Reducing BigWind setbacks will squeeze people out

BigWind is working hard in the Ohio legislature to reduce turbine setbacks. One might ask what the title means? Turbines and People do not belong together and that is why we have setbacks. Setbacks are PROTECTIVE for Ohio residents and wildlife and property rights. Without them, we may as well live in the Wild West. Just how many turbines are we talking about? SEE THIS LINK FOR A GOOGLE MAP REPRESENTATION. IT IS SHOCKING!!


It is poor policy to reduce setback distances while turbines are getting taller.
Larger rotor diameters mean longer throw distances!!
No other state or local jurisdiction in the nation is reducing setbacks.

At a minimum, the General Assembly should not take action while the Ohio Power Siting Board is in the middle of rulemaking on blade shear. Testimony about blade shear at the PUCO late last month indicated blade failures on current wind turbines in Ohio within the last three years have thrown debris over 1500 feet. The current setbacks are only slightly more than 1200 feet from a property line. Changing the setbacks to pre-2014 levels would allow the 650 foot turbines to be located much closer to your home than currently allowed.

Curiously, we wonder what documentation the sponsors and co-sponsors of this bill are relying on? Not only should our legislators be concerned about safety, but also the nuisance of noise, vibration, and shadow flicker. If they are successful in changing the setback, can citizens sue the legislators???


BigWind blows hot air in Ohio

The Energy Generation Subcommittee continued its hearings on April 24th with more calls for reducing wind setbacks and more protests from wind and solar advocates who do not want to compete with more reliable and available clean energy sources.  The hearings can be seen on the Ohio Channel at .   We encourage you to go to the link at look at Part One at about 43 minutes to watch Michael Shellenberger’s testimony in favor of the bill.  Shellenberger has written prolifically Forbes magazine against wind’s gigantic footprint which destroys the landscape, habitat and the environment generally.     In Part Three at 1hr 45.36 Susan Munroe of Chambers for Innovation spews a bunch of nonsense about Blue Creek in Van Wert County and misrepresents the impacts of safe setbacks.  She claims on behalf of Paulding County that they want all the wind they can get.  

A revised Clean Energy bill will be introduced next week and hearings will resume before the full House Energy and Natural Resources Committee.

On  Tuesday, the Ohio Power Siting Board conducted a “workshop” to determine whether rules should be established for blade shear.  The workshop can be viewed at:

Julie Johnson testified against a setback reduction and argued that the failure of OPSB to require incident reporting, independent investigation and public access to incident reports results in the inability of landowners and persons who sign Good Neighbor Agreements to give “informed consent” to the waiver of setbacks.  They can unwittingly impose risk upon others who may live on, work on or visit properties within the range of a debris field if a turbine fails.   Terry Rittenhouse pointed out in his testimony that while the wind companies claim that blade failure is an extremely rare event, Ohio has experienced a 100% failure rate with incidents occurring at Hog Creek in Hardin County, Blue Creek in Van Wert County and Timber Road in Paulding County.   In two incidents, fragments traveled further than the current setbacks.

Gary Biglin also spoke on behalf of those residing in Richland County near the Blackfork Wind project.  Dennis Schriener, a nuclear engineer who specializes in safety, spoke as well. Schreiner resides near the proposed Apex project called Emerson Creek in Huron County.   He described his efforts to find safety standard information and said it was not publicly available in the United States and that he had to secure information when he was out of the country in Brazil.  The information he obtained specified a safety setback of 1,640 feet.  We have seen this specification in Nordex materials.  

The workshop was disappointing in that  there was no give and take discussion.  It was similar to a public hearing where the Administrative Law Judge sits in silence and listens.  After the citizen testimony, no wind developer (if any were present) spoke.  Michael Settineri, the Vorys attorney who represents many wind developers, popped up and said he could not let the moment pass and encouraged the OPSB not to promulgate a rule because it might undermine investor confidence.  He suggested that any incident reporting be made a part of a certificate condition and remain a matter between the OPSB and the wind operator.   It was a foolish comment given the testimony.  The OPSB will now take the information provided to them and draft a rule.  The proposed rule will be subject to public comment before adoption.  This is a good step forward by the new leadership of the OPSB which has prior to now, ignored public safety.

