Devaluation of Homes

Windweasels Will Resort to Bribery, When All Else Fails….

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

UK Wind Industry Turns to Bribery as it Fails to “Win Brit’s Hearts & Minds”

December 5, 2014 by 1 Comment

dirtyrottenscoundrelsoriginal

Ministers accused of trying to ‘buy off’ local discontent on wind farms
Western Morning News
Phil Goodwin
12 October 2014

Landscape campaigners have described the latest Government moves tohelp communities obtain financial benefits from wind farms as a guide to bribery.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has set out new standards for wind energy schemes to work with local communities.

The guidance, written by the industry body Regen South West, focuses on how communities can best obtain and use cash funds of up to £5,000 per megawatt (MW).

Opponents of turbines say windfalls under the new rules – worth £1.1 million over the life cycle of a large project up for decision in Cornwall later this month – are simply designed to “buy off” local discontent.

Campaign group Cornwall Protect said the only way the Government can achieve its renewable energy targets is to “extend the gravy train beyond developers and landowners to communities”.

Spokesman Danny Mageean said there was a danger that so-called community leaders may be keen to win “brownie points” even if they live “at the other end of the village”.

“I live five hundred metres from a 77-metre turbine so I know the problems, and I don’t think giving our parish council a few thousand would compensate for the devaluing of our property and the noise,” he added.

Ministers unveiled a raft of measures last year in response to growing anger in the rural Conservative heartlands at turbines and solar farms.

The new guidance was billed as giving more protection to the landscape and a stronger voice to locals who opposed unpopular renewable energy schemes.

In addition, the recommended community benefit package in England was increased fivefold from £1,000 per MW of installed capacity to £5,000 per MW.

DECC has published the guidance on how wind schemes should work with communities, calling for partnerships between the two.

It gives examples of different ways in which funds and other investments by developers have been used by local groups, from the provision of care services to mountain bike trails.

The guidance is expected to be followed shortly be a community “right to invest” in new renewable energy projects that will also apply to solar schemes.

Jodie Giles, communities project manager at Regen South West, authors of the document, said “We are delighted that more communities are getting involved with sustainable energy, and in particular onshore wind projects – one of the most efficient and cost effective renewables technologies available.”

Examples of how benefits have been used will soon be recorded on DECC’s new community benefits register for England.

This month, a decision will be made on plans for one of the biggest wind farms in the region – 11 turbines producing 25MW at Week St Mary in Cornwall.

Developers Good Energy are proposing a fund of £2,000 per MW, totalling more than £44,000 a year for the life of the project, available to people living within three miles of the plant.

A local electricity tariff scheme is also proposed, offering discount for locals living within the three-mile radius who sign up to receive electricity from the scheme.

The firm is also exploring the possibility of the community owning one of the turbines.

Bob Barfoot, a member of the CPRE in Devon and a planning expert who has helped prepare a report from the group Communities Against Rural Exploitation (CARE) for the planning meeting on October 23, said community benefits cannot be taken into account by councillors.

He says this point has been made by a number of planning inspectors in recent appeals, including a decision this June to uphold the refusal of a 77-metre turbine at Ladock.

In dismissing the appeal, planning inspector Paul Jackson said plans to generate about a third of the parish’s annual electricity demand were “a laudable aim”

“However, as planning permission for the scheme was refused on landscape and visual amenity grounds, which remain the main concerns, it is unclear how the intended community benefits could make it acceptable,” he added.

Environment campaigner Jeremy Varcoe, of North Cornwall, said it was wrong to lavish cash on the girl guides rather than affected locals.

“What’s so unfair is the money goes to people not affected – rather than those whose lives are blighted by the turbines – it is little more than a bribe to the local parish or town council,” he added.

“It is a dishonest device to buy off the increasing resentment among people who are against these developments. Strictly speaking community benefits are not a material planning consideration but there is no doubt that the promise of large amounts of money has affected the decision of committees and council case officers.”
Western Morning News

As community and political opposition to the great wind power fraud rolls and builds across the world, the charge that opponents are red-necked climate change deniers, infected with a dose of Not In My Backyard syndrome, starts to ring hollow.

