an article about their win: https://www.wind-watch.org/news/2018/05/09/challenger-beats-incumbent-in-gop-council-primary-redweik-defeats-rains-by-372-votes/
Warren County – voted out (as in “You’re fired!”) a pro-wind commissioner who is said to have originally brought big wind into the county and they replaced him with a pro-property rights candidate! Way to go!
Montgomery County was able to hang on to two current anti-wind County Council members, and pro-wind was running against them, so hats off to them on their wins.
Pulaski County had a win as their believed-to-be on our side Commissioner handily won his primary and can perhaps be more free now to be more aggressive in getting wind kicked out of Pulaski County for good.

What every Ohioan should know about BigWind (as a new neighbor)

If you live in Ohio, you should share these truths (from Indiana) with your legislators. Legislators who are STRONGLY considering SHORTENING the distances between an industrial wind energy turbine and your home.  And our governor supports this nonsense! BigWind lobbies hard and they are extremely well funded, so it is vital that you educate yourselves and SHARE your opinion with your legislators….

As a Tipton County property owner, I did extensive research on the possible effects of having Industrial Wind Turbines. Our county was the first to attempt to have the turbines located close to residential homes and communities. Recently, I read Wind Watch online regarding Fulton, Miami, and Cass counties being interested in having a windfarm. I would like to pass along some findings of over 1,000 hours of research regarding this situation.

I first thought these things were green, non-toxic, and would be great for the environment…

Some counties have changed their setbacks due to health risks. Whitley County is now a half mile from the property line. Noble County has a 3,960 foot setback, and a noise limit not to exceed 40 decibels at 1,000 feet from a turbine, and requires that a tower’s blinking lights be shielded. Tipton County’s setback is now 2,640 feet from a residence. Many other counties have a complete ban on wind farms. If there were no risks, why would all these counties be putting in stricter ordinances??The World Health Organization recommends a minimum setback of 5,280 feet for children, elderly, and the chronically ill. The International Standards Organization recommends community noise limits of 35 decibels during daytime, and 25-30 decibels at night. Many European nations with more than two decades of experience with windfarms have setbacks of 3-5 miles. Denmark’s setback is four times the total height, and Holland’s is 3,280 feet.

Our County Commissioners were initially touting that “everyone was happy in Benton County” with the IWT’s. I sent a letter to the editor of the Lafayette Journal Courier stating I would like input from anyone regarding the impact of their turbines.

I received numerous replies (some anonymous) and others asking me not to use their name.

The following letter is from an individual who supplied her address in Fowler, Ind. My husband and I visited their home, and experienced all of her claims first-hand. Most people who visit Benton County wind farms have appointments set up for a tour with the Benton County Wind Farm EDC. We wanted to go on our own.

Here is the letter:

“I live in Benton County. Feel free to come to visit us. We are right in the heart of the wind turbines. They surround our house. I DO NOT like having them so close to our house. When they put them in, our road was so busy I could not even go walking that summer. The noise REALLY bothers me, and I have never gotten used to it! Depending on which way the wind is out of, you can hear the noise in the house. It seems worse in the winter. I believe it’s due to the density of the air. This time of the year the “FLICKER” effect is really bad in the morning and in the evening. You feel like you always need to duck as you see the blades going around. When my son-in-law visits, he always asks how we can stand that. We feel we should be compensated. The landowners get paid for the rental of their land but we get no compensation and we were here first! When it is all said and done, the commissioners should have made the set back a lot further from the houses. We would still have the noise but at least we wouldn’t have the FLICKER effect. I wish I had known all this before they were put in. Everyone just kept on saying they will be good for the community. They are, only if you are a landowner. They don’t care at all about homes in the community. Then they wonder why nobody wants to live in Benton County. Don’t know that I want you to use my name because we, as well as many others, have received threats and property damage when we’ve complained, but feel free to use this information.”

Here is another letter:

“In response to your letter to the editor, Thursday, February 14, in the Journal Courier, this information may be what you need. Personal property value will fall like a rock. Benton County houses located within the wind farms are selling for whatever the owner can get. Many land owners where these wind generators are located do not live in the county. The average age of the lease owners is retirement age…

The companies brag that the local economy will boom, but that is temporary until the company is done installing these monsters. They tout that they will create hundreds of jobs, but that is not true either. The companies bring their own machinery operators, and in the end there might be 5-6 people that maintain the turbines, or are guards, or both.

