PDA

View Full Version : Wind Farm proposal for Reddington on Maine AT



DavidNH
12-07-2005, 17:55
Hello,

I just today received my latest issue of Appalachian Trailway News (I am suspecting many of you are atc members!). There is an article in it that describes a proposal to build huge wind towers on 11 miles or so of ridge line..with big blades..many roads, wires, and easily visible from 50 plus miles of the AT. You need to see the article.

Now I am all for renewable energy but this project is horrifying!:mad:

Gotta stop this. Now I live in New Hampshire, not in Maine so I can't very well just write my representatives (and in NH that doesn't help much anyway). What can us out of state folks do about this?

I can just imagine hiking the trail..getting to what should be one of the most beautiful states on the whole AT and looking out on a whole line of towers.

My God..between cellular phone towers, wind towers, and access roads.. and race tracks and lord knows what else..is there any are these developers out to destory the whole eastern US? seems that way.

DavidNH

Peaks
12-07-2005, 18:07
If you want to support the effort, then join ATC and other organizations that are opposing the wind towers.

TJ aka Teej
12-07-2005, 18:24
Details, including a map showing the AT and the proposed Wind Farm, can be found on the Maine Appalachian Trail Club website: http://www.matc.org/windissu.htm

Navigator
12-07-2005, 18:28
At some point we have to stop the NIMBY mentality and start actively pursueing alternative energy sources for primary energy, secondary energy. and transportation requirements. As we continue to burn fossil fuels, we will not have to worry about a viewshed greater than a mile away. Then would it be alright to put up wind towers. Nuclear power, coal, and oil can not be "our final answer". we must actively pursue alternatives now before they actively seek us out in the future as the only option due to maximum damage to the environment by our current conventional method of power generation and transportation needs.
Solar and wind the only generation of safe and clean energy production.

JoeHiker
12-07-2005, 18:29
It seems everyone is all for renewable energy as long as it is somewhere ELSE.

TJ aka Teej
12-07-2005, 18:35
What can us out of state folks do about this?


People and organizations from away have little political influence with Mainers, and an excess of outside input will swing even otherwise reasonable locals to oppose the outsider's issue. Joining the MATC might be the best thing you could do to help stop the Wind Farm.

TJ aka Teej
12-07-2005, 18:44
At some point we have to stop the NIMBY mentality...

At some point we have to convince people that the AT's backyard is worth defending.

rickb
12-07-2005, 18:47
Especially in the area of the Reddington project.

DavidNH
12-07-2005, 19:03
First off folks,

I DO support the ATC. I also support the AMC (though I may drop them as they are very expensive) and have for years supported the sierra club, NRDC and others. I also do my best to vote for pro environment candidates.

I don't see my self as simply a NIMBY. I believe in supporting wildlands especially here in the east where they are not so plentiful and ESPECIALLY so close to the Appalachian trail..the premier hiking trail in the eastern US.

Navigator...I wonder where you actually live? and are you one who loves wilderness? could we put up a couple of 200 + foot towers with huge blades up next to your house so that ever day you will be looking at it? yeah..wouldn't want it near my place either!!

Teej and Rick Boudrie (hope I spelled names right!) thank you. The AT's back yard IS WORTH defending!


Personally..I think wind energy might be fine in some places..like out in the great planes..where you don't have to new build roads you don't have to cut into beautiful forests, and you don't ruin the views from one of our countrys most famous trails! It sure as hell doesnt belong in the Reddington area of Maine! This is right up their with that road someone wants to build in the Great Smokey MTN Park (previous ATC issue).



DavidNH

Navigator
12-07-2005, 19:13
... and in this area and that area and because it is where I live and because I don't want to have to look at it.
Unfortunatelly, wind farms can only be built where there is sufficient prevailing winds to ensure generation of sufficient power to make it a cost effective alternative. And unfortunately is is all about money (cost) What this country needs is a major price hike in oil to stimulate research in alternative "clean" energy. With current oil prices and coal availibility it is not cost effective. I guess we should just continue to strip mine in PA for coal and burn it in the midwest and continue to let the prevailing winds distribute the pollutant by-products on the northeast. Just think, Alberta Canada still has the largest oil sands reserve that we have not had the pleasure of completely extracting for use.
I guess that with this type of NIMBY mentality we will have to wait until "the Last Tree has been cut down, only after the Last River has been poisoned, only after the Last Fish has been died from our pollutant run-offs only after the last piece of coal and the last drop of oil is used up, will they learn that they should have acted sooner , because now it is too late - Reality

Navigator
12-07-2005, 19:17
If the wind was steady enough I would build it myself. For now I have to stick to solar

TJ aka Teej
12-07-2005, 19:34
... and in this area and that area and because it is where I live and because I don't want to have to look at it.

The developer says Reddington isn't the best place for the towers. One of the stated reasons for choosing this location over more potentialy suitable sites is cost and the remoteness from people. NIMBYism has forced the developer away from coastal and urban locations that his own research shows would generate higher value product. The best place for these towers would be out in Casco Bay. If you're really against NIMBYism, you should be in favor of putting these things where they belong.

weary
12-07-2005, 19:36
First off folks,

I DO support the ATC. I also support the AMC (though I may drop them as they are very expensive) and have for years supported the sierra club, NRDC and others. I also do my best to vote for pro environment candidates.

I don't see my self as simply a NIMBY. I believe in supporting wildlands especially here in the east where they are not so plentiful and ESPECIALLY so close to the Appalachian trail..the premier hiking trail in the eastern US.

Navigator...I wonder where you actually live? and are you one who loves wilderness? could we put up a couple of 200 + foot towers with huge blades up next to your house so that ever day you will be looking at it? yeah..wouldn't want it near my place either!!

Teej and Rick Boudrie (hope I spelled names right!) thank you. The AT's back yard IS WORTH defending!


Personally..I think wind energy might be fine in some places..like out in the great planes..where you don't have to new build roads you don't have to cut into beautiful forests, and you don't ruin the views from one of our countrys most famous trails! It sure as hell doesnt belong in the Reddington area of Maine! This is right up their with that road someone wants to build in the Great Smokey MTN Park (previous ATC issue).

DavidNH

The decision will be by the Land Use Regulation Commission, which was founded in 1970 to serve as the building inspector, planning board and zoning board for the 10 million acres of Maine (half the state) that has no municipal governments.

I got back a couple of hours ago from a workshop for LURC commissioners on the basics of windpower arranged by the agency's staff. Most of the speakers were windpower supporters, or only luke warm opponents, so this is going to be an uphill fight.

The Maine Appalachian Trail Club has formed a special committee to fight the project and has appropriated $25,000 to help pay for the cost of lawyers and expert witnesses. The committee is being asked to raise the balance of the money needed, currently estimated at $75,000, I think.