Sprinkling a little cash – like confetti at a wedding – isn’t going to overcome the fact that anyone with an interest in the roll-out of giant fans – which obviously includes those in impacted and threatened communities – is alive to the scale and scope of the greatest economic and environmental fraud of all time (see our post here).

The level of anger is palpable and has already erupted with community defenders toppling MET masts in Scotland (see our post here); and sabotaging turbines and construction equipment in Ontario (see our post here).

True it is that everyone has a “price”. But not everyone is ready to sell their souls.

not-for-sale

Victims of the Windweasels & Their Turbines, are Treated with Disdain!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Macarthur Wind Farm Disaster: Jim Doukas Slams Fellow Moyne Shire Councillors’ Utter Contempt for Victims

November 1, 2014 by

jim doukas

Moyne councillor Jim Doukas critical of Macarthur wind farm report
The Standard
Anthony Brady
30 October 2014

A DEFIANT Moyne Shire councillor angered his fellow councillors but delighted the wind farm critics during a heated exchange in the council chambers this week.

A large gallery of wind farm critics cheered on Jim Doukas when he criticised the council’s response to complaints about noise issues relating to the giant Macarthur wind farm.

Cr Doukas was the only councillor to oppose the passing of a report approving the council’s handling of the complaints.

Cr Doukas claimed the report was biased and weak and brought into question the council’s relationship with wind farm owner AGL.

“The report is so light on information and facts it seems like it is bias. Is AGL doing something for us we don’t know about, because it looks that way.”

This comment brought an indignant response from mayor James Purcell.

“I may have misheard your representation, it appeared you were insinuating that this council, the integrity of councillors, was at risk here,” Cr Purcell said.

“This council has the highest integrity of any council any where in the world,” the mayor said.

Cr Doukas denied he had questioned the integrity of his fellow councillors but remained strong in his attack of the report.

He said council should do the right thing by the community and revisit this issue by conducting another investigation to come up with an “unbiased” outcome.

“It is not treating the people being affected fairly and not treating the other residents of the Moyne Shire fairly, because it’s the rate money we are going to have to spend when it goes to court.

“It’s all very well for us to sit here and act tough because we have ratepayers’ money, but if we had to defend ourselves with our own money maybe we’d have a different outlook.”

Earlier in the meeting Macarthur resident Jan Hetherington addressed the councillors, warning them of dire consequences should they approve the report.

“It is the opinion of the residents you may put yourselves in a position where you may be held accountable under the Australian Criminal Code Act,” Ms Hetherington said.

“Of which you have been made fully aware and in which case you most probably will not be covered by Moyne Shire’s insurance policies.”

She labelled information from the council’s solicitors that noise from the wind farm is not substantial and unreasonable as “utter rubbish” and said council should be ashamed of itself if it accepts such a poorly presented report.

“Should you approve of this report and its totally wrong conclusion you, through your continual ignorance and seeming willingness to hide and ignore all the evidence of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, will be knowingly allowing ongoing torture in the form of sleep deprivation.”

Cr Ralph Leutton caused a stir in his address supporting the report when he put forward his own scenario to Cr Doukas’ suggestion that wind farms should be turned off at night time.

He asked Moyne CEO David Madden if he could turn off the waves crashing on the beach in Port Fairy at night if that noise was causing a lack of sleep for residents.

A member of the gallery injected loudly that she had not chosen to live next to wind farms and that councillors had no idea of what residents are going through.
The Standard

Ralph Leutton’s attitude towards the suffering of his constituents tends to undermine James Purcell’s wild claim about the Moyne Shire Council having the “highest integrity any where in the world”.

That would be a mighty big claim at the best of times, but with this council thumbing its nose at its statutory duty “to achieve the highest attainable standard of public health and wellbeing by protecting public health and promoting conditions in which persons can be healthy” (set by s4 of the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008) – Purcell’s claim that it has world beating “integrity” falls just a little flat.

When it comes to “noise or other emissions” the Council (under s60 of that Act) comes under an express “duty to remedy as far as is reasonably possible all nuisances existing in its municipal district”. That duty applies to “nuisances which are, or are liable to be, dangerous to health or offensive”.  Where “offensive” means noxious or injurious to personal comfort”.