Ohio House Democrats O’Brien and Skindell have introduced HB 223 to repeal existing property line setbacks.  Perhaps it is their intention to have the language folded into the Clean Energy bill since so many witnesses demanded it.  To date, Speaker of the House, Larry Householder, has rejected requests to consider setbacks in the Clean Energy bill.    A sampling of news stories related to the Clean Energy bill are included below….

In other news:

  • AEP is taking bids to set up energy purchase agreements for solar or wind facilities that are operational or coming online soon within the 13-state footprint of PJM. It will seek 10-year agreements for wind and solar projects online now as well as 15-year solar and 12-year wind agreements, for facilities that begin operation between 2020 and 2023, according to a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  
  • PV magazine says “As we’ve noted before, Ohio is not the first state that most people think of when they think solar. At the end of last year the state had only 202 MWdc installed, placing it in the bottom half of installed capacity nationally, and SEIA’s project database did not show any larger than 20 MW. Despite this humble start, Wood Mackenzie ranks Ohio as the top state in the Midwest for solar development over the next five years, and a look at the status of some of the leading projects explains why.”  “Six projects totaling over 1 GWac that have siting board approval, interconnection agreements and/or PPAs, suggesting that large-scale solar development is about to take off in a big way.”
  • Filings on the OPSB website show Republic Wind LLC and OPSB staff Friday requested a 90-day extension to allow the company more time to submit information for the staff investigation report.  Perhaps Republic is waiting to see if legislation to repeal property line setbacks is sneaked into the budget by Sen. Dolan, slips into the Clean Energy Bill or is passed as standalone legislation.
  • The FAA has awarded the state with a certificate of authorization allowing it test defense-related drone technology without reliance on a visual observer or chase aircraft. Typically, drones can only fly within the uninterrupted line of sight of the person operating the UAS, but the special waiver allows AFRL and the Ohio UAS Center, which is part of the Ohio Department of Transportation’s DriveOhio Initiative, to use SkyVision to test drones beyond the visual line of sight within a 200 square-mile parcel of unrestricted airspace near the Springfield-Beckley Municipal Airport.   We wonder if this program would prevent turbine development in the area?


BigWind prepares attack on Ohio wind turbine setback

BigWind in Ohio is on the move…prowling, circling and now a House Bill has been presented to SHORTEN our BigWind setbacksOnce again, they insist on predatory setbacks that will be measured from a residence RATHER than a property line. It is time to contact your representatives and share your disgust for this tactic! BigWind can have leasees sign ‘waivers’ to get around our current setback. Why is this not enough? Are they lazy? NO, they are greedy predators…..

Sponsors of this bill: Fred Strahornn, Michael Skindell, Kristin Boggs, Tavia Galonski, Glen Holmes, Michele Leport-Hagan, Joseph Miller, Michael O’Brien, Kent Smith and Terrence Upchurch.

ALL of these representatives are Democrats.

ALL of these representatives live in CITIES and have no business telling us what to do with our rural land!!!

BigWind brings Circus to Ohio

BigWind brought the circus to Ohio and barked about setbacks!! This week the Ohio House Subcommittee on Energy Generation is heard interested party and opponent testimony on HB 6 – the Ohio Clean Air Program.  As expected, a conga line of anti-nuclear/pro-renewable witnesses took the stand.   The Tuesday proceedings can be viewed at  What should be lost on no one is that many witnesses used the opportunity to testify to call for a change in wind turbine setbacks. We suspect that the wind lobby wants to include a revision to setbacks in HB 6 as a bargaining chip to gain votes.  To date, Speaker Householder has not seemed receptive to addressing setbacks  in HB 6.  Time will tell, if he caves to pressure…..

Today’s report excerpts statements about Ohio setbacks from the April 23 testimony.  In addition we provide various articles from around the state reporting on the hearings.  We believe the media are uninformed and/or – to use a popular term – colluding with the green crowd to report much fake news critical of HB 6.   

Michael Shellenberger of Environmental Progress testified before the Subcommittee.  We urge you to read his article, link below, from Forbes  concerning nuclear energy and Ohio energy policy.

