Thumbs Down to Ohio BigWind Alternative Energy Zone

Screen Shot 2019-04-01 at 11.12.49 AM.png

A great victory was achieved this week for the warriors of Seneca County when two of the three County Commissioners voted to repeal the county’s designation as an Alternative Energy Zone.  Seneca County now joins Van Wert as a county which has repealed their designation.  Remaining AEZ counties include Sandusky, Delaware, Franklin, Putnam, Paulding, Hardin, Clinton, Noble and Summit.  Recently, requests to approve individual PILOT requests were turned down in Logan, Huron and Erie Counties.  Had these counties been designated AEZ, tax abatement and PILOT payments would have been automatically granted. 

Dale Arnold and the traveling Farm Bureau circus made an appearance in Urbana this week to tout the latest “ag commodity” – solar energy.  Harvest away.  We are still waiting to farm coal and gas, maybe raise a little nuclear. Among the points reported to us by attendees were that many of Ohio’s 33 solar companies have left the state because permitting is difficult; solar projects under 50 MW are subject to local zoning;  10 solar projects are in the OPSB pipeline; and permitting can take between 36 and 48 months.

PILOT is apparently important to solar developers.  According to a summary report written in 2010 by the law firm of Bricker & Eckler, PILOT “significantly reduced the state tax burden on renewable and advanced sources of energy generation, such as solar, wind, co-generation, and clean coal. Under the old laws, taxes on solar and wind were estimated to be approximately $115,000 and $40,000 per megawatt (MW), respectively – rendering Ohio a less competitive marketplace for deployment of these technologies.” Current PILOT law reduces the tax burden on qualifying projects to $6,000 to $9,000 for wind and $7,000 per MW for solar.

At the very bottom of this issue of Wind News is a very readable publication by Mark Mills of the Manhattan Institute.  We think it will make you laugh out loud as Mills explains the physics of energy and shows why there is no possibility that the world is undergoing— or can undergo—a near-term transition to a “new energy economy.” Mills takes on wind, solar and battery storage.   One example: “The annual output of Tesla’s Gigafactory, the world’s largest battery factory, could store three minutes’ worth of annual U.S. electricity demand. It would require 1,000 years of production to make enough batteries for two days’ worth of U.S. electricity demand.”  The US routinely maintains two months of stored energy to meet demand in the event of emergency.  You do the math.

An interesting bill was introduced recently.  HB 126 would bar an action challenging an act for violation of the one-subject rule if it is commenced later than 275 days after the act’s effective date.  This has applicability to the lawsuit filed in Paulding County by wind leaseholders and AWEA against the state which alleges current setbacks violate the Ohio Constitution because they were included in a budget bill in 2014.  HB 126 would forbid a lawsuit like the one filed in Paulding County unless it was filed 275 after it was enacted.   Rep. Seitz is a co-sponsor of this bill.

 

In this week’s news:

 

  • The Icebreaker Wind project in Lake Erie received important approvals from the Ohio EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a permit to commence construction.  We wonder if these turbines will be granted PILOT and, if so, what entity would have the authority to grant it?

 

  • The General Assembly is getting closer to the introduction of legislation to promote low and no carbon energy generation.  Rep. Jamie Callender, who chairs the House Public Utilities Committee, is leading the effort and says, “We’re looking at promoting lower emissions not just with nuclear but also solar and wind and also with other types of generation here in Ohio,” he continued. “How can they take what they’re doing and move it to be clean? We’re being very cautious to the extent we cannot play favorites but come up with a global solution that helps everyone move toward lower carbon emissions.”  Callender is a self-proclaimed fan of renewables. He expects legislation to be introduced in early April, possibly as early as this week.

 

  • Kevon Martis swats back at Rep. Casey Weinstein’s comments reported last week about wind turbine setbacks not being a matter of safety concern in that all generation carries risk.  “Any risk of wind turbine failure must be added to the risks of gas extraction, transportation and power generation because wind generation is wholly dependent upon the gas resource. It is not a replacement for those resources. Thus your colleague’s comparison collapses.”

 

  • North Carolina could permanently ban big wind-power projects from the most energy-intensive parts of the state’s Atlantic coast, but a state senator said Wednesday the move is necessary to prevent hindering military training flights.  Legislation introduced by Republican Sen. Harry Brown would prohibit building, expanding or operating sky-scraping wind turbines within about 100 miles from the coast. The bill would apply to the area that stretches from the Virginia border to south of the Camp Lejeune Marine Corps base.