In Benton County, this happened because few people knew about the turbines until it was way too late to do anything about it. This is how the companies manage to get this done everywhere. A decision of this magnitude should be decided after a debate over property values, who is responsible for that loss, and other issues such as blinking lights, noise, which is nauseating, and the strobe effect from shadow flicker.”…

http://www.rochsent.com/Content/Local-news/Local-news/Article/Windfarm-neighbor/15/31/26003

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=https%3A%2F%2Fmalwaretips.com%2Fattachments%2Fknowledge-is-power-jpg.159611%2F&sp=ff7030207db39767f48361d19cdae7a6

The ‘Spin Doctors’ of BigWind are in Ohio….

screen-shot-2016-11-13-at-9-54-36-am

The Doctor is “In” – that is, the Spin Doctors of industrial wind. This past week the Spin Doctors were busy in their emergency rooms using the tools of their profession: truthiness (half truths) , proofiness, cherry-picking, fear mongering, false choices, weasel words and euphemism to save their hides.

“Spin (which is actually propaganda from a military perspective) is making us blind to what is happening. Being blind, we let our governments and big corporations get away with doing things that are unjust and to the detriment of the economy of the ordinary people and detrimental to democracy. Spin has been and continues to be used to pull the wool over the eyes of the general public.” http://www.truthliesdeceptioncoverups.info/2013/05/spotting-spin-some-tricks-of-trade.html

Reply comments on wind siting rules were submitted to the Ohio Power Siting Board on November 8th. The Mid-American Renewable Energy Coalition and the Ohio Environmental Council took shots at GNU and UNU and vice versa. We were dumbfounded by the spinning served up by the windies and enviros. Dizzy! Take some Dramamine and visit the link, below, to read all of the reply comments. We will share some spin highlights….

Ø Cherry-Picking & Truthiness: “MAREC believes the Board should apply wind energy standards that are consistent with neighboring United States jurisdictions, rather than adopting rules from foreign nations whose rural landscapes and population densities are vastly different than in those areas where wind farms are proposed in Ohio. A cursory review of Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan wind energy ordinances establishes that Ohio’s guidelines are already more restrictive than counties where wind farms both have and have not been built.”

MAREC lists four “cherry-picked” Indiana setback examples and suggests Ohio should emulate them. Yet, a more comprehensive list of 12 other Indiana counties reflects that 5 ban industrial wind facilities outright and five establish setbacks from property lines. The Indiana property line setbacks range from 1,300’ to 3,960’ (¾ mile). The two counties that measure from the residence have setbacks of 2640’ and 1,500’ from a non-participant residence. Our Indiana list also shows MAREC’s information about Tipton County is factually incorrect. Tipton revised their setbacks in July to 2640’ from residence, 1500’ from the property line within the Prairie Breeze development area and 1460’ from property line in the rest of the county.

If MAREC wants OPSB to apply wind energy standards “consistent with neighboring United States jurisdictions,” they would have to agree to enabling Ohio counties to ban industrial wind facilities outright as five Indiana Counties have done; establish setbacks from property lines as five counties have done; or lengthen setbacks from the residence as two have done. We recommend that readers use the MAREC chart and the Indiana list which reveals the dishonesty of MAREC when visiting with your local elected officials both at the state and county levels.

Ø Proofiness: Outight lying with numbers to mislead; quoting statistics out of context so that they mislead; distorting statistics; or using incorrect logic in order to mislead the audience.

“ It is MAREC’s view that the Board should acknowledge the original setback regulations “worked” considering there are nearly zero sound or shadow flicker complaints against the two existing wind farms in Ohio with over 5 years in operation. The Board should not adopt sound and shadow flicker impact setbacks from property lines.” (MAREC reply Page 3) In this instance, MAREC is deceptive because the wind leases and “good neighbor agreements” contain gag clauses that forbid landowners from complaining. This was recently reconfirmed in Hardin County when an EverPower representative peddling a good neighbor agreement advised that they would be free to complain but only to EverPower. Wind developers contractually suppress complaints and then defend their practices based on the assertion that there are “no complaints.” SPIN!

Similarly, MAREC asserts at page 15 of their reply that “Trade secrets: UNU argues an applicant should be required to submit to staff any post-certificate evaluation of shadow flicker impacts, including all supporting documentation; however, this information should not be protected by trade secret. MAREC disagrees – trade secret information should be protected in accordance with the statute.” Whether it is bird kills or shadow flicker intrusion, the wind industry works to manipulate or hide information that may be damaging to them and then relies on “proofiness” to spin their argument.