Ohio House Subcommittee on Energy Generation Testimony April 23,  2019:

We should instead be investing in Ohio’s growing renewable and energy efficiency sectors by fixing the laws that are holding back renewable energy development in our state, such as our restrictive wind setback law, and continuing to push for stronger renewable and energy efficiency standards. But instead, we’re discussing a bill that would strip money from those programs. 

Anastazia Vanisko Recent college grad looking for a job in a state with energy policies that comport to her values

Finally, it is important to note that any serious review of Ohio’s renewable energy policies must include reconsideration of the draconian setback rules imposed as an amendment to budget legislation in 2014. These rules have significantly impeded the development of new wind resources in the state of Ohio and sent developers looking elsewhere to create jobs and economic development. Ohio can benefit enormously from reforming these problematic setback rules to allow Ohio to be a leader in deployment of new wind projects again.

Andrew Gohn, and I am Eastern Region Director for the American Wind Energy Association.

Rather than propping up nuclear power, I ask you to continue Ohio’s progress towards renewable energy by sustaining the renewable energy standards passed by the Legislature a decade ago and removing unnecessary barriers to expansion of wind farms. I visited a wind farm in Van Wert County last spring and was delighted to hear from a local farmer that the revenue from the turbines was a great source of stability to her family’s business, and that property taxes on the turbines were generating over $800,000 a year in new revenue for her children’s elementary school, which is now excellent.

Ariel Miller, volunteer, Ohio Interfaith Power and Light

I can testify to the fact that Ohio’s leaders commitment to cautiously diversify Ohio’s electricity supply was a success, but it could have been a much bigger one. The legislature started backing away from this commitment in 2014 with the freeze to Ohio’s Alternative Energy Standard and a dramatic increase in the distance that a wind turbine has to be setback from an adjacent property line. …Now we encourage you to consider building an even bigger future for Ohio by backing the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard and reducing the setbacks for wind turbines to a reasonable and safe standard.

Testimony of Erin Bowser EDP Renewables North America

Remarkably, while House Bill 6 concentrates benefits, it increases economic damage across the state by pulling the legs out from under Ohio’s existing renewable energy and energy efficiency standards, as well as by failing to correct the job-killing wind energy setback mandate.

Testimony of Frank Szollosi  Great Lakes Climate Policy Director, National Wildlife Federation

We urge the General Assembly to postpone action on HB 6 to carefully address related issues such as the currently prohibitive wind energy setback rules, grid modernization, utility business models, electric vehicle infrastructure, and on-bill financing as part of a comprehensive energy bill.

Leo Almeida, The Nature Conservancy in Ohio

SB 310, enacted in 2014, froze the renewable energy and energy efficiency standards for two years while gutting many of their key provisions, including the requirement that a portion of the renewable energy purchased by utilities come from sources inside Ohio. In separate legislation that year, the General Assembly also enacted punitive wind turbine setback standards that brought most new wind development to a standstill in Ohio, leaving over $4 billion in capital investment and thousands of jobs on the sideline. In the years since 2014, some in the General Assembly have repeatedly sought to undermine and effectively repeal the RPS, creating uncertainty that has, in turn, suppressed private sector investment in renewables in Ohio.

Testimony of Ted Ford President, Ohio Advanced energy Economy

HB 6 stops short of taking advantage of an opportunity to remove government regulations that are blocking the development of new sources of generation and the opportunities to create jobs, spur economic development, and increase revenue for local schools and communities. Ohio’s energy portfolio should not be focused on creating new, government-run, tax and spend programs, but rather on trimming back existing government regulation – such as the current wind setback.

Tyler Duvelius Executive Director, Ohio Conservative Energy Forum

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….

Could a BigWind lease put your family at risk for a lawsuit?

Screen Shot 2019-03-25 at 10.48.54 AM.png

Since BigWind slithers into an area, before it is announced to the public, you should educate your neighbors, now, about the risks of signing BigWind leases. Could you/they be at risk for future lawsuits? Maybe. We have blogged about this scenario in Indiana, once before. Will it become more common? Would it cause stress to the property owners? Absolutely! Leases should be scrutinized by a professional with experience…..