ATC will be joining in the fight, but they also face severe budget problems. AS I recall, $25,000 ATC appropriated a couple of years ago has lapsed because the developer did not apply for permits on the timetable he had origninally indicated. MATC is negotiating to get the ATC funds restored.

The application still hasn't been submitted, but everyone at the workshop, today, seemed to think the submission was probably only days away.

Donations may be sent to Maine Appalachian Trail Club, PO Box 1256, Auburn Maine, 04211. The checks should be made out to MATC. But send along a note or mark the memo place on the check to pinpoint that the money is to be used to oppose the REdington wind power project.

WEary

TJ aka Teej
12-07-2005, 19:43
I got back a couple of hours ago from a workshop for LURC commissioners on the basics of windpower arranged by the agency's staff.

Thanks for attending Weary. Do you know if the ATC magazine story mentioned fund raising? I have not seen the latest ATN, (or Trailwayswhatever) if it had another horse on the cover it might've been tossed directly into the recycle box with the Lands End and Beans catalogs.

weary
12-07-2005, 19:53
Thanks for attending Weary. Do you know if the ATC magazine story mentioned fund raising? I have not seen the latest ATN, (or Trailwayswhatever) if it had another horse on the cover it might've been tossed directly into the recycle box with the Lands End and Beans catalogs.
I've got the magazine around here someplace, but I haven't had a chance to read it. MATC, however, will be the lead intervenor as I understand the plan. We've hired one of the best environmental lawyers in Maine (he's giving us a major fee reduction, but he'll still cost thousands of dollars) and have a half dozen or so "expert" witnesses lined up, who also will have to be paid. ATC has done some photo simulations, to counter those being used by the developer.

I'm a member of the MATC committee, but I've got so many other irons I'm juggling that I haven't been as active as I should be.

Weary

Tin Man
12-07-2005, 19:56
Maybe we could volunteer the privy's as a source for producing methane?

rickb
12-07-2005, 20:04
Part of the ATC article reads:

"The ACT has review six wind-energy proposals in the viewshed of the A.T.and the Redington project is the only one it opposes. Two of the other projects are in the Berkshire region of Massachusetts. One is on top of Brodie Ski Area (About four miles from the A.T.) and the other is in the Hoosac Range (about 10 Miles from the A.T.) near North Adams."

No mention of fundraising, TJ.

Navigator
12-07-2005, 20:44
I guess the real question is, when do we start saying yes for the environment at the cost of the visual aesthetics. By everyone saying no we are no better off and the environment and the wilderness continue to be the loser. I would love to hear any alternatives for energy production that would solve both the environmental and aesthetic issues together.
We as a society need to move forward environmentally, standing still gets you nowhere.

Tin Man
12-07-2005, 21:42
When I hired a builder, I asked him about geo-thermal heating systems, which have been installed successfully. He recommended against it for the long payback period. When I pushed in saying that oil heating prices were likely to rise (but I had no idea how that they would go so high so quickly as they did this year), he responded that it would be seen as a negative when I went to sell. So, not only do we not want renewable energy in our backyard, we don't even want it UNDER our backyard.

fiddlehead
12-07-2005, 21:53
I'm lookin at this proposal as good news. It's about time we start looking for clean energy. I have friends from Holland and Denmark who use wind for the bulk of their energy (electric ) and they are happy with it.
i've hiked thru the windmills in CA and felt much better than i did hiking past nuclear power plants in Harrisburg, PA and NY.
I've lived off the grid with solar and could deal with the low power available. Washing clothes was the worst part.
I live now in Thailand about 150 yds from a windmill that generates enough electric for our small village and am happy about it. i think most of the folks in the area are.
Given the choices available today, something must be done. Either we use a lot less electric (i have no problem with that but my girlfriend likes the TV) or find cleaner, cheaper, less damaging ways to make it. Answers?

weary
12-07-2005, 22:00
When I hired a builder, I asked him about geo-thermal heating systems, which have been installed successfully. He recommended against it for the long payback period. When I pushed in saying that oil heating prices were likely to rise (but I had no idea how that they would go so high so quickly as they did this year), he responded that it would be seen as a negative when I went to sell. So, not only do we not want renewable energy in our backyard, we don't even want it UNDER our backyard.
That's the nature of builders. Builders, by and large don't go to school to learn their trade, they learn it on the job. What the job teaches them, mostly, is how to build what they built yesterday.
When my house burnt down in 1979, I prepared some sketches reflecting everything I had learned as a reporter covering environmental and energy matters since the OPEC oil boycott of five years earlier.

Traditional builders were uniformly opposed to everything I suggested. Finally, I found a couple of young guys who had attended an alternative construction school and hired them. Mine was the second or third house they had ever built.

It was a gamble. But it worked. For the most part. A couple of thousand dollars would correct all the "mistakes" that have showed up in the 25 years since.

WEary

DavidNH
12-07-2005, 22:38
Seems like some folks don't mind a blight on the landscape..so long as they can have their TV, radio, computer games, offices lit up all night. This is depressing.. in many ways..what is most special about living in America is the wonderful variety of wildlands in such pristine state we have to enjoy.. and yet.. many seem to say..damn the view..gimme electricity. All I am saying..let's find another way..to provide for our energy needs with out harming either the ecology or the beauty of our wild landscapes.

The article in the ATC magazine showed a computerized rendition of what the scene would look like.. and one can see the wildness is no longer there.

You know guys...there are damn few countries in this world with even half the unspoiled and diversified wildlands that we have. If that isn't worth defending..what is?

DavidNH

Moxie00
12-07-2005, 22:52
No sense in beating a dead horse. I live in Mount Vernon, Maine, miles from Redington so I am not a nimby. Simply said, Redington os not the place. There are many mountains in Maine that would be better. It is too wild, too beautiful and too remote. If you had a choice of throwing garbage beside a beautiful lane or in a dump would you choose the lane? Well there are many "dump mountaintops and ocean areas" in Maine that would support a wind project so why put it in a wild and beautiful place?. The project will be fenced and gated and will be closed to hikers. No matter how much we all believe in alternative energy, wind and solar, there is a place for everything and everything should be in it's place. Long live wind power and long live Redington-just let them live seperately.

hikerjohnd
12-07-2005, 23:40
At some point we have to stop the NIMBY mentality and start actively pursueing alternative energy sources for primary energy, secondary energy. and transportation requirements. As we continue to burn fossil fuels, we will not have to worry about a viewshed greater than a mile away. Then would it be alright to put up wind towers. Nuclear power, coal, and oil can not be "our final answer". we must actively pursue alternatives now before they actively seek us out in the future as the only option due to maximum damage to the environment by our current conventional method of power generation and transportation needs.
Solar and wind the only generation of safe and clean energy production.