The decision of the majority simply cocks a snook at the Council’s absolute duty under the Act, which is clearly designed to protect and promote the health of ALL Victorian citizens. ALL citizens, that is, except those with the misfortune of being stuck next to 140 giant 3MW, Vestas V112s – according to the Moyne Shire Council.

Jim Doukas’ comment that the Council’s report is “biased” in favour of the operator, AGL is mastery in understatement.

In dismissing the residents’ well-documented complaints out of hand, the Council’s whitewash asserts that: “The social utility of the Macarthur WEF is significant, in that it is a source of renewable energy that does not cause greenhouse gases or other pollutants”.

So, let’s get this straight: if the Macarthur Wind Energy Facility was being run on coal or gas instead, the residents’ complaints would have been treated seriously; the Council would have acted consistently with its duty under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act; and ordered that the Facility be shut down at night?

But because we’re talking about “wonderful” wind power, the Council gets to ignore their suffering; abdicate its statutory duty to its residents (and ratepayers); treat them as “road-kill” and leave them to rot in what have become sonic torture traps (see our post here).

As we said in this post: “When those that govern us become indifferent to the reasonable demands of those they’re paid handsomely to represent, the very integrity of the institution of government suffers. When that indifference turns to open contempt (as it has), it isn’t long before ordinary people become fed-up, grab their pitchforks and revolt.”

Using the tag “renewable energy” in a cynical effort to “justify” the suffering caused to the health and well-being of hard-working, tax-paying citizens by incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound is nothing short of monstrous (see our post here).

The Council’s report concedes that the noise generated by AGL’s turbines causes “sleep disturbance” and yet says that suffering from “sleep deprivation” is not “dangerous to health”.

That “finding” will come as news to the World Health Organization which – in its Night-time Noise Guidelines for Europe – the Executive Summary at XI to XII covers the point – says:

NOISE, SLEEP AND HEALTH

There is plenty of evidence that sleep is a biological necessity, and disturbed sleep is associated with a number of health problems. Studies of sleep disturbance in children and in shift workers clearly show the adverse effects.

Noise disturbs sleep by a number of direct and indirect pathways. Even at very low levels physiological reactions (increase in heart rate, body movements and arousals) can be reliably measured. Also, it was shown that awakening reactions are relatively rare, occurring at a much higher level than the physiological reactions.

The review of available evidence leads to the following conclusions.

  • Sleep is a biological necessity and disturbed sleep is associated with a number of adverse impacts on health.
  • There is sufficient evidence for biological effects of noise during sleep: increase in heart rate, arousals, sleep stage changes and awakening.
  • There is sufficient evidence that night noise exposure causes self-reported sleep disturbance, increase in medicine use, increase in body movements and (environmental) insomnia.
  • While noise-induced sleep disturbance is viewed as a health problem in itself (environmental insomnia), it also leads to further consequences for health and well-being.
  • There is limited evidence that disturbed sleep causes fatigue, accidents and reduced performance.
  • There is limited evidence that noise at night causes hormone level changes and clinical conditions such as cardiovascular illness, depression and other mental illness. It should be stressed that a plausible biological model is available with sufficient evidence for the elements of the causal chain.

But what would the World Health Organization know about night-time noise, sleep and health, hey? Apparently, half-a-dozen country bumpkins wedded to defending the wind industry at all costs know better than the world’s top public health experts.

Maybe it’s that level of “expertise” that’s led to the Moyne Shire Council having the “highest integrity any where in the world”? This is one group of councillors who will never be accused of modesty.

STT loves Ralph Leutton’s specious comparison between noise from turbines and waves lapping on a moonlit beach –  a line that comes straight from the wind industry play book.

The wind industry wrote the noise standards that councils (see our post here), planning departments (see our post here) and EPAs (see our post here) use to cover up the noise problem (see our post here); invented lies about wind turbines sounding like a refrigerator 500m away; or like waves lapping on a moonlit beach (see our post here); and invented a nonsense theory that the only people suffering from turbine noise impacts are red-necked climate change DENIERS who refuse to fall in love with the “majestic” look of giant fans – a class of people that one advocate of the “nocebo” story calls “wind farm wing nuts” (see our post here).