 

  • In Ohio, the General Assembly has ignored and avoided the issue of wind turbine interference with military training routes but perhaps that could come to an end.  An assessment of the Seneca Wind project states “Considering the low altitudes associated with these routes, it is possible that wind development could have an impact on military operations. It is possible that these routes are used frequently by aircraft from Mansfield Lahm Air National Guard Base and other nearby units. If this is the case, the originating activity of these routes may object to proposed wind development within the route boundaries. The units may also object to any wind development over 499 feet AGL due to the likely increase to the minimum cloud ceilings required to fly the routes.”  This study and its concerns should be of importance to any community near a military airfield including Wright-Patt.  The study is attached.

 

  • Another great article on the renewables scam focuses on Georgetown, Texas – part of the 100% renewable gang.  “Like other places said to be 100-percent reliant on “renewable energy,” Georgetown doesn’t actually have its own wind turbines, solar panels, and biomass resources powering it. It simply pays an upcharge for electricity that is said to come from renewable sources. If the green communities and businesses actually did use all renewables, it would likely be very easy to tell: On calm nights the lights would go out. A very few locales in the nation might have the geological features necessary to keep the lights on when renewables fade — such as hills and water that allow a sizeable hydroelectric dam — but most don’t.”   Of course, the 100-percenters have figured out a slick way to get around these physics truths: They pretend.   The 100-percent renewables scam is being sold to us by the government, the utility companies, and the towns and businesses that participate. The “scam” buys goodwill with the duped public and is not only good public relations, it’s also an easy route for them. But as with most governmental interference in the free market, the public ends up taking it in the pocketbook.

 

  • The scammers and pretenders are forming a trade association.  Imagine that.  Companies from a variety of industries — including Walmart, General Motors, Google and Johnson & Johnson — are forming a trade association to represent firms that purchase renewable energy and remove barriers that make it complicated to shift away from carbon.  The new organization, the Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance, is building on years of work between corporations and climate advocacy nonprofits. Currently, about 200 companies, cities and universities are involved. Miranda Ballentine, the CEO of the new trade group, says the organization will help push energy markets and public policies to make it easier to actually choose to buy green energy.   This story from National Public Radio actually states: Many companies have set green energy targets as part of overall sustainability efforts — whether out of a sense of corporate responsibility or in the pursuit of positive PR.    And don’t forget the blackmail/extortion from those “climate advocacy nonprofits”!

 

  • The US DOE is about to waste some more taxpayer dollars to advance offshore, distributed and ‘tall’ wind across the lower-50 states. DOE is looking at supporting 140 meter towers.  That is a 459’ tower before measuring the blade.

 

  • The Grain Belt Express appears to be moving forward again under the management of its new owner, Invenergy.

It continues to be an active climate, in Ohio, filled with ‘constant change’…..

Seneca County commissioners voted 2-1 Thursday to “sunset” the alternative energy zone put in place in 2011 by a previous board. The AEZ will end June 30….

Phasing out the AEZ in about three months does not affect the Seneca Wind or Republic Wind proposed projects, but would mean the AEZ is not automatically in place for companies that might propose new wind projects after June 30…

Commissioner Mike Kerschner changed his vote since the November vote was taken.

“The fact is that if we rescind it we then have the power within this group of negotiation,” Kerschner said. “It puts a lot more power on this group.”

He said Erie and Huron counties also have rescinded their AEZ programs…

Chris Aichholz, spokesman for the local anti-wind organization, said “We consider today’s decision by the commissioners to rescind the alternative energy zone another achievement. These types of successes only come as a result of our tireless efforts to educate the community on the industrial wind turbine projects being proposed for our county.”

He said the group has been asking for the AEZ to be rescinded for almost a year.

Original article

About Ohio nuclear

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

First Energy Solutions to Lawmakers: Time Running Out to Save Nuclear Plants

Kevon Martis

North Carolina

The Renewable Energy Scam

Walmart,GM,Google want more renewables.