Receipt of a mechanic’s lien against their property in the amount of $68,995.75 has caused some property owners in Arkwright a fair amount of confusion and, at least initially, a significant amount of stress.

On March 15, Harter Secrest & Emery LLP, the law firm representing Specialties Company, LLC of Indianapolis, Indiana, filed mechanic’s liens against real properties in Arkwright under lease agreements with wind company EDP Renewables. According to lien documents, Akrwight Summit Wind Farm, with consent from the property owners, engaged the services of subcontractor White Construction, Inc., also of Indiana.

White Construction “was engaged to furnish labor and materials for earthwork, excavation and backfill of soil, and soil stabilization and modification, for the improvement of the Premises.”

Although the work has been completed, the mechanic’s lien says that White Construction has not been paid in full. “The total agreed price and value of labor and materials furnished under contract with White Construction, Inc., 3900 East White Avenue, Clinton, IN 47842 was $6,109,037.28 of which $3,548,568.30 remains unpaid and the total amount allocable to the Premises and which this lien filed is $68,995.75.”...

After speaking with the wind company, Norton contacted the OBSERVER by phone later on Wednesday. “I spoke to one of the vice presidents of EDPR. It’s a dispute between contractors, but beyond that they couldn’t talk about it. They are aware of the situation. It’s a legal matter,” Norton said.

In recent years, mechanic’s liens have been filed against other property owners with wind company lease agreements. In a similar 2016 case, AUI Construction Group v. Louis J. Vaessen, a subcontractor on the wind project, AUI, was responsible for the construction of the foundation and the tower on Vaessen’s property. In AUI’s subcontractor’s agreement, wind company GSG 7 was listed as the owner for the wind turbine. At the end of the project, AUI claimed it was owed $5.9 million from another subcontractor involved. AUI received partial payment, but was owed a remaining balance of $3.18 million. Although AUI received a partial award to settle the dispute, the subcontractor soon filed bankruptcy, leaving approximately $1 million unpaid. AUI attempted to collect the unpaid amount from the Vaessens in the form of a mechanic’s lien.

In a landmark decision, the Illinois appellate court ruled in favor of the property owners, whose lease agreement allowed an easement for a structure on their property. Further, the court determined that the property owners did not receive a direct benefit from the turbine — only from the lease money ($7,500 annually) from the wind company. Because the wind turbine was the property of the wind company, who directly benefitted from the energy generated by the turbine, they were held responsible for the amount of money owed to AUI.

Although the court ruled in favor of the landowners, the case raises serious questions regarding the lien rights of subcontractors and property owners’ liability. Many contractors, subcontractors and suppliers are engaged in order to create just one wind farm, which can leave several opportunities for payment problems or disputes. What protections do subcontractors have when the property owner is not the one benefitting from the project? Who becomes responsible for monies owed if a party involved in a wind project files for bankruptcy? While answers to these questions may differ based on the specific terms of property owners’ lease agreements, the case is a reminder for all parties involved to read — and understand — the fine print….


Arkwright article

BigWind ‘spins’ the TRUTH at Ohio House

Screen Shot 2019-03-19 at 8.40.57 AM.png

Last week the Ohio House Energy Generation Subcommittee heard a presentation from Dayna Baird Payne on behalf of AWEA and Terrence O’Donnell on behalf of several wind developers and the Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition (MAREC).  They asserted that there was an effective moratorium on new wind development in Ohio due to what they believe are restrictive setbacks measured from property lines.  As a result, they complained that this situation could force Ohio to become a net importer of renewable energy.   Given that Ohio prides itself on being a “choice” state where energy users can choose any kind of power they prefer from throughout the PJM system, being a “net importer” of renewable energy is only an issue to developers who want to force projects in Ohio’s rural communities. If their assertions are true, then why are there so many BigWind projects in planning stages???

When asked by Committee Co-Chairman Michael O’Brien how Ohio’s setbacks compare with other states, Payne acknowledged that some states do regulate at the county level but the “industry norm” is 1.1 times the turbine height from the property line – which was the law prior to 2014.   It strains credulity to think that standards adopted a decade ago when turbines were half the size they are today would still be considered the “industry norm.”  And while the wind industry may hold that 1.1x turbine height is their standard, no community would adopt it as their standard. 