I couldn't have said it better. We constantly fight advancements - and yet we vehemently protest the increasing cost of goods and services we desire. As a society we can not have what we want, when we want it, at the price we want, without significant cost somewhere. I am not suggesting that we surrender the whole wilderness to that cost, but concessions have to be made – and we had better start making them.

Sly
12-07-2005, 23:52
I couldn't have said it better. We constantly fight advancements - and yet we vehemently protest the increasing cost of goods and services we desire.

Windpower isn't an advancement, it's been around for thousands of years.

Navigator
12-08-2005, 08:27
I find it slightly amusing how some people support tougher environmental standard but oppose efforts to attain them. Here in connecticut people overwhelmingly voice support for tougher vehicle emision policies yet don' t support vehicle emisiion testing.

I guess some people don't realize that if we continue to destroy the environment, all of your wildlands will be lost and your view will be of a brown haze. Just imagine seeing the early morning smog coming down the appalachians every day. It will be like waching it blow down from Los Angeles in the summer. I was really impressed with such a wonderful sight of the blackish/brown haze that man was able to produce.


If you plan now you could probably design and market your own lightweight hiker breathing apparatus for use by future thru-hikers. The way we are going 2050 would be about the right time to have it in place if things continue unchecked.

walkin' wally
12-08-2005, 08:59
Thanks for attending Weary. Do you know if the ATC magazine story mentioned fund raising? I have not seen the latest ATN, (or Trailwayswhatever) if it had another horse on the cover it might've been tossed directly into the recycle box with the Lands End and Beans catalogs.

Hi Teej,

The ATN November December issue which has been re-named AT Journeys has an article on Pp 29-31 concerning the wind farm. The greenway section. It says to "go to www. applachiantrail.org/redington for the latest information on the project or to find out more about ways to help". They are asking for letters written and contributions.

Maybe someone can create that link.

There is no horse on the cover just the future of the AT :D

Tha Wookie
12-08-2005, 10:35
Letter sent to: [email protected] ([email protected])9:30am December 8th, 2005


Hello,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I understand the need for clean energy. The wind-tower technology is certainly a good application of science that we will need to keep our planet healthy. I have found, however, that clean views, open natural space, and roadless lands are also needed to keep our minds and spirits healthy.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
There is a place for everything. The Redington site, in view of 50 miles of the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:place w:st="on">Appalachian Trail</st1:place>, is not a place for wind towers. It is a place for escape from energy dependence and connection to the natural landscape. Please consider the message from the thousands of hikers, who cherish this area as on the last truly scenic vistas in the East, along the most popular trail in the world. Incidentally, from <st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Saddleback</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Mountain</st1:PlaceType>, overlooking the Redington Site, is also the first view of <st1:place w:st="on">Mount Katahdin</st1:place> for the northbound hiker, who might have walked 2000 miles just for that view. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I have hiked the entire Appalachian Trail, and coming from my home state in GA I thought Maine, and in particular the area of your proposed developments, was the most natural and scenic place on the entire 2,200-mile route.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I also have hiked through wind tower farms along the Pacific Crest Trail, and I know how enormous they are, how many roads are carved into the landscape, and how many of them need constant maintenance from large trucks on the miles of roads. Those towers were in the <st1:place w:st="on">Southern California</st1:place> desert, in a far less scenic place, with far less organic steep-sloped soil to erode. At that time, I could agree with their placement, and enjoyed learning about their utility to human energy wants. I think the technology is great, and is needed. But some other things, in some places, like the capacity for endless natural inspiration for generations and generations of people, are more important. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Redington is not my back yard. I live in <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Georgia</st1:place></st1:country-region>. You are welcome to come and put them in my back yard. But for the benefit and health of Americans -keep them out of the Redington mountain site and out of view of the <st1:place w:st="on">Appalachian Trail</st1:place>. <o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Finally, I’d like to share with you some impressions I had about the <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Maine</st1:place></st1:State> and its people when I walked through along the AT in 2001:<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
“Unlike the settled lakes and ponds in most states, most of the "waterfront" houses here are set back behind the rows of trees, obscuring them from the viewshed of the large pond. The result is a peaceful, solitary environment, which I enjoy as I sit on a large rock half submerged in its waters. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:State w:st="on">Maine</st1:State></st1:place> is a beautiful state, and it seems most of the inhabitants like to keep it that way.” –August 7<SUP>th</SUP>, 2001, Rangely, ME<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Sincerely,<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Nate Olive<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
PS Please also see my day on <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:PlaceName w:st="on">Saddleback</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Mountain</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> at http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?id=8216 (http://trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?id=8216). I hope my children can have the same experiences.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Nate Olive, M.A.
Recreation Ecologist/Trail Specialist
Registered Federal Research Contractor
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Winterville</st1:City>, <st1:State w:st="on">GA</st1:State> <st1:PostalCode w:st="on">30683</st1:PostalCode></st1:place>
706.534.5033
www.thawookie.com<o:p></o:p>

Skyline
12-08-2005, 11:07
If the place where the wind farm is proposed is the ideal environment for it, I say we AT enthusiasts suck it up and do our part for the environment--not oppose it.

But if it is not the ideal place, and there is some other demonstrably ideal place in the region that is better and is available--I say let's go all out to encourage it to go there.

Facts should decide this, not emotion.

If we get the oil monkey off our backs we will improve the environment and take away one huge reason for wars. If we ever get to the point that we can de-commission nuclear power plants we eliminate serious terrorism targets.

Wind, solar, and alternative fuels play important roles here. We all need to be engaged.

rickb
12-08-2005, 11:32
The ATC link outlines the facts pretty well, I think.

http://www.appalachiantrail.org/site/c.jkLXJ8MQKtH/b.839393/k.8DFF/Maine_Wind_Farm.htm

From a cold cost/benefit approach on this proposal, I can't help but agree that the benefits to all but a few investors are meager indead, while the costs to many future generations is huge.

weary
12-08-2005, 11:48
If the place where the wind farm is proposed is the ideal environment for it, I say we AT enthusiasts suck it up and do our part for the environment--not oppose it.
But if it is not the ideal place, and there is some other demonstrably ideal place in the region that is better and is available--I say let's go all out to encourage it to go there.
Facts should decide this, not emotion.
If we get the oil monkey off our backs we will improve the environment and take away one huge reason for wars. If we ever get to the point that we can de-commission nuclear power plants we eliminate serious terrorism targets.
Wind, solar, and alternative fuels play important roles here. We all need to be engaged.
We absolutely do not have to damage the rarest places remaining on earth in order to save the earth. Redington was chosen because Redington was available. We are dealing with a developer who chose a site that he figured would generate enough profits to encourage investors, all of whom are in it to make money.

Talk of ideal locations is mostly nonsense. There is no ideal location. Wind power developers choose a mountain and post wind monitors on top to see if it produces enough wind to interest investors to contribute the $50 million plus in construction costs. Every mountain range in Maine that runs perpendicular to the prevailing wind is probably equally suitable. So are the vast flat and increasingly abandoned potato fields of northern Maine. So is the entire 5,000 mile Maine coastline.