Recharge

US opens wallet to offshore, rural and ‘tall’ wind

Department of Energy earmarks $28m with eye on ‘significant opportunities’ for cost reductions

By Darius Snieckus

28 March 2019

Corporations promise more renewables

No timeline for $2.3bn US Midwest wind link despite state OK

Invenergy says still ‘premature’ to look at construction schedule for 4GW Grain Belt Express after regulatory boost

By Richard Kessler in Fort Worth

26 March 2019

Mark Mills of Manhattan Institute **********

 

Advertisements

‘Hite’-Way Robbery amendment gives BigWind POWER in Ohio

“(Senator) Cliff Hite introduces amendment to grant private property to foreign corporations without the consent of the property owner, a land grant unequaled since the days of the railroad robber barons.” Kevon Martis, IICCUSA

Senator Cliff Hite has introduced an amendment to the budget bill returning setback measurements to a non-participating neighbor’s home rather than the property line.   He thinks sufficient protections are provided because he proposes an increase in setbacks from previous property line measurements from 1.1 times turbine height to 1.2 times the height.  Hite claims he is acting on behalf of his constituents who demand reduced setbacks.  He identifies his supporters as Hardin, Putnam, Seneca, Paulding and Fulton Counties.  It would be interesting to ask the County Commissioners in these counties – on the record – if they support the uncompensated seizure of private property.  Ironically, Van Wert commissioners and others have been on record disputing some of the outrageous claims from the BigWind supporters. See our April 20, 2017 post, “Ohio mayor shares the realities of BigWind in Van Wert, Ohio”.  We have blogged these in the past.  Are the Commissioners of these counties looking to profit from PILOT payments if more wind can be built in their counties?  Projects that are granted PILOT provide that a certain amount of money will be paid into the Commissioner’s discretionary fund each year.  This money can be used to give raises, buy trucks or do whatever the Commissioners want.  Persons in these counties are encouraged to ask their Commissioners if they have written letters of support for stealing land from the people they represent.  Remember, zoning is intended to separate incompatible land uses.  Measuring the setback of an industrial power plant (aka wind turbine) from a neighboring home rather than the neighbor’s property line destroys the protection of zoning and destroys property values too.  We call this HITE-WAY ROBBERY.

The Hite-Way Robbery Amendment  will now be considered for inclusion in the state budget.  We urge everyone to make their calls to the Senate Finance Committee members who will be making this decision in the coming week.  Supporters of property line measurement may also wish to call their State Rep. and urge them to oppose inclusion of the Amendment.  If the Hite-Way Robbery Amendment is put in the budget and adopted by the Senate, the mess will fall into the laps of the House members.  Those folks can either help you fight for your property rights now or they will have to fight for your rights later.  If the matter goes to the House later this month, a compromise may be negotiated where townships are given the power to decide whether setbacks are reduced or not. 

 

ACT NOW to prevent the Hite Amendment from being put into the Budget Bill!

 

A timely news report from a turbine failure in Oklahoma shows once again why protective setbacks from property lines are so important.   “The broken blade sits about 100 yards behind the wind turbine, crushing all of the corn that surrounds it. The cornfield belongs to Ken Carpenter, who declined to comment. Cleaning up the blade and wind turbine could take anywhere from a couple of weeks to two months, and will involve bringing a large crane near the field to take the blade off, McIntyre said.”

 

All readers are asked to call their House Representatives and Senators THIS WEEK to object to any amendment reducing property line setbacks.   IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU CALL THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND SENATE PRESIIDENT.   We recommend that you CALL THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE: 

 

Senate President Larry  Obhoff (614) 466-7505

Senate Finance Committee Chair Scott Oelslager (614) 466-0626

Senate Finance Vice Chair Gayle Manning  (614) 644-7613

Senator Troy Balderson (614) 466-8076

Senator Bill Beagle (614) 466-6247

 

Not sure what to say?   “I oppose any budget bill amendment to allow a wind developer to take my land.  Zoning begins at my property line not my front door.   Giving wind developers the right to trespass on my land strips away my property rights and will burden my family for generations.  THIS IS ‘HITE-WAY’ ROBBERY!”   

 

PLEASE MAKE YOUR CALLS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!    ASK YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS TO MAKE CALLS.   THE SENATE NEEDS TO HEAR FROM US.

 

A destroyed wind turbine blade now sits in the middle of a corn field about 10 miles east of Enid.