It was reported that Co-Chair Dick Stein (R-Norwalk) challenged Payne’s claim that the wind industry generated 96,000 megawatts (MW) last year.  She then had to admit her figure did not reflect actual output, and that wind farms generally operate at a third of their “nameplate” capacity. O’Donnell went even further saying it might be as high as 40%.   Payne added that she did not know whether wind generation contributes to the capacity market operated by PJM.  Yeah, sure.  Generally we understand that PJM assigns a value of 13% to wind.  PJM will be the next Committee presenter and that question will be cleared up.


O’Brien asked about the offshore Windbreaker facility underway in Lake Erie, and O’Donnell said competition is “fierce” for offshore wind developments, especially on the eastern seaboard.  To compare, or better, to “confuse” enthusiasm for offshore wind in the ocean with the Windbreaker project in Lake Erie is misleading.


While wind was making its case to the legislature, the Ohio Democratic Party was unveiling their “Ohio Promise” agenda designed to address numerous education, human services, environmental and social justice concerns.  A list of priorities is reported below and, of course, along with gender equity, increased minimum wages and mandatory overtime pay is “ loosen wind farm restrictions.”


Distributed to all members of the House and Senate Energy Committees was the Michael Shellenberger article on the destruction of the landscape by wind and solar as well as an article from the National Review.  Rep. Seitz points out to his colleagues that while much of the NR article “is a well-deserved deconstruction of the “Green New Deal”, the portions that I have circled also indicate that renewables are not the answer. As that article notes, only 13 states allow all customers a choice of electricity supplier– and we are one of them. The author makes the point that in customer choice states, customers have an option to select clean energy and that is why I have long maintained that renewable portfolio mandates are unnecessary as those who wish to make these choices are perfectly free to do so now, absent the heavy hand of government. “


Counties considering granting PILOT should give serious consideration to the experience of Oklahoma communities where a five year tax abatement program for industrial wind has wreaked havoc.  An important report included below recounts that lobbyists for the wind industry have been handing out brochures touting the millions of dollars in property tax revenues that Oklahoma schools and counties have received as a result of wind farms being built in their jurisdictions.  “But there’s something those brochures don’t say: Most of those property tax payments to date have not been paid by wind company owners. Instead, they’ve been paid by Oklahomans whose income tax and other tax payments have been used to reimburse school districts and counties for revenue lost due to a five-year property tax exemption granted to wind farm owners by the Oklahoma Legislature. New wind farms no longer qualify for that exemption, which is being phased out. There’s something else those brochures don’t say: Once the five years of exemptions are over, wind companies have been sending lawyers to county courthouses to file tax protests and lawsuits contending the value of their equipment is worth hundreds of millions of dollars less than the values assigned to them by county assessors.” 


Some of those lawsuits have dragged on for years, leaving millions of dollars in disputed tax payments sitting in escrow while some school districts have struggled to make bond payments and pay operating expenses.

A good example is Comanche County, where the owners of Blue Canyon Wind Farms have tax protests pending covering five consecutive years.  EDP is the developer of Blue Canyon Wind as well as the Timber Road projects in Paulding County. The Paulding County Commissioners designated the county as an AEZ eligible for PILOT.  It will be interesting to see what EDP does when the Timber Road PILOT expires.    




OPSB reschedules the adjudicatory hearing for Republic Wind Farm for June 3rd.  A local hearing to receive comments is scheduled for May 14, 2019, from 5:00 to 9:30 p.m. at Bellevue High School, 200 Oakland Avenue in Bellevue, Ohio. Republic Wind is an Apexproject.


In the Seneca Wind project, a judge denied sPower’s request for a temporary injunction that would have allowed it to have access to properties where owners believe the leases have expired.  “In his eight-page ruling, the judge said the Ohio Constitution “places great importance on the rights of property owners” and had little sympathy for sPower’s argument that it was running out of time to keep the project on schedule because of annual restrictions on clear-cutting that take effect March 31 to protect endangered bats. Although sPower only came into possession of signed leases a few years ago, the judge noted that it and its predecessor had more than a decade in most cases. The company asserts there was a clause that automatically renewed the leases after the initial 10-year contracts had expired.”  The issue concerning the validity of the leases will be heard in court at a later date.