For Ralph Leutton’s benefit here’s a video of what his beloved turbines really sound like – the first sequence is from Macarthur. STT finds it hard to believe that anyone in touch with their earthly senses could compare wind turbine noise to waves lapping on a beach:

****

 ****

Waves_on_Straddie_beach

Wind Turbine Farmers Finding Out the Truth. It is NOT a Good Idea!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Farmer Seeks Wind Answers

Wednesday, October 29, 2014 5:14 AM by Fadi Didi
Lucknow farmer looking for answers, compensation for wind farm construction

(Lucknow)-A Lucknow farmer is looking for answers, and compensation.

In a letter addressed to Jay Shukin of K-2 Wind, George Alton describes a threatening document received from the power company.

In the letter from K-2, it is suggested the spreading of manure on his farm constitutes a health hazard to construction workers, and an impediment to construction.

Alton goes on to describe the necessity for manure, and the work needed to ensure it is used efficiently.

The farmer goes on to cite several issues with the turbine construction, including ditch reconstruction, open pits, harvest delays, loss of farmable land, and trespassing.

Alton requests answers as to how K-2 Power plans to compensate him for his losses.

Bayshore Broadcasting News is awaiting a response from K-2 power.

Wising Up to the Great Wind Power Fraud!

/ 1957chev / 1 Comment

Jay Lehr: Sooner or Later the World will Wise-up to the Great Wind Power Fraud

October 27, 2014 by

Definition of fraud

The Rationale for Wind Power Won’t Fly
Heartland.org
Jay Lehr PhD
21 October 2014

To understand the folly that drives too much of the nation’s energy policies, consider these basic facts about wind energy.

After decades of federal subsidies – almost $24 billion according to a recent estimate by former U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm – nowhere in the United States, or anywhere else, has an array of wind turbines replaced a single conventional power plant. Nowhere.

But wind farms do take up space. The available data from wind-power companies, with which the Environmental Protection Agency agrees, show that the most effective of them can generate about five kilowatts per acre. This means 300 square miles of land – 192,000 acres – are necessary to generate the 1,000 megawatts (a billion watts) of electricity that a conventional power plant using coal, nuclear energy or natural gas can generate on a few hundred acres. A billion watts fulfills the average annual power demand of a city of 700,000.

Taxpayer support for wind energy will eventually come to an end, I optimistically predict. The only question is how soon. My pessimistic guess is it will take another decade – by which time the number of wind turbines, currently about 45,000 according to the American Wind Energy Association, could more than double.

It is unclear whether very many wind-energy firms have sufficient monetary reserves to cover dismantling these behemoth lawn sculptures once the tax credits wind down or disappear. If not, the result will be a scene from a science fiction movie – as though giant aliens descended onto our planet only to freeze in place.

tehachapi-wind-turbines-p1

The promise that wind and solar power could replace conventional electricity production never really made sense. It’s known to everybody in the industry that a wind turbine will generate electricity 30% of the time – but it’s impossible to predict when that time will be. A true believer might be willing to do without electricity when the wind is not blowing, but most people will not. And so, during the 30% of the time the blades are spinning, conventional power plants are also spinning on low, waiting to operate during the other 70% of the time.

JULY22

Importantly, the amount of electricity the wind can generate per acre of land is unrelated to the size of the turbines. Yes, by doubling the turbine’s blade length you quadruple the turbine’s power output. The problem? If the turbines are big and tall you need fewer of them, but they must be more widely separated. If they’re smaller you need more of them, closer together.

Another inescapable problem for electricity grids: The power generated by a wind turbine varies with the cube of the wind speed. When the wind speed doubles – say from 10 miles per hour to 20 miles per hour – the energy output increases eightfold (2 x 2 x 2). Someone, or some computer, has to balance these huge variations on the grid by calling on standby generators to produce more or less power to maintain the stability essential to the grid.

So, you might wonder, do high winds make turbines really hum? No. Turbines must be shut down in high winds because centrifugal force would begin to tear the blades apart. Also, the world has learned from experience in Europe – whose wind sculpture gardens may one day dwarf ours – that a one-millimeter buildup of bugs on the blades reduces their power output by as much as 25%.