I'm not opposed to people investing money to make a profit. It's how the system works. But Maine has laws that regulate the locations suitable for development. Properly enforced these laws would prohibit such a huge development on Redington.

That's why MATC directors voted unanimously to oppose the project and to hire the lawyers and technical experts needed to counter the lawyers and technical experts of the developer.

We still need another $50,000 at least to mount a proper opposition. Those who wish to help can send a contribution to:

REdington Project
Maine Appalachian Trail Club
PO Box 1256
Auburn, Maine 04211

Weary

the goat
12-08-2005, 12:36
thanks for the info & address, weary. even if only for a fleeting moment, we do agree on something.:D
i'm earmarking some dough from this week's paycheck for the matc's reddington project.

Skyline
12-08-2005, 13:19
We absolutely do not have to damage the rarest places remaining on earth in order to save the earth. Redington was chosen because Redington was available. We are dealing with a developer who chose a site that he figured would generate enough profits to encourage investors, all of whom are in it to make money.

Talk of ideal locations is mostly nonsense. There is no ideal location. Wind power developers choose a mountain and post wind monitors on top to see if it produces enough wind to interest investors to contribute the $50 million plus in construction costs. Every mountain range in Maine that runs perpendicular to the prevailing wind is probably equally suitable. So are the vast flat and increasingly abandoned potato fields of northern Maine. So is the entire 5,000 mile Maine coastline. Weary


If the facts back that up, then opposing this location is appropriate and I'd probably be convinced to contribute $$$. So, if I'm reading you correctly, many if not most Maine mountains, coastline, and potato fields are created equal for wind power generation? If so, why do you figure they chose this one? Seems this one's remote location would make it more difficult to construct on. Just trying to better understand...

Footslogger
12-08-2005, 13:49
I think they've become the state tree out here in Wyoming ....

'Slogger

RWBlue
12-08-2005, 14:14
I think I am going to say something that is going to piss off everyone, but that is the way most compromises go.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
I see wind as a great generally untapped resource.
I appreciate a good view (especially in the fall when the leaves have turned).
I live in suburbia. I wouldn’t mind a large wind turbine in the city parks or the golf course as long as it didn’t produce too much noise.
I am considering building a place in the country. If I can use wind or solar or other environmentally friendly technology I will, but it needs to be cost effective. Please write your elected lyre and get me a tax abatement so these technologies are affordable.

Now for the issue at hand; Since the developer is developing his own land, and is doing somethign good for the environment as a whole, is there any possibility of having the ATC or the Gov. buy better land for him to develop and trade him for this land?

I would have a hard time if do gooders told me that I could not build something on my own property because what I wanted to build was ugly. After all some people are ugly, can I tell them that they need to stay home?

rickb
12-08-2005, 14:33
Weary,

Were this to move forward do you know if the speculator would be be asking the State to condemn any private land, and/or use public land for power line rights of way and such?

Rick

TJ aka Teej
12-08-2005, 16:06
Here's a newspaper story about the meeting Weary went to.


State energy head touts wind power to LURC
Thursday, December 08, 2005 - Bangor Daily News
BREWER - As wind power begins to blow into Maine, state regulators on Wednesday considered its potential to squeeze increasingly expensive - and less environmentally friendly - fossil fuels out of the region's energy mix.
>snip<
At least four wind power projects have been proposed in Maine, mainly in the state's rural, unorganized areas.

In Franklin County, a Canadian company wants to erect 200 turbines on the western mountains.

In Aroostook County, a Bangor-based group hopes to erect 30 turbines on Mars Hill Mountain by early next year. A Freeport company is installing six test towers in the St. John Valley to collect wind data before deciding whether to proceed with its own plans for a wind farm on potato fields there.

The Passamaquoddy Tribe received permits in October to erect two meteorological towers on its tribal trust lands in Washington and Somerset counties in anticipation of a wind power project.

>snip<
Pete Didisheim of the Natural Resources Council of Maine told the commission that certain sensitive sites - such as Mount Katahdin and Cadillac Mountain - should be off-limits to such development.

But he did say his group strongly supported wind technology in appropriate areas because of its potential environmental benefits.
>snip<

full story at this link:

http://www.bangornews.com/news/templates/?a=124826

rickb
12-08-2005, 16:12
Mount Katahdin and Cadillac Mountain should be off limits?

Singe03
12-08-2005, 16:13
If they are too ugly for Ted Kennedy to look at, why should we have to.

I'd love for this to not happen but there are worse things, at least it is not a Wal-Mart.

the goat
12-08-2005, 16:20
If they are too ugly for Ted Kennedy to look at, why should we have to.
I'd love for this to not happen but there are worse things, at least it is not a Wal-Mart.

i disagree, a wal-mart would be ugly, but you could at least resupply there. :D

Peaks
12-08-2005, 19:56
Part of the ATC article reads:

"The ACT has review six wind-energy proposals in the viewshed of the A.T.and the Redington project is the only one it opposes. Two of the other projects are in the Berkshire region of Massachusetts. One is on top of Brodie Ski Area (About four miles from the A.T.) and the other is in the Hoosac Range (about 10 Miles from the A.T.) near North Adams."

No mention of fundraising, TJ.

There is also the expansion of the existing Searsburg Vermont wind farm that is visable from the AT/LT north of Route 9. And I understand that the ATC does not oppose that one also.

I might add that Redington is only 1 mile off the AT. All other wind-energy proposals are several miles further off the AT.

Moxie00
12-08-2005, 21:31
Paper companies and land developers don't purchase mountain ridges in Maine. It's too hard to get the wood off and no one wants to live there. You can't drive up in the winter and it's too far from the lake for your boat. Redington was for sale and the ridge was cheap so Harley Lee took out an option on it and set out to attract investors. He also joined the Maine Applachian Trail Club and hoped for their support. Harley isn't a hiker or a trail maintainer. He isn't even an enviromentalist. He is a businessman and he wants to make a buck and windpower is a popular way to do it. A century ago Maine had many mills, paper, cotten, woolen, and more because we had waterpower. Now they have gone south and to India and China. The water is still here but the industry is gone because of cheap labor. Wiser men than me will tell you Redington isn't needed, with our hydro and biomass plants we now export power because we make more than we could ever use in Maine. Other parts of the country could use the wind project alot better than Maine. Our border mountains with Quebec have much more reliable winds than Redington and are no further off the grid than Redington but they were not for sale when Harley was setting up his project. Also the tides off Eastport or the constant wind in the Gulf of Maine would be better sources. This isn't about the enviroment, it is about the bottom line. Reddington just isn't the best place right now, We neeed wind, solar and tidal power but we also need to save a few wild places and Redington is one that deservas saving.

weary
12-08-2005, 23:23
If the facts back that up, then opposing this location is appropriate and I'd probably be convinced to contribute $$$. So, if I'm reading you correctly, many if not most Maine mountains, coastline, and potato fields are created equal for wind power generation? If so, why do you figure they chose this one? Seems this one's remote location would make it more difficult to construct on. Just trying to better understand...
All would produce electricity. All are not equal in providing profits from selling that electricity.