More general “proofiness” was revealed this week in the industry publication, Wind Watch, when the statistics used to assert public support for wind were exposed as misleading. “Seventy-seven percent of Trump supporters want more wind farms, but 69% want more coal mines, 66% want more offshore drilling, 58% want more fracking, and 55% want more nuclear. Trump supporters want wind farms, but that is only because they want more electricity whatever source it comes from. Whether it is ‘clean’ or ‘dirty’ doesn’t seem to matter. The research also does not specify how much new wind capacity they would want, so they may only want a tiny amount.”

Ø Euphemisms –“ When part of a spin performance, euphemisms are usually used with other spin methods. With spin, euphemisms tend to be used when the intent is to manage the impressions of the audience so that they will not react to bad news in a way the spinner does not want.” http://www.truthliesdeceptioncoverups.info/2013/05/spotting-spin-some-tricks-of-trade.html

UNU’s Reply at page 14 states “Initially, MAREC objects to the Board’s use of the term “noise” and asks the Board to use only the term “sound,” contending that “noise” has “a negative connotation that indicates loud, harsh, or disturbing sound.” But make no mistake about it, the sounds imposed on the public by wind turbines are loud, harsh, and disturbing. The semantic niceties offered by the wind industry cannot disguise that fact. Acoustic engineers define “noise” as “unwanted sound.” Since no one desires the sounds from a wind turbine, not even the turbine’s host landowner, “noise” is the most appropriate term for turbine emissions in this rule.

We direct the reader’s attention to the timely article from Columbus Business First reporting that Ohio State University has been engaged in a research project called “Sounds of New York.” In this instance, the sound is not just “noise” but “noise pollution”. Whether one is in a quiet rural area or in a bustling urban environment, there is a point at which the increase in “sound” is unwanted and harmful. Important to note, also, is that human complaint data is considered to be important in understanding and responding to the problem. OSU acknowledges complaint data can “provide reliable information to support decision making”. But OOPS! Here we go back to “Proofiness”! In New York, complaint information is essential to addressing a problem while the wind industry hides complaint information and dares the public to disprove their “proof” that there are no complaints about noise or shadow flicker.

We could go on and on. Our message to all is EYES WIDE OPEN. Understand the tricks of spin and help your community to SEE how wind propaganda is being deployed to BLIND them to the truth….

In the Matter of the Ohio Power Siting Board’s Review of Rule 4906-4-08 of the Ohio Administrative Code.

Status: OPEN-OPEN
Industry Code: GE-GAS & ELECTRIC
Purpose Code: BRO-Rule promulgation
Date Opened: 5/18/2016

View All
1 – 15 of 30 documents 1 / 2 First Previous Next Last
Date Filed Summary Pages
11/08/2016 Reply Comments of Icebreaker Windpower, Inc. electronically filed by Terrence O’Donnell on behalf of Icebreaker Windpower, Inc. 14
11/08/2016 Reply Comments of The Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition electronically filed by Terrence O’Donnell on behalf of Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition. 34
11/08/2016 Reply Comments of the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation electronically filed by Amy M Milam on behalf of Ohio Farm Bureau Federation 7
11/08/2016 Reply Comments electronically filed by Mr. Christopher A. Walker on behalf of Union Neighbors United and Johnson, Julia F. Ms. and McConnell, Robert Mr. and McConnell, Diane Mrs. 44
11/08/2016 Reply Comments of the Ohio Environmental Council on Review of Rule 4906-04-08 and Proposed OAC 4906-4-09, Case No. 16-1109-GE-BRO electronically filed by Ms. Miranda R. Leppla on behalf of Ohio Environmental Council. 10
11/08/2016 Reply Comments of 6011 Greenwich Windpark, LLC electronically filed by Teresa Orahood on behalf of Sally W. Bloomfield. 33
11/08/2016 Reply Comments of Greenwich Neighbors United electronically filed by Mr. Samuel C. Randazzo on behalf of Greenwich Neighbors United. 17
11/07/2016 Reply Comment electronically filed by Mr. Matt Butler on behalf of Ms. Katie Elsasser. 4
11/07/2016 Comments electronically filed by Mr. Matt Butler on behalf of Mr. Gary Biglin. 2
11/04/2016 Reply to Initial Comments electronically filed by Mr. Matt Butler on behalf of State Sen. Bill Seitz. 3
11/01/2016 Comments electronically filed by Mr. Matt Butler on behalf of State Sen. Bill Seitz 33
10/28/2016 Comments electronically filed by Mr. Matt Butler on behalf of Ohio State Historic Preservation Office, Ohio History Connection (SHPO) 3
10/24/2016 Initial Comments electronically filed by Terrence O’Donnell on behalf of Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition. 30
10/24/2016 Comments filed on behalf of Icebreaker Windpower, Inc. electronically filed by Terrence O’Donnell on behalf of Icebreaker Windpower, Inc. 8
10/24/2016 Comments of 6011 Greenwich Windpark, LLC electronically filed by Teresa Orahood on behalf of Sally W. Bloomfield. 9…..