“We’ve never had a catastrophic blade failure like that,” said Jeff McIntyre, regional wind site manager of NextEra Energy…

The blade broke off the turbine sometime Wednesday night…,

“(We will) need to go through and assess the rest of the blades and make sure there’s not any exposure to the rest of the site, or any of the property around the site,” McIntyre said…

The broken blade sits about 100 yards behind the wind turbine, crushing all of the corn that surrounds it. The cornfield belongs to Ken Carpenter, who declined to comment.

 Cleaning up the blade and wind turbine could take anywhere from a couple of weeks to two months, and will involve bringing a large crane near the field to take the blade off, McIntyre said…

Source: Blade breaks off wind turbine east of Enid | News | enidnews.com

Can Ohioans sue Senator Cliff Hite if his BigWind legislation passes?

Ohio Senator Cliff Hite will soon be proposing to shorten the current Ohio BigWind setback of 1,125 feet.  IF his legislation passes AND an Ohioan suffers from a consequence (see 1,000 foot ice throw below) of this legislation, can the Ohioan sue Senator Hite? As we have previously stated, it is time for Senator Hite to take a Hike, along with a new job with BigWind.  He practically works for them anyway….

Kevon Martis has been the leading activist working to halt the expansion of wind turbine developments in Michigan.

The Riga Township man who founded the grass roots Interstate Informed Citizens Coalition has coined a new phrase to describe one of the reasons he cares — “trespass zoning.”

The concept is that the industrial wind farms’ towers and spinning turbines require such large safety zones and noise setbacks that these extend onto neighbors’ property. Turbine blades can reach up to 600 feet above the ground with tips moving at 180 miles per hour. Since the uses of the property within a safety zone are limited — no children’s swing sets, for example — the intrusion is a property value-reducing trespass.

Martis said that wind farm promoters lobby local townships for zoning setbacks that only consider a turbine’s proximity to an actual residence. This means neighbors can lose the ability to use large portions of their land if a wind turbine is nearby.

“You did not give your consent to that and you didn’t get compensated for lost property,” Martis said about neighbors of property owners who have signed tower leases with wind turbine companies. “What they’ve done is make it legal to trespass on my private property.”…

 

One safety issue centers around ice forming on spinning turbine blades.

A report issued by General Electric in 2006 warned about “ice shedding” and “ice throw.” It states: “Any ice that is accumulated may be shed from the turbine due to both gravity and the mechanical forces of the rotating blades.”

A wind industry opponent called the Industrial Wind Action Group Corp.has posted testimony on its website from Will Staats, a wildlife biologist for the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. In his testimony to a New Hampshire Senate committee, Staats explained the dangers of ice that come from wind turbines.

He said, “The danger of ice throw cannot be overemphasized. I have often worked near these turbines on our research projects in the winter and witnessed the large divots in the snow where ice has been flung from the turning blades. I have seen the steel stairs leading to the doors of turbines bowed and broken by ice falling from the nacelle. And, on one terrifying occasion, my truck was struck by flying ice that, had it hit me or anyone else close by, could have killed or caused serious injury. One operator of a wind installation told me these machines will throw a 400-pound chunk of ice 1,000 feet.”

In a phone interview this week, Staats said he has seen large chunks of ice debris on the ground that had been thrown from wind turbines into the woods.

The American Wind Energy Association declined to comment for this story. But the organization produced a fact sheet on wind power myths and said the statement that wind turbines are not safe due to flying or discharged ice is a myth.

“Fact: Ice throw, while it can occur under certain conditions, is of little danger,” the fact sheet says. “Setbacks typically used to minimize noise are sufficient to protect against danger to the public. In addition, ice buildup slows a turbine’s rotation and will be sensed by a turbine’s control system, causing the turbine to shut down.”…

Source: If Neighbor’s Wind Turbine Flings Ice Chunks In Your Yard Is It Trespassing? [Michigan Capitol Confidential]

BigWind attacks Newsweek. Did they divert attention FROM the facts

Newsweek created quite a stir this week when AWEA ‘called them out’ for not vetting a college prof who wrote an op-ed piece about problems with wind energy. The attacks thrown at them, along with the defensive position that Newsweek has, subsequently , taken the story away from the facts. But isn’t this what BigWind is all about? Diverting you AWAY from the facts? The comments below this article are enlightening and chock full of facts. We have share some with you…

Texas prides itself on being a national leader, whether it be in barbecue, football or wind energy. That’s why when someone misguidedly attacks one of our strengths—as Randy Simmons did in an opinion article republished by Newsweek last week—as a Texan, I can’t remain silent.