The price of land has gone up dramatically since the developer locked in the price of Redington. A power line that serves a biomass boiler -- which some speculate will go out of business if the wind complex is built -- ensures cheap transportation to the grid.

We are dealing with ridgelines, not mountains. A lone wind tower is a loser. The ability to install 30 on a ridge cuts the access and development costs.

Critical also is the relationship to prevailing winds. If the winds tend to blow straight down a ridgeline, only the first turbine gets the full force of the power of the wind. Prevailing winds that are perpendicular to the ridgeline are ideal. I think wind power developers are looking for east-west ridges, but I forget.

WEary

Skyline
12-09-2005, 11:43
All would produce electricity. All are not equal in providing profits from selling that electricity.

The price of land has gone up dramatically since the developer locked in the price of Redington. A power line that serves a biomass boiler -- which some speculate will go out of business if the wind complex is built -- ensures cheap transportation to the grid.

We are dealing with ridgelines, not mountains. A lone wind tower is a loser. The ability to install 30 on a ridge cuts the access and development costs.

Critical also is the relationship to prevailing winds. If the winds tend to blow straight down a ridgeline, only the first turbine gets the full force of the power of the wind. Prevailing winds that are perpendicular to the ridgeline are ideal. I think wind power developers are looking for east-west ridges, but I forget.

WEary


I still don't understand why they've chosen this particular ridge, instead of some of the other places mentioned. Seems like those abandoned tater farms or even some coastline would be easier to access and build on. I understand the profit motive, but wouldn't easier access tend to yield more profit? (I'm assuming tater fields and coastline are easier to get to than a ridgeline, but I'm a Southern boy and don't really know the lay of the land up there beyond where the AT is, and THAT seemed pretty damned remote to me!)

Re: prevailing winds...don't winds blow west to east most of the time? If so, wouldn't a ridge line that runs more or less north/south be more advantageous for a string of 30 or so towers? Which way does the ridge we're discussing run?

Moxie00
12-09-2005, 12:40
Which way does the ridge we're discussing run?[/quote]
Starting at Black Nubble and going to Reddington the wooded ridge runs in a northeasterly direction. The prevailing winds in the area blow from a magnetic heading of 330 degrees on an average . That would put it at an angle to the wind farm most of the time. Please remember the wooded ridge line will asorb or deflect much of the wind unless it is stripped off and clear cut. Not a pleasant option for a wilderness mountain.

weary
12-09-2005, 14:05
I still don't understand why they've chosen this particular ridge, instead of some of the other places mentioned. Seems like those abandoned tater farms or even some coastline would be easier to access and build on. I understand the profit motive, but wouldn't easier access tend to yield more profit? (I'm assuming tater fields and coastline are easier to get to than a ridgeline, but I'm a Southern boy and don't really know the lay of the land up there beyond where the AT is, and THAT seemed pretty damned remote to me!)

Re: prevailing winds...don't winds blow west to east most of the time? If so, wouldn't a ridge line that runs more or less north/south be more advantageous for a string of 30 or so towers? Which way does the ridge we're discussing run?
This project started nearly a decade ago. I have no way of reconstructing the thinking of the developer when he chose this particular site. But a decade ago paper company lands were rarely on the market. This site was owned by an independent owner that harvested his lands for timber. I suspect the price was low, because no commercial quantities of wood grew on the ridgelines.

Wind technology has progressed greatly in the intervening years. Towers have grown taller, turbine capacity has increased, as has visual impacts.

The developer says the lay of the Redington ridgeline is excellent for capturing wind energy. If so there are many ridgelines with a similar orientation. I suspect, however, that not much thought was given to the selection of Redington, other than that the land was available, the orientation was okay, and the site had easy access to the grid.

The opposition may have already had some impact. The developer promised he would be filing an application three years ago. The application process requires that the developer show financial capacity to carry out his plans.

I'm hoping investors have looked at the opposition from trail supporters and decided to place their money in wind developments in potato fields or on less sensative ridgelines.

Weary

Stix
12-09-2005, 17:38
NIMBY

Acronym (http://www.bartleby.com/59/7/acronym.html) for “Not In My Back Yard.” A term for a person who resists unwanted development, such as manufacturing plants, prisons, power companies, or chemical companies in his or her own neighborhood or town.

hikerjohnd
12-10-2005, 15:10
Windpower isn't an advancement, it's been around for thousands of years.

Granted, but the technology making windpower a cost effective form of electricity is an advancement. We have to begin looking to alternatives to fossil fuels - or else our efforts to preserve things like the AT will be for naught.

lobster
12-10-2005, 15:16
Moxie,

If we have so much excess power sources, why do we import electricity from Canada?

Tha Wookie
12-10-2005, 16:52
NIMBY

Acronym (http://www.bartleby.com/59/7/acronym.html) for “Not In My Back Yard.” A term for a person who resists unwanted development, such as manufacturing plants, prisons, power companies, or chemical companies in his or her own neighborhood or town.


Redington is NIMBY!

As I said in my letter above, I welcome them IN MY BACK YARD..... but not near the AT!

Moxie00
12-10-2005, 17:46
Moxie,

If we have so much excess power sources, why do we import electricity from Canada?
I guess Borrago Springs< Calif where you live is too far from Maine so you get yours from Canada but Maine does in fact export much of the power generated here. If you don't believe me try fording the Kennebec on a hot day in July or August about noon. All the air conditioners in Boston come on about 10AM and Harris Station Dam above The Forks generates peaking power for Boston and the water from the generators raise the water level. Not one single watt stays in Maine. The water is higest in the Kennebec when Boston needs peaking power.

weary
12-10-2005, 18:07
Granted, but the technology making windpower a cost effective form of electricity is an advancement. .
Sure. That's why wind power development came to a halt during the two years it took for Congress to renew the wind power subsidies.

lobster
12-10-2005, 22:55
<TABLE id=HB_Mail_Container height="100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0 UNSELECTABLE="on"><TBODY><TR height="100%" width="100%" UNSELECTABLE="on"><TD id=HB_Focus_Element vAlign=top width="100%" background="" height=250 UNSELECTABLE="off">Moxie,

Born in Machias, ME and live there and in East Blue Hill from June to October now. Just moved out here in 99.

I think Eastern Maine gets some power from Canada.