MaterResource featured an article on a letter that audiologist Dr. Jerry Punch sent to the OPSB in January concerning the potential impact of Seneca Wind on a client with severe vertigo.  Punch’s assessment of the situation for  his client is grim.   Punch points out that “In the 2009 guidelines, the World Health Organization (WHO)  recommended that average, A-weighted noise levels outside a residence, designated as LAeq, outside, not exceed 40 dB to avoid substantial annoyance, sleep disturbance, and other adverse health effects. It established limits specifically for wind turbine noise for the first time in its most recent guidelines, [3] recommending that noise emissions from turbines not exceed 45 dB Lden.  The Lden metric penalizes evening and nighttime noise levels by 5 and 10 dB, respectively, relative to daytime levels, and a level of 45 dB Lden is equivalent to an Leq of 38.3 dB. Levels between 38-40 dB Leq are in agreement with those recommended by Dr. Paul Schomer, a prominent acoustician who is the former Director of the Standards Division of the Acoustical Society of America.”


In Findlay, Ohio (home of former Senator Cliff Hite) plans to build one or two 400-foot wind turbines southeast of the intersection of Crystal and Bigelow avenues were rejected by the Findlay City Planning Commission.

“The action was a foregone conclusion after the city zoning appeals board last month denied One Energy’s request for a variance from city laws setting a 40- to 100-foot limit on wind turbines. Crystal Avenue residents have denounced the proposed wind turbines as an eyesore which would sink their property values and flicker shadows into their homes. They also have expressed concerns that the wind turbines would harm their health. One Energy may next challenge the city in Hancock County Common Pleas Court.”


An April 3rd date has been sent for the new public information meeting on the Apex  Emerson Creek Wind Project.  The meeting will be held from 5-7 p.m. at the Bellevue VFW, 6104 U.S. 20.  This meeting was ordered after the first meeting was held in a private venue and a wind opponent was forced by the Sheriff to leave at Apex’s request.   Following lawmaker complaints, the OPSB ordered a second public meeting.  Apex continues to assert it followed all regulations governing a “public” meeting.


Kaleab Mammo-Jegol, the state director of the US Youth Climate Strike, is working to make Ohio commit to 100% renewables as part of a social justice platform.  Conveniently, this radical group is supported by the fake Conservative Energy Forum whose director, Tyler Duvelius remarked,  “The Constitution guarantees property rights” for people to use and lease their property as they see fit, Duvelius said. “The Constitution does not guarantee a right to a view,” he added when asked about opponents’ nuisance claims.”  Kaleab Mammo-Jegol and Tyler Duvelius have now found common cause.


While the Youth Climate circus was playing out in Ohio, the county presidents of the Ohio Farm Bureau were in Washington visiting US Senator Portman who explained that the Green New Deal would be disastrous to farmers : “We can do better in terms of energy efficiency and that is a great way to reduce emissions but also to add more jobs. We should be able to use technology and innovation better and we are starting to do that. I support legislation to give our power companies incentives to be able to capture carbon and sequester it and start a carbon market. Finally I will say that people who are really serious about climate change ought to look at nuclear power. There are advanced nuclear power technologies out there. It is emissions free,” Portman said. “There are ways we can make sure we have the base power we need. We have solar and wind. We have it in Ohio and we like it, but sometimes the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. You need to have that base power also. We have two nuclear plants in Ohio and they are both aging. We need newer, safer, more innovative plants that are much more efficient. There are lots of things that can and should be done and we are doing some of them, but to take up the Green New Deal and put that on the American people and the American farmer would be disastrous. It would increase everyone’s costs of electricity dramatically.”