There are other problems. Thousands of turbine breakdowns and accidents have been reported in recent years. The basic concrete foundations are suffering from strains, as reported by industry sources and on the wind-farm construction website windfarmbop.com.

turbine collapse devon

And there are environmental factors. Annoying, low-frequency noise produced by wind turbines, particularly large turbines, is driving some people away from their homes, according to numerous press reports. (Low-frequency noise regulations are already in place in Denmark while the phenomenon is the subject of continuing research.) The Audubon Society now estimates bird deaths from turbines exceed a million per year.

eagle 1

Wind is at best a niche player in energy. Grandiose claims made on behalf of wind-generated electricity are rubbish, whether or not renewable-energy advocates admit it. Wind-power developers will milk taxpayers across the world out of a few billion more dollars, euros or pounds in subsidies, tax credits and the like, but sooner or later the public will wise up.
Heartland.org

Lehr, Jay

French Doctor Talks about Health Effects From Wind Turbines…..No More Denial!

/ 1957chev / 2 Comments

Chevallier: wind turbines, eco sham and new drama Public Health

The Point – Published 10/24/2014 at 15:34

We swear by these symbols of environmental cleanliness. Yet the myth to reality, there is an abyss, and maybe even a scandal!

Avignonet Lauragais Midi-Pyrenees. Studies show a link between these giant industrial facilities and health problems.
Avignonet Lauragais Midi-Pyrenees. Studies show a link between these giant industrial facilities and health problems.Gabalda © Remy / AFP 
By DR.

Ecology is still good. European companies seeking by all means to implement giant wind (we approach the 200 m high) in the French countryside, close to the houses. It is clear that wind turbines do not have anything green with the thousands of tons of concrete needed to support these steel monsters; about the energy, it is far from the account feedback from those already established.

My concern, as a physician and member of the European Association Physicians for a healthier environment being created, focus on health. A report by the National Academy of Medicine, published in 2006, concluded that the need to suspend (or prohibit) the construction of wind turbines with a capacity greater than 2.5 megawatts located within 1500 meters of housing. These are actually real industrial plants inducing nuisance, including noise.

Industrial wind turbines are in fact classified as ICPE: installations and plants that generate risks or dangers. Several scientific studies are being published, the results recommend that wind turbines are not located within 2.5 kilometers of homes. Thus, clinical observations of Dr. Michael Nissenbaum two wind farms in the state of Maine to the United States indicate that there is a correlation between the distance residential wind turbines and health problems for residents.

The responsibility of prefects engaged

A number of doctors have already identified multiple health problems related to ownership with these industrial machines. A medically defined the “wind syndrome” which includes increasing headache (noise and turbulence as triggers of migraines), ringing in the ears like tinnitus, sleep disorders, an increase of anxiety and depressive disorders, sometimes the appearance as Dr. Jean-François FERRIEU of “nausea, dizziness, palpitations, all of these chronic conditions can promote authentic depressions” said.

This dimension is not taken into account, or insufficiently, by the government, probably through lack of information. During this time, various local businesses, which more often then sell the exploitation rights to legally well structured international companies continue to put pressure on municipalities to accelerate Starts at times 500 meters of housing, wind farms, as they are never isolated wind turbines are located but the groups multiplied effects. The responsibility of prefects is committed to this day, since it is they who issue building permits.

Gel ongoing projects

On the evidence currently available, it would seem sensible in principle of responsibility to recommend minimum distances of 5 km between industrial wind turbines and homes. Ideally, it would be desirable to freeze all ongoing projects now and deepen health dimension not induce new diseases on a large scale.

It may also come to the conclusion that, for the health of humans and animals such as birds, farm animals or bats, precious “insecticides” natural which have been the subject of a report of the American Academy of Sciences (PNAS, September 29, 2014), it is sufficient to ban industrial wind turbines on land.

As noted by Nicolas Hulot , “initially, wind energy is a great idea, but upon arrival, it is a tragic realization. If we were told that at least it would close plants, but this is not the case. ”

Windweasels Attack Another Community….Residents in Fighting Mode….