</TD></TR><TR UNSELECTABLE="on" hb_tag="1"><TD style="FONT-SIZE: 1pt" height=1 UNSELECTABLE="on">
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Drum Stick
12-11-2005, 10:28
Here is some wind data. www.truewind.teamcamelot.com/ne
I found the wind data previously from another source and Reddington scored a '4' on a scale of 1-5 (5 being very windy). I have browser issues today so I could not zoom in on the Reddington site via the Truewind map, but notice the red (hot spots for wind) on their graphic in the mountains of Western Maine. Weary old buddy! Where are the windy potato(e) fields you spoke of?

Maine does export some electricity, and maybe we import some to. But Maine is a looooooong way from being energy independent and completely green (fossil free).

Drum Stick

Sly
12-11-2005, 10:38
Here is some wind data. www.truewind.teamcamelot.com/ne
I found the wind data previously from another source and Reddington scored a '4' on a scale of 1-5 (5 being very windy).

Your link doesn't seem to work. Aren't the potato fields in Arrostook County in northern Maine?

Drum Stick
12-11-2005, 10:39
I apologize for the bad URL (i can't cut and paste URL's with my cheesy browser... but it is free)
Try www.truewind.com
or www.awstruewind.com

Drum Stick

Moxie00
12-12-2005, 00:10
Here is some wind data. to(e) fields you spoke of?

Maine does export some electricity, and maybe we import some to. But Maine is a looooooong way from being energy independent and completely green (fossil free).

Drum Stick
What is so green about stripping a mountaintop and running transmission lines through one of the last wilderness areas in the east? Every watt of power at Harris Station goes to the Boston Area and we do have surplus power, enough so we could shut down Maine Yankee Nuke plant. Lobster pointed out that we do get a little power from the Canadian Nuke plant near Eastport but Bangor Hydro and Nothern Utilities in Presque Isle exchange power with New Brunswick as the need of each side of the border changes. In the last decade Maine turned down an offer to hook up to the cheap power from Hydro Quebec because it wasn't needed. No our power is not all green and as a fisherman I hate dams but I prefer them to wind that kills migrating birds and is an eyesore in the mountains. Maine has alot of biomass, the plant at Stratton for example that burns wood bark, branches, and wood the parer companies can't use as well as demo debris. That plant mayl have to shut down if Redington is built as it may lose the customers it now has for it's brand of "green power". I see you are from Wells but I asume you are very new to Maine if you don't know about the potato fields in Arrostock County.

Drum Stick
12-12-2005, 07:14
Hello to All,

I can live with or without the Redington wind farm but I do think the site is a very good idea. I simply reject the idea that we (man) can not construct the farm in an environmentally sound way, we must insist upon it. Nor do I believe that the state of Maine is going to let Endless Energy do what it pleases on the site. What it all comes down to I believe is the view. I am willing to give up the view for the greater good / getting serious about global warming and reducing pollution that causes disease. If the Redington farm goes forward 'I bet' it will be there for a couple of hundred years, that is until new technology makes wind turbines obsolete and the view is restored.

Anyhow that is my view in short. Good luck with the battle over the site. I gotta get ready for work but I will be back later. Have a good one! BTW I have owned property in Wells for 20-years and I camp in Harrison for about 35-years now so I am not totally new to Maine Moxie. I know the tater fields are up north I just wanted Weary to point out those windy fields for me.

Drum Stick
BTW you might be interested to know that The American Bird Conservancy abcbirds.org actually supports wind turbines because vastly more birds are killed by global warming / lost habitat than are killed by turbines.

weary
12-12-2005, 09:35
Hello to All,

I can live with or without the Redington wind farm but I do think the site is a very good idea. I simply reject the idea that we (man) can not construct the farm in an environmentally sound way, we must insist upon it. Nor do I believe that the state of Maine is going to let Endless Energy do what it pleases on the site. What it all comes down to I believe is the view. I am willing to give up the view for the greater good / getting serious about global warming and reducing pollution that causes disease. If the Redington farm goes forward 'I bet' it will be there for a couple of hundred years, that is until new technology makes wind turbines obsolete and the view is restored.

Anyhow that is my view in short. Good luck with the battle over the site. I gotta get ready for work but I will be back later. Have a good one! BTW I have owned property in Wells for 20-years and I camp in Harrison for about 35-years now so I am not totally new to Maine Moxie. I know the tater fields are up north I just wanted Weary to point out those windy fields for me.

Drum Stick
BTW you might be interested to know that The American Bird Conservancy abcbirds.org actually supports wind turbines because vastly more birds are killed by global warming / lost habitat than are killed by turbines.
The question is where do you draw the line. Is it acceptable to place wind towers on the summit of Katahdin? On all the peaks of the Presidential Range? On the 17 miles of the Bigelow Preserve? What about along the trail itself? Or maybe 500 feet off the trail? Or 3,000 feet off the trail (Redington)?

Weary

hikerjohnd
12-12-2005, 10:11
The question is where do you draw the line. Is it acceptable to place wind towers on the summit of Katahdin? On all the peaks of the Presidential Range? On the 17 miles of the Bigelow Preserve? What about along the trail itself? Or maybe 500 feet off the trail? Or 3,000 feet off the trail (Redington)?

Weary

Perhaps we should draw the line along the strip mines ravaging other areas that are not in your back yard. Or even through the oil spills that devistate ecosystems that are, again, not in your back yard. If proposals are taken on a case by case basis, then there is no need to draw the proverbial line in the sand. Alternative energy sources are needed - and they are here.

weary
12-12-2005, 11:30
Perhaps we should draw the line along the strip mines ravaging other areas that are not in your back yard. Or even through the oil spills that devistate ecosystems that are, again, not in your back yard. If proposals are taken on a case by case basis, then there is no need to draw the proverbial line in the sand. Alternative energy sources are needed - and they are here.
The decision about which energy sources are used on a daily basis, both in Maine and the other New England States are made by the New England Power Pool with headquarters in Massachusetts.

Generators of electricity submit bids daily, and the lowest bids get to sell their electricity that day. The basic price is that set by the giant utilities generating electricity from natural gas.

Small generators like the proposed wind power complex on Redington don't bid a specific price. They just sell for whatever is being paid for natural gas generated electricity that day.

Whatever power that is generated by wind will be sold, since once the capital costs of wind power are paid, their are no continuing fuel costs.

Where hikerjohn's facts breakdown is his assumption that fewer strip mines in West Virginia will be needed as a result of wind energy generation. Coal, which is a relatively cheap fuel, will continue to be burned as usual.

The facilities that will close will be the biomass boilers such as the one in Stratton in the shadow of the proposed wind energy towers on Redington and Black Nubble, since biomass boilers have relatively high fuel costs.

Weary

rickb
12-12-2005, 11:32
I think hikerjohnd is right. Proposals should be taken on a case by case basis.

In the case of the Reddington project, the answer is clear. The costs far out weight the benefits.