In Ireland, Seven Cork families could be on course to receive damages after a wind farm operator admitted liability in a High Court action over noise pollution.  The case is next listed for hearing on April 25, and will be closely observed by many of the families living in close proximity to wind farms and who claim that there should be a greater distance between homes and turbines.  “Planning regulation around wind turbines remain governed by 2006 guidelines which allow companies to build turbines within 500m of private dwellings. Updated guidelines stipulating how far wind turbines should be set back from residential homes are three years overdue. These guidelines will also deal with noise and ‘shadow flicker’ from the turning blades. Up to 7,000 submissions were made in the public consultation process that followed the issuing of draft guidelines by the then minister for housing Jan O’Sullivan, which set down a mandatory minimum setback of 500m “for amenity considerations”.  [1,640’] The draft guidelines also set a maximum day and night noise limit of 40 decibels for future wind energy development, measured outdoors at the home nearest to the wind turbine. The guidelines also stipulated that there should be no shadow flicker at home within 10 ‘rotor diameters’ of a turbine.”


The left-wing NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) has proposed a grand bargain for saving Ohio’s nuclear plants.  The want to trade short term support for a long term commitment to transition Ohio to 100% renewables.  They claim “Ohio will be left behind our neighboring states throughout the Midwest if we do not have strong policies for a transition to the clean energy economy. We should be leading, not swimming against the economic wave that is lifting up other states; and not protecting Wall Street speculators but investing in local renewable energy generation and all the benefits for Ohio that would come with it.”  Many people consider the NRDC and Sierra to be domestic terror organizations.  Why on earth would policy-makers let them determine Ohio’s energy policy?


Some Ohio renewable energy advocates and lawmakers who are being asked to support saving the nuclear plants have some significant items on their wish list for any compromise agreement.  “At the top is a repeal of 2014 restrictions on wind farms. The law has the effect of limiting how many turbines can be placed in a project area, which has slowed development. “We don’t like bailing out nuclear plants, but we don’t rule out supporting a package if the package on balance is a good one for consumers and the environment,” said Rob Kelter, a senior attorney for the Environmental Law and Policy Center.”


Developer EDP surfaces again in Illinois where they are suing a township that adopted strict siting provisions.  In addition, they are promoting legislation to restrict wind farm regulations outside of a municipality to the county alone, excluding townships.   Ohioans should be on guard for any pre-emptive moves advanced by the wind industry in the context of a setback compromise.  We know where EDP stands.


Minnesota farmers are fighting against industrial wind and express remorse for prior support.  “Given the choice, no sentient being would ever tolerate an industrial wind turbine anywhere near their home or property. Merrily wrecking rural communities wherever it goes, the wind industry is facing real, red-blooded American resistance across the Midwest. In this piece from Minnesota’s The Globe, locals lament the day the wind industry rolled into town.”


The last article addresses the ever growing community of opponents to renewable projects.  The author feels opponents should be recognized and basically run over.   This is an inside the beltway perspective that is unable to appreciate why anyone would turn down the money to host wind or solar.  They really do not get it.  sPower commissioned a poll to measure support for a solar project in Virginia. They got the results they wanted but the reality was quite different and locals sought to block the project.  The article tries to understand if climate denial is the reason for opposition – they might as well blame the Easter bunny.  This is proof of a profound inability of urban elites to appreciate the value of rural living.  It is an article worth reading if for nothing more than the enjoyment of learning that when the San Bernardino chapter of the Sierra Club decided to support a ban on all renewables, the nationals ordered them to stand down.  Instead, they changed their name and kept on fighting.

House Democrats roll out new ‘Ohio promise’ agendaBy Jim Siegel
The Columbus Dispatch Posted Mar 14, 2019

OPSB reschedules adjudicatory hearing for Republic Wind FarmCOLUMBUS, OHIO (March 14, 2019)

Judge: Landowners don’t have to let Seneca wind farm company on propertyTom HenryBlade Staff Writer MAR 13, 2019

Judge denies wind farm company injunction in Seneca County By Jonathan Monk | March 12, 2019 at 5:29 PM EST – Updated March 12 at 9:34 PM

Wind Turbine Syndrome


Bellevue, Ohio

Wacky Ohio youth

Ohio senators and climate change

school finance problems

Wind farm admits liability

Ohio’s grand bargain

nuclear bailout?

Illinois legislation

Minnesota meltdownRural landowners air opposition to industrial wind farms
The Globe
Julie Buntjer
27 February 2019

nontraditional alliances