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Jupiter Wind Farm Proponents from Another Planet

October 25, 2014 by

rocket atlas-5-launches-tdrs-l-liftoff-1

Yet another wind farm disaster proposed for the Southern Tablelands, yet another community backlash. This time it’s the threatened Jupiter wind farm at Tarago that has sent locals into orbit: the community is nothing short of ropeable (see our posts here and here).

Here’s one of their number smashing the Spanish developer, the disgraceful NSW Planning Department and the hypocritical ACT government.

LETTER: They are on another planet
Greg Faulkner
Goulburn Post
15 October 2014

I AM writing regarding Jupiter wind farm, proposed for the area surrounding Tarago. The proposed development would consist of up to 110 wind turbines each 170 meters or 50 stories tall.

The developer is EPYC a company which I understand is over 80 per cent Spanish owned.

My partner and I are long term residents from within the project area.

Like most locals we live here for the peace and quiet. We now face the sickening possibility of our home being sandwiched between banks of these colossal turbines, situated on our neighbours land, and possibly as close as 600 meters from our house door.

After having contacted NSW Dept of Planning about the situation, and having received no helpful response, we find ourselves with no alternative but to speak out publicly against the frightening unfairness surrounding the current approach to wind farm development in The Southern Highlands.

The turbines proposed are mind boggling huge, this cannot be overstated.

They are taller than the Sydney Harbour Bridge and very nearly as tall as Canberra’s Black Mountain Tower.

247586460-14114959

They are bigger than the ones around Bungendore and, for close residents, will never be obscured by tree plantings or anything else. Giant turbines may be a novelty to marvel at for a few moments, as we drive past, but I don’t think many Australians would want to live in their midst 24/7. I have observed the use of the term NIMBY in the media, in relation to rural residents who express any doubt about wind farm development near their homes.

The most enthusiastic users of this brutal and provocative term seem to be “green” city residents, who may be comfortable in the knowledge that their communities will never be the target of wind farm development. It seems common sense that any person who learns that their beloved home may soon be surrounded by giant turbines will be understandably devastated, and should not be subjected to cheap name calling.

A little understanding would be more productive.

Like most working, middle aged Australians, our home represents virtually all of our capital and its sale was to be central to any type of retirement or health care in our old age (not so far away).

If Jupiter wind farm proceeds our house will be sandwiched between arrays of monstrous, spinning, noise emitting turbines.

I do not think I am being pessimistic when I predict that any sale will difficult, unless the price is very, very low indeed.

In this sense alone the development is an absolute disaster for us, and most of our neighbours are in the same boat.

Australia may want renewable power options but we cannot continue forward like this.

In its haste to establish the renewable power sector it seems the NSW Government is prepared to sacrifice the wellbeing of many rural residents in the Southern Highlands, so as to provide a financially appealing environment to tempt foreign investors. It has offered up the unregulated development of the Southern Highlands to foreign developers without bothering to provide any protection for existing residents.

Claims by developers that large turbine arrays don’t affect the value or amenity of a location are ludicrous and dishonest. It seems the ACT Government is also prepared to overlook the frightening unfairness of the various wind farm developments just outside its borders, in order to buy the power produced and achieve its renewable power ambitions.

The residents of Canberra may not be aware that these arrangements will come at a very high price for many families in neighbouring rural communities.

The ACT’s position is staggeringly hypocritical, given its long standing commitment to stringent height limits in its own planning law, which protect its own skyline from unsightly high rise development.

It is clear that the ACT government understands the importance of controlling development to ensure a healthy and unoffensive environment for its own residents.

It is also clear that this concern does not extend to nearby NSW neighbours who are being targeted for wind farm development that Canberra would never tolerate itself.
GREG FAULKNER, Boro Rd via Braidwood.
Goulburn Post

At a mere 600m from the nearest turbine, the Faulkner’s currently peaceful home will be turned into a sonic torture trap and will be totally uninhabitable.

That’s around the same distance that Pac Hydro lobbed its giant fans from long-suffering Sonia Trist’s Cape Bridgewater home. After years of suffering from incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound, Sonia has decided enough is enough and is abandoning her beautiful and – once tranquil – home (see our post here).