Too little electicity to justify the project on environmental grounds.

JoeHiker
12-12-2005, 14:45
The question is where do you draw the line. Is it acceptable to place wind towers on the summit of Katahdin? On all the peaks of the Presidential Range? On the 17 miles of the Bigelow Preserve? What about along the trail itself? Or maybe 500 feet off the trail? Or 3,000 feet off the trail (Redington)?

Weary

The question is always, "where do you draw the line." The people supporting this simply draw it at a different place than you do.

weary
12-12-2005, 16:42
The question is always, "where do you draw the line." The people supporting this simply draw it at a different place than you do.
Again my questions: Is it acceptable to place wind towers on the summit of Katahdin? On all the peaks of the Presidential Range? On the 17 miles of the Bigelow Preserve? What about along the trail itself? Or maybe 500 feet off the trail? Or 3,000 feet off the trail (Redington)?

Peaks
12-12-2005, 17:44
Again my questions: Is it acceptable to place wind towers on the summit of Katahdin? On all the peaks of the Presidential Range? On the 17 miles of the Bigelow Preserve? What about along the trail itself? Or maybe 500 feet off the trail? Or 3,000 feet off the trail (Redington)?

Two comments:

First, as I understand it, the ATC is not taking a position, either for or against, about 6 other wind farm proposals, including those within the view of the AT.

Second, it's not just the wind towers. It's also the access road and power line scars. Possibly if there was an access road nearby, or if so much power line did not need to be built, then maybe ATC and others would not oppose Redington.

rickb
12-12-2005, 18:13
From the ATC:

"Supporters of the project tout its “clean energy” aspects and say that it would power 33,000 homes. Currently, Maine does not have an electricity deficit, and existing power lines from Maine into southern New England are at capacity.

More importantly, air-pollution problems in the state, originating in midwestern coal-fired plants, would not be abated in any significant way. Most of the energy displaced by the wind farm's small output likely would be that from nearby plants that burn more costly fuel sources such as natural gas or biomass, and not coal."

hikerjohnd
12-12-2005, 21:43
Where hikerjohn's facts breakdown is his assumption that fewer strip mines in West Virginia will be needed as a result of wind energy generation. Coal, which is a relatively cheap fuel, will continue to be burned as usual.

Careful - I submit that alternative energy resources are needed everywhere coal/oil are used as a primary fuel. Yes - I do assume that with more alternative energy production, mines and wells will not be needed on the scale that they are now. Given enough time, that will happen. We simply can not continue to rape the landscape and pollute the air to meet our energy needs.

I know this process will not happen overnight - but it has to begin and soon. The integration of a simple technology like solar singles can be an easy first step in new home construction. With more integration, costs will begin to drop and various technologies will be easier to integrate.

Navigator
12-13-2005, 13:04
Having a surplus of environmentally friendly generated energy is a plus and the only means to put an end to the dependence on and production of "dirty" energy sources. As hikerjohnd stated, and I am sure we can all agree, that it will not happen overnight. We need to push for the projects that will give us long term returns for our efforts. If trees need to be cut to build this wind farm, I am sure that some will be replanted and will grow back in time. If we continue as is and acid rain and pollution kill the trees and make the soil unproductive for plant/tree growth then we will end up in the same situation that you say you do not want - a bare and desolate mountainside where there is no biological diversity.

Moxie00
12-13-2005, 13:36
If trees need to be cut to build this wind farm, I am sure that some will be replanted and will grow back in time.
Trees will be cut to allow for wind flow direct to the turbines. Trees act as a windbreak so they won't be replanted. Trees will be cut for power lines and they wont be replanted because they don't want branches falling on power lines. Chemical spray, similar to agent orange will be used so trees will not grow back. That's what Central Maine Power Company and Bangor Hydro do now around their power lines. Of course this causes erosion and chemical plant killing chemicals flowing into Carabasset Stream and the Dead River. If this is anyones idea of "green power' let them come and drink the water and enjoy the flashing lights as the turbines kill migrating birds.:-?

rickb
12-13-2005, 13:55
We need to push for the projects that will give us long term returns for our efforts.

Exactly right. The problem with Redington is that the long-term returns are very modest.

If one places little value on the wildness of that area, such modest returns might be enough.

I can understand why those who don't appreciate wildness would make that bargin.

I have a harder time understanding why some of those who do appreciate wildness are willing to sell it out for so very little.

Navigator
12-13-2005, 15:26
I find it harder to fathom that those who say they care about the environment only do so for their own self-gratification.

So what if we continue to dump more than 150 million short tons (Conservative number - in 1998 it was measured to be approx. 200 million short tons (200,000,000 short tons or 4,000,000,000,000 pounds of pollutants into the air every year (EPA)) And that is just the U.S. I guess the 800,000lbs/day (292,000,000 lbs/yr) that this project can reduce does not matter.

You appresiate the wilderness knowing that you are destroying it at the same time... Go figure. I guess if that is what you want, the midwest will continue to burn fossil fuels, export their energy production, and continue to let the air cuurents move their waste to the east.

Enjoy your trees while you have them, and don't forget to take pictures to show your grandchildren what it once looked like to have a healthy (actually dying) living ecosystem diverse with life.

I guess the environmental benifits do not meet your value for the environment, just for your own pesonal value in the use of the environment.
For more information on pollution and the environment visit the EPA's website.

"The needs of the environment outweigh the needs of the casual user."

weary
12-13-2005, 16:18
I find it harder to fathom that those who say they care about the environment only do so for their own self-gratification.

So what if we continue to dump more than 150 million short tons (Conservative number - in 1998 it was measured to be approx. 200 million short tons (200,000,000 short tons or 4,000,000,000,000 pounds of pollutants into the air every year (EPA)) And that is just the U.S. I guess the 800,000lbs/day (292,000,000 lbs/yr) that this project can reduce does not matter.

You appresiate the wilderness knowing that you are destroying it at the same time... Go figure. I guess if that is what you want, the midwest will continue to burn fossil fuels, export their energy production, and continue to let the air cuurents move their waste to the east.

Enjoy your trees while you have them, and don't forget to take pictures to show your grandchildren what it once looked like to have a healthy (actually dying) living ecosystem diverse with life.

I guess the environmental benifits do not meet your value for the environment, just for your own pesonal value in the use of the environment.
For more information on pollution and the environment visit the EPA's website.

"The needs of the environment outweigh the needs of the casual user."
Navigator, it's just that some of us are able to make judgments based on something other that the current politically correct fad. We don't automatically support Redington, just because a group of investors think they can take advantage of federal subsidies to make a profit.

It's silly to argue, as you do, that no matter what alternative energy source an investor thinks may be profitable it should be automatically supported, regardless of where it is located.