http://dis.puc.state.oh.us/CaseRecord.aspx?CaseNo=16-1109

BigWind blowing lots of hot air in Ohio (and Indiana)

 

Speaking up and speaking out are important – we are reminded of the phrase “you create your own future.” At the risk of seeming over confident, we think those who are speaking out in Ohio and in Indiana are truly creating a better future for themselves and their communities.

First things first. One Van Wert County Commissioner has stepped forward to publicly express what he thinks and we blogged about this last week. Todd Wolfrum was first elected County Commissioner in 2013. He is a practicing attorney who also writes a weekly column for the local newspaper pertaining to estate planning and other legal matters of interest to the public. Commissioner Wolfrum also sits on the local hospital board, the Community Investment Corporation and he is President of the Regional Planning Commission. His main interests are promoting advanced education and the generation of business opportunities in the Van Wert area. In winning his current seat on the Board of County Commissioners, Wolfrum defeated the Superintendent of Vantage Career Center in a landslide – garnering 65% of the vote. Why is this important? Because the Vantage Superintendent is an outspoken supporter of industrial wind who has testified on behalf of wind. Vantage operates the wind technician training programs for local developers. Wolfrum’s credentials speak to the fact that he is not some crazy anti-wind nut to be ignored.

On July 2nd, Commissioner Wolfrum used his newspaper column to express his thoughts on wind. He questions what would happen if Sub HB 190 were to pass (which it won’t) giving local commissioners more authority over siting and setbacks. He states that after giving Iberdrola a 70-80% tax reduction through PILOT because Van Wert County had chosen to be designated as an Alternative Energy Zone, the Commissioners realized they had made a mistake and they rescinded their AEZ designation going forward. Now, they speculate that if a developer wanted to get a tax break, they would have to come up with a proposal and put it up for a vote – but who would be eligible to vote? Everyone in the County? “It does not seem appropriate that areas that stand only to benefit from a taxing scheme be allowed to vote to burden another area.”….” I don’t know a definition of fair that would allow Van Wert City voters, an overwhelming majority of the school district, to determine this issue for Liberty Township.”…”But, imagine if we started giving tax breaks to incentivize a hog farm to locate next door to you?”…” If you are in the pro crowd, I would advise against trying to pressure us to force windmills on a population that, as of now, does not want them.” …” And perhaps there is no way to win support. But if a majority of people in a zone for a proposed wind farm cannot be convinced to accept a tax plan, then someone will need to explain why it should be forced on them over their objection, because that is really the only thing that has been proposed to date.”

This is something to think about as the legislature continues to grapple with how to deal with the renewable mandate. Before December 31, 2016, the General Assembly (Ohio) must do one of three things: eliminate the mandates, continue the “temporary freeze” or resume the mandates. Governor Kasich has said he will not accept the elimination of the mandates. But, resumption of the mandates will put pressure on communities where developers want to build. Almost every community with the exception of Hardin County and perhaps Seneca will, like Logan County and now Van Wert, object to the burden of hosting an industrial wind facility or granting tax incentives for doing so. Why mandate a source of power generation that requires tax incentives that most are unwilling to support in their community? The reality of Ohio is that we rank 7th nationally in population density and we are not a suitable place for the development of industrial wind. Perhaps, Commissioner Wolfrum has made that point a little clearer for our legislators.