But not to worry, the Spanish outfit aiming to destroy the Faulkner’s property and ability to enjoy it will employ a little of the $millions it’ll receive in REC subsidy to buy the house, stitch up the owners with a bullet-proof gag clause (see our posts here and here) and then quietly bulldoze it (see our post here).

bulldozer-home

Wind Turbine Contracts…Lefty’s Use Them To Reward Their Cronies! Corruption!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Ex-Rep. Istook: Wind Energy a Crony Capitalist Gift

Thursday, 23 Oct 2014 10:13 PM

By Sean Piccoli

Wealthy investors in wind power are reaping profits from an expensive — and subsidized — form of green energy that is driving up the electricity bills of ordinary Americans, a former Oklahoma congressman told Newsmax TV on Thursday.

Under the guise of saving the planet from global warming, wind power has become a taxpayer ripoff and a boon to investors claiming massive federal subsidies for an industry that cannot compete on price with traditional energy sources, former Republican Rep. Ernest Istook told “MidPoint” host Ed Berliner.

Of the $40 billion annually doled out to various green energy incentives, grants and loans, one of the biggest magnets for public funds is a wind energy tax credit first enacted in 1992, said Istook.

“For every megawatt hour that [producers] generate through wind energy, they get $23 from the U.S. Treasury,” he said, “and of course you multiply that by the many thousands of megawatt hours that are generated — which is still a small fraction of what the country uses — and they’re talking about an $18 billion renewal of this.

“Now, this was supposed to be a temporary tax credit back in 1992 to help the industry get on its feet,” said Istook. “Well, the problem is wind power is such an expensive way to generate electricity, that even with these major subsidies — plus all sorts of subsidies from different states — it still is one of the costliest forms of power. And it makes people’s electric bills skyrocket.”

Istook said a new study from the Energy Information Administration — the U.S. Department of Energy’s statistical service — finds electric rates rising four times faster in the states that use the most wind power.

He said the arrangement continues year in and year out thanks to a classic “vicious cycle,” in which subsidy recipients use their profits to secure more subsidies.

“I want to give you a quote, though, from one individual who was a major wind energy investor and getting a lot of these tax benefits: Warren Buffett,” said Istook, citing the Nebraska-based billionaire investment guru.

“These are his words, not mine: ‘We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.’ Those are Warren Buffett’s words,” said Istook.

“The people that are making this investment recognize that unless they can get these crony capitalism dollars, it’s a bad investment,” he said. “But government is paying them to do that. It’s paying some people to get rich at our expense while our utility bills go up”.

Istook said the public has a chance to put a stop to the tax credit, which expired last December, but is being pushed for retroactive renewal by the administration during the lame-duck congresional session that begins after the Nov. 4 midterm elections.

“They’ve got the skids greased in the U.S. Senate to do it,” said Istook.

And they will, too, he said, “unless people call their member of Congress and say, ‘Don’t vote for anything that renews this $18 billion giveaway, no matter what it’s packaged with. Don’t vote for it.’ That’s the only way we’re going to put a stop to this crony capitalism.”

Family Horrified to See Wind Turbine Blade Flying out of Control, Barely Missing Their Home!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Wind turbine blade smashes into Rowley Regis garden
Emma Brewin with the the propeller blade.

http://www.halesowennews.co.uk/news/11552138.Wind_turbine_blade_smashes_into_Rowley_Regis_garden/?ref=rss

First published 03:00 Thursday 23 October 2014 in News
A FAMILY were left traumatised after a 4ft blade broke from a wind turbine in the grounds of a Rowley Regis school and spun out of control narrowly missing their house.

Mother-of-two Emma Brewin estimated the three propeller blades had been spinning at speeds of more than 160mph on top of the huge turbine during Tuesday’s strong winds before they broke off.

The Ross Heights’ resident said: “They were going like the clappers and the pole was shaking.”

Suddenly, there was a loud bang and she saw something “flying through the air” out of the corner of her eye.
She and partner Steve McGilligan, aged 49, were horrified to discover one of the heavy fibreglass blades had hurtled about 200 yards into their garden, sliced through a hedge and smashed into their next door neighbour’s bench before coming to rest in the garden.