Simmons’ op-ed on the “true cost of wind power” is the same tired slant we have heard from fossil fuel interests time and time again, which should come as no surprise when you learn who’s really behind the piece. Simmons lists his title as professor of political economy at Utah State University, but he doesn’t mention he is the Charles G. Koch professor of political economy. He’s also a senior fellow at the Koch– and ExxonMobil-funded Property and Environment Research Center. In other words, he works for oil companies.

So let’s expose this op-ed for what it really is: a fraudulent attempt to discredit clean, affordable wind energy and protect polluting coal plants….

Comment thread:

Kevon Martis: The author also disingenuously paints a false either/or scenario with respect to wind and fossil fuels. The truth is far different: wind energy binds ratepayers to fossil fuel generation in perpetuity, particularly gas-fired generation like that the produces more than 50% of Texas’ electricity. AWEA board member GE made that clear in testimony to the Obama White House: 

“Energy generation from renewable sources like wind and solar have zero
emissions and very low variable cost of generation. However, if flexible
generation assets, such as gas turbines, are not available, these renewable
technologies will not be deployed. In other words, gas turbines are an essential
component of renewable energy sources’ ability to penetrate the market.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/oira_2060/2060_07232013-1.pdf

And no one knows this better than the “fossil fuel front men” that inhabit the board of the American Wind Energy Association: http://www.awea.org/About/content.aspx?ItemNumber=779

Duke, E.On, AEP, Invenergy, FPL/NextEra: wall to wall fossil fuel.

That’s at least 3 strikes against this totally deceptive author….

Bruce Morgan Williams: FALSE. Recent studies by NREL, LBL, PJM, GE, and several universities have proven that we can integrate large amount of renewables and reduce fuel consumption significantly. It’s already happening. You post some political editorial BS that ignores real world data, and I post links to in-depth industry studies by grid operators.
You are either a Rube of a Shill (If you’re not sure, you’re a Rube)

http://www.pjm.com/committees-and-groups/subcommittees/irs/pris.aspx

Kevon Martis: Bruce Morgan Williams Actually the quote is from GE. You do know they are the biggest US wind turbine manufacturer and an AWEA board member? And the PJM study stipulates billions of dollars of new gas-fired generation right up front.


And it was done by GE as well.

The NEWIS study for ISO-NE (also by GE) says the same thing: gas is needed to integrate wind.

And NERC is saying the same thing about CAISO: nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability Assessments DL/NERC-CAISO_VG_Assessment_Final.pdf

Now show me where I posted editorial BS Bruce.

“Generating electricity from renewable energy rather than fossil fuels offers significant public health benefits. The air and water pollution emitted by coal plants is linked to breathing problems, neurological damage, heart attacks, and cancer. Replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy has been found to reduce premature mortality and lost workdays, and it reduces overall healthcare costs.”

Here is another whopper.

Notice how this quote conflates “coal” with “fossil fuels” and health impacts?

Here is the deceptive part: the alleged health impacts from coal emissions are derived from PM2.5 and/or Hg emissions. But natural gas-a fossil fuel- emits essentially none of those.

This author appears to be determined to deceive his audience at every turn….

Interesting that the wind promoters have decided to talk about water use in the generation sector as if reducing that use would end droughts.

Consider:

“When talking about water for power generation, two important terms must be explained and understood: water use and water consumption, said Dr. Susan Stuver, research scientist with the Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources (IRNR) and Texas Water Resources Institute (TWRI).

“If you’re using water and putting it back where it came from, it’s water use,” Stuver said. “A power plant is not consuming millions of gallons; it just needs (the water) once and then puts it back, and keeps using the same water over and over again.

“Water is drawn from the reservoir, used to cool the power plant and is then returned to the reservoir where it can therefore be used for other activities such as habitat for wildlife or recreation.”...

The problem is that wind energy costs at least $80/MWh to produce and often much more in many markets yet can only save $25-35/MWh of coal or gas fuel costs. In the meantime it is reducing the profitability of existing dispatchable power plants which normally would be fine if wind were a replacement technology for coal or gas generators. But it is not. Wind energy has a parasite/host relationship with primarily gas fired generators and when the parasite siphons off enough of the revenue stream of it’s requisite host it either dies-thus killing wind too-or the host demands new revenue removed from energy sales to keep it alive and the grid stable. That is a poor economic construct.