I am hoping that sometime soon, we'll have an administration that will begin a serious consideration of global warming and what realistically the alternatives are. In the meantime, I'm going to weigh the benefits and costs and make decisions based on facts, not politically correct emotions.

Weary

TJ aka Teej
12-13-2005, 21:56
For more information on pollution and the environment visit the EPA's website

That's the funniest thing I've read all day. What next? Suggest we visit the Whitehouse website for information on truth and honesty?

Drum Stick
12-14-2005, 07:35
Not to worry country folk! The EPA just released an article stating that inner city minorities suffer 'most' from pollution related illness. I did not look heavily into the article but I did notice that Maine was highlighted as an area of concern, that is surprising to me.

Weary I would still like to know where those windy potato fields are, seriously they might be a good investment. In fact instead of flushing the MATLT money down the Redington toilet you might think about investing into the land and a turbine. :-) I couldn't help myself!

Moxie I see that you recognize that Maine has huge biomass potential. I also see the potential and I wish more would be done to take advantage of it, I guess economics will get it done. I picked up 4 tons of wood pellet fuel last month and I was told that I timed my purchase just right because there has been a shortage. The pellets I have been burning for the last several years come from Canada, maybe soon the fuel will come from Maine. Maine is exporting electricity but when the hydrogen economy is here Maine could convert the electricity into hydrogen and fuel Maine transportation. Maine is a long way from being self reliant when you include transportation and home heating energy. That was my earlier point neighbor.

Drum Stick

Almost There
12-14-2005, 10:56
All I can think is 33,000 homes....totally sounds worth it to me:datz Folks this is nothing, a drop in the bucket as far as people goes. Why screw up something so pristine for as far into the future as we can see for 33,000 homes?!? You wanna fix the problem not put a band-aid where it isn't even needed. This is just some man out to make money...and I say, DAMN THE MAN!!!:eek:

Speer Carrier
12-14-2005, 13:50
There was an interesting article in today"s Atlanta Journal. It talked about the huge number of bats that are killed each year running into the fan blades of the windmills on wind farms. Some organization that advocates for bats has been waging a battle to keep more windfarms from being built and too reduce those already up to running only during the day. Their current attack is on the proposal for a wind farm in West Viginia. Their claim is that the destruction of the bats (which apparently only produce one offspring per year) could be devestating to agriculture. Bats eat many bugs that destroy crops. maybe this approach will be the best for keeping more wind farms from being built.

On a side note, I've seen the massive wind farms in California. I've never driven by them when more than just a few were operating. I guess I don't understand how they could be the big contributer to electricity production when they don't appear to even operate any where near capacity.

I think that depite all the fear mongering that goes on, nuclear power is the way to go. Most western European countries have gone this route already.

weary
12-14-2005, 18:24
....Weary I would still like to know where those windy potato fields are, seriously they might be a good investment. In fact instead of flushing the MATLT money down the Redington toilet ....
I've spent nearly 35 years working to keep the Appalachian Trail in Maine wild. I have a wall full of plaques from organizations who think, among other things, that I'm at least partially responsible for 130,000 acres of buffers for the AT corridor in Maine -- the Mahoosuc, Four Ponds, Bigelow and Nahmakanta Preserves.

I've spent hundreds of hours over the past three years writing dunning letters and emails, and making phone calls helping to raise the $300,000 that is needed to preserve 2,400 acres on the east side of the Appalachian Trail in the Saddleback-Crocker Mountain area.

Given those efforts, I've decided that I won't take Drum Stick's advice and support an industrial-sized windpower complex proposed for just across the ridge line from our Abraham-Saddleback purchases. As near as I can tell the primary beneficiaries of the windpower complex would be a group of investors from California, who want to profit from a federal wind power subsidy.

Weary www.matlt.org

Moxie00
12-14-2005, 21:29
Not to worry country folk!
Moxie I see that you recognize that Maine has huge biomass potential. I also see the potential and I wish more would be done to take advantage of it, I guess economics will get it done. I picked up 4 tons of wood pellet fuel last month and I was told that I timed my purchase just right because there has been a shortage.

Drum Stick
Twenty five years ago Great Nothern Paper research dept. was looking into making paper out of alders, roots and stumps. They couldn't produce quality paper so all that wood waste became biomass and the energy potential far exceeds any wind on Redington. I never bought a pellet stove for the reason you just gave. I own 25 acres of woods and two good chain saws and at my age (67) I cut and hand split all the wood I need to heat my 200+ year old cape. Cut the trees, new ones grow. Don't harvest your hay for a few years and you have a woodlot. Maine has more trees than it could ever use. Paper mills are shutting down so there is a surplus of wood. That is where Maine should look for it's future energy, both home heating and electric. It is renewable and beats the heck out of putting a bunch of spinning, lighted turbines on a wild and undeveloped mountain. You suggested that the Maine Applachian trail Club purchase a turbine and put it in a potato field. If we are going to ruin mountains why not put a turbine or two on every mountain in Maine. Transmission lines could be strung all along the Applachian Trail. We could have floodlights every 100 feet or so for night hiking. All the shelters could have electric stoves and heaters and once hikers got to Maine they could send home their sleeping bags and use electric blankets. With night hiking and electric refrigration the 100 mile wilderness will become a snap. Just think of the motivation of having cold beer waiting in every valley. In time rock stairways and root and rock trails can be replaced by moving electric sidewalks and stairways. Yes, lets bring turbines to the wilderness, progress is our most important product.:rolleyes:

weary
12-19-2005, 16:58
After a decade of talking and promising, an application for an industrial-sized wind power complex on Redington and the nearby Black Nubble mountain have finally been filed.

Last week, Endless Energy, who first proposed the project, joined with California wind energy investors. Yesterday the application was finally filed with Maine's Land Use Regulatory Commission -- the building inspector, Zoning Board and Planning Board for the half of Maine that has no municipal governments.

You can read the story here:

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/news/state/051219endless.shtml

The nearest tower would be about 3,000 feet from the Appalachian Trail on Crocker Mountain. The 30 towers would be visible from overlooks on about 25 miles of the AT. Each tower would be about the height of a 40-story building.

Weary

Moxie00
12-19-2005, 22:24
The investors now claim enough energy will be produced to power 40,000 homes. That isn't even enough power for most Maine cities. That is about the amount of power used to run the cigarette filter plant outside Perrisburg, Va. How can anyone call it green power if you look at the facts. Two mountaintops would be stripped of trees. The land would have to be chemically sprayed on a regular basis so the trees don't grow back. Silt and chemicals from the clear cut will run into two pristine rivers. The profits all go to Califorinia and a wonderful mountain ridge will be lost forever, replaced by flashing lights, and 40 story high singing blades. They don't even have a plan to harvest meat from all the birds and bats that will be killed by the blades. All this for 1/1000s of the power to run a small city. It will produce about enough power to run 4 0r 5 Walmart Supercenters.