In Indiana, the story is the same. Multiple counties are pushing back hard and “A wind-farm aversion is driving a handful of other rural counties – including some that already have turbines – to put moratoriums on any future development as local debate unfolds. “They’re losing favor all over the state,” said Campbell, who’s now working with like-minded opposition in other communities. Ben Kenney, of the Indiana Office of Energy Development is reported to have pledged that “the state won’t push for wind-energy projects where they’re not welcome. “ via:  http://www.batesvilleheraldtribune.com/news/local_news/wind-farms-whipping-up-opposition-across-rural-indiana/article_c0e2464e-b771-50a9-a4ac-14cd84f738d2.html  

How about it in Ohio? We think the Ohio Public Utilities Commission and the Ohio Power Siting Board has one of the worst records of facilitating wind development over the objections of Ohio communities who do not want them. And now comes the appointment of Vorys attorney Howard Petricoff to the Public Utilities Commission. Word on the street is that Mr. Petricoff has demonstrated a poor record of acting in the public interest during his career representing wind developers and others in the electricity business. In fact, the Statehouse news reports are that “The top Democrat on that Senate panel, Sen. Sandra Williams (D-Cleveland), likewise wants hearings on whether Gov. John Kasich’s nominee is the best fit for the office…. As the committee’s ranking minority member, Sen. Williams said in an interview she is “not impressed” with the governor’s selection.” Petricoff’s confirmation hearing is scheduled for Tuesday at 1:00 in the Senate Finance Hearing Room. 

Tuesday is a double header of sorts in that oral arguments will be heard in the Ohio Supreme Court on Champaign County’s appeal of the OPSB approval of Amendments to the Buckeye Wind project. The Court will convene at 9:00 a.m. sharp and anyone who is able to attend is encouraged to do so. A show of support for Champaign County and the Townships would be appreciated.  The County and Townships assert two points in their appeal:

A. The Board’s approval of Applicant’s amendments in its Order of February 18, 2014 and its Order of May 19, 2014, without holding a required hearing was unreasonable and unlawful, as such amendments would result in a material increase in the environmental impact of the facility or a substantial change in the location of all or a portion of such facility.

B. The Board’s approval of the amendments in its Order of February 18, 2014 and its Order of May 19, 2014, without hearing was unreasonable and unlawful, as it denied Appellants County and Townships the only opportunity to be heard.

If the Court finds in favor of Champaign County and the amendments are sent back to the OPSB for a hearing, it is presumed that property line setbacks would be applied to the EverPower Project. A separate pending appeal from Union Neighbors United in connection with the extension of the certificate for Buckeye I has not been scheduled for a hearing.

Recent maddening news is that the wind lobby (aka Big Wind) is ramping up their $$green$$ machine to go after more of everything: more “purchased” politicians to deliver more federal tax credits and more local tax incentives; more lenient conservation rules; more renewable mandates; more biased news reports; blah blah blah. American Wind Action (“AWA”) has been born. “AWA, a nonprofit 501(c)(4) advocacy group, can engage in political campaign activities as long as those efforts are not its primary activity. At its launch, it claimed an “initial seven-figure budget.” Enfield declined to specify just how much AWA has raised so far or where it will target its funding. But he indicated the main focus will be states where pro-wind-energy policies such as tax breaks and minimum requirements for renewable energy appear to be at risk.” Look for AWA recruits in your neighborhood or under a rock at your area career center and defend against them because, as we said at the outset, “You create your own future.”….

The U.S. wind energy industry is the fastest-growing new source of electricity in the country. But it’s not resting on its laurels, especially in an election year.

Hence the launch of American Wind Action, a group that will promote the benefits of wind energy to the public…

“We will be working to identify and activate supporters of wind energy to encourage action from their elected officials, and we will educate the public about the actions and positions those officials take on wind energy…

Source: Turbine industry aims to keep tailwind blowing

Indiana county says NO to BigWind (Apex)

 

Bravo, Indiana! The truth about these industrial sites is spreading.  A neighboring county already has turbines, and we are certain, plenty of people who oppose them.  We have learned, however, that we must stay vigilant. Just because Apex was unable to put up met towers, means nothing.  That is just a smokescreen because these companies don’t really care how windy a region is (or not).  This region of the country is NOT very windy, per governmental data (see our home page). These companies are here for the $$$, and when you are blinded by their smokescreens, they quietly negotiate leases….

The Henry County Planning Commission denied two requests from Apex Clean Energy to build towers in the southern part of the county to gather wind data. The meteorological towers, commonly called met towers, would have been placed in Spiceland and Dudley Township….

Many people who attended the meeting wore neon colored shirts emblazoned with anti-turbine slogans. Residents from all corners of the county asked the members of the board to consider that met towers are precursors to wind turbines. They repeated concerns that have been voiced several times at a variety of public meetings over the past few months….

 

Source: Planning commission denies temporary towers