John Thomas Jordan Jr: Sorry not buying in. I don’t have a problem subsidizing renewable resources of any kind, we already subsidize traditional energy directly and indirectly. I also don’t have a problem with using all the above. As we develop more and better means of storage which won’t happen if there is no demand the reliance on other types of energy will shrink and the market will determine who is the ultimate winner.

Kevon Martis: John Thomas Jordan Jr. I see you are a union guy. Consider this: the steel industry spends $18 billion per year on electricity. They employ 100,000 people who are largely union. A 10% increase in the price of electricity takes $18,000/employee/year off the table for fringes and benefits. Wind energy’s wholesale PPA price is typically 80-120% higher than the wholesale value of electricity in most markets. Good luck with that next pay raise…

David Davila:  live in the Banning Pass, where wind power has been for decades. I really wish those that support it take a very close look at the existing farms here. Many are obsolete and don’t even work. They can’t be upgraded easily, all foundations, structures and wiring must be removed before an upgrade, that’s why many owners just walk away and abandon them. Many leak oil like a sieve that blows all over the desert. I also read these articles and wonder whether the authors ever calculate the energy deficit that they start with. +/- 5 tons of copper, +/- 80 tons of steel and +/- 150 gallons of oil and there are many other materials need as well that increase that consumption of energy before they produce a single watt. These materials were not mined, created or smelted using wind power. The authors do not even mentioning scraping vast amounts of pristine desert, local wildlife be damned. Want a permit for a large construction project? Good luck. Want one for a wind or solar farm and they can’t write them fast enough. Nice job looking at numbers and linking to them, horrible job taking all factors into account…

The True Benefits of Wind Power.

Citizens applaud Ohio Senate for increased BigWind setbacks

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Thursday, May 22, 2014 Contact: Kevon Martis, Executive Director Interstate Concerned Citizens Coalition (517) 403-2438

Citizens Hail Action by Ohio Senate to Correct Predatory Wind Turbine Setback Law Measure Sustains Wind Project Possibilities

Citizens of northern and western Ohio applauded action by the Ohio Senate to help protect property rights and values of homes in areas targeted for wind development. Current setbacks for industrial wind turbines, which reach up to 500 feet in height, were established by the Strickland Administration to be measured from the foundations of the homes of neighboring property owners. Senator Keith Faber, whose district is heavily impacted by wind development efforts, has recognized that effects of industrial wind turbines on neighboring property can devalue those properties, create health and safety hazards for the inhabitants, and render some virtually unsalable.

“We applaud the movement of turbine setback from homes to property lines, but remain baffled that the safety perimeter remains at 1,125’ plus one blade length (roughly 1,300’), while documentation from the safety manuals of turbine manufacturers Vestas and Nordex both recommend employees remain at least 1,640 ft. from turbines under some circumstances. That’s more than a football field further away than the new provision requiress.”

Wind developers are private for-profit businesses that should be required to negotiate easements and compensate neighboring properties for intrusion. Homeowners have a right to the peaceful enjoyment of their home,” said Kevon Martis, Executive Director of Interstate Concerned Citizens Coalition on behalf of the residents of northwest Ohio. “Senator Faber respects the rights of homeowners and nothing in this wind turbine setback will prevent a developer from pursuing a wind development. It does, however, restore the balance of power between ordinary people and powerful well-heeled developers.”

In a response from the American Wind Industry Association, they claim that respect for property rights and protection of rural home values will somehow destroy the wind industry. Such claims are exaggerated. AWEA regularly states that there are no adverse impacts on nearby property values and that the reports of negative health effects are not credible. If AWEA’s claims are true, there should be no problem negotiating affordable easements with neighboring property owners rather than simply taking property rights with no permission and no compensation.

“It is alarming the wind industry is publically balk at measures to protect Ohio homeowners.” remarked Mr. Martis. “Is this industry so greedy as to publically admit they wish to put Ohio rural citizens at risk?”

All across Ohio, rural citizens are cheering the leadership of Senator Keith Faber and his willingness to step forward, yet still puzzled that the industry’s own safety standards are stricter.