Miss Brewin, whose daughter Jayde, aged 18, was out at the time, said her special needs daughter, Freya, aged 11, was particularly traumatised by the incident.

“If the propeller had broken off a second later it would have travelled in a straight line and smashed into our living room. We could have been killed,” said 40-year-old Miss Brewin.

PROMOTED STORIES
13+ Things You Shouldn’t Eat at a Restaurant (Reader’s Digest)
The Way This Guy Transformed His Backyard is Hard to Believe (Photos) (Viral Nova)
Girl bullied after donating her hair to charity (but wait…) (TheLoop.ca)
Photos: A Grandpa Left a Trunk Behind For His Family – What’s Inside is Incredible (Viral Nova)
Workers from Nepal and India dying in record numbers on Qatari construction sites (walkfree.org)
This Swedish Model’s Pics Have Gone Viral (Bossip)
Recommended by
The wind turbine has caused annoyance to residents, whose homes back onto St Michael’s CE High School, since it was installed to make electricity for the new Rowley Learning Campus two years ago.

Miss Brewin condemned it as a “noisy eyesore” which sent a reflected strobe effect into her living room when caught by sunlight.

She described Tuesday’s incident as “unbelievable” and vowed to fight through the courts, if necessary, to prevent the wind turbine being put back.

St Michael’s CE High School headteacher Mike Wilkes said: “I am really disappointed that the failure of the turbine has caused distress to our near neighbours.

“As Interserve provide the facilities management we are working with them closely to ensure this never happens again as the health and safety of our students, staff and the local community is of paramount importance to us.”

A spokesman for Sandwell Futures, which owns the wind turbine, said an immediate investigation had been launched to establish why the blades failed during the strong winds as the area was hit by the tail end of Hurricane Gonzalo.

He added: “Fortunately no one was injured, but it was clearly distressing for those affected, and it’s important that we get to the bottom of how this happened.

“Luckily, this sort of incident is extremely rare, but we have launched an immediate investigation to establish why the blades failed.”

The Undeniable Facts About Useless Wind Energy!

/ 1957chev / 2 Comments

With wind turbines, ‘rotten’ cuts both ways

Joan M. Lagerman11:14 p.m. CDT October 18, 2014

Bill Lueder’s Oct. 13 Money & Politics column in The Reporter — Wisconsin Lags on Renewable Energy — focuses on the progress of renewable energy projects in our state. He discusses solar and wind project development.

The author quotes Matt Neumann, president of the Wisconsin Solar Energy Industries Association, who says that Wisconsin’s recent record on renewable energy is “rotten.”

As a resident for six years in the Blue Skies Green Fields industrial wind project in Fond du Lac County, “rotten” is how I would describe what life has been like for my family and a number of my neighbors.

Yes, most citizens likely want energy policies that include a conservation plan, as well as different forms of renewable energy. I am not against renewable options. But what wind developers and the author of this article won’t tell you is that increasing numbers of wind turbine project residents report being sick in their homes with headaches, ear pressure, ear pain, nausea, dizziness and sleep deprivation from the infrasound and inaudible Low Frequency Noise emitted by the giant wind turbine blades.

Lueder’s article used numbers and percentages to make his case supporting renewable energy. In regard to industrial wind turbines (IWTs), what the article fails to tell readers is that industrial-scale wind turbines after 20 years of federal tax dollar subsidies in the form of Production Tax Credits have a capacity factor rated from only 17 percent to 25 percent. IWTs are not reliable and cost-effective.

When there is no measurable wind, the IWTs are not adding electricity to the grid. In fact, they require winds up to eight miles per hour before they add electricity to the grid. The money could be better spent on biomass, solar and conservation programs because wind-generated electricity is not only unsafe when sited too close to people, but is 45 percent more expensive than conventional energy systems in the state of Wisconsin.

Michael Vickerman, a spokesman for Renew Wisconsin and lobbyist for wind turbine projects, stated in the column that wind projects have “flatlined.” He added that no new wind turbine projects have been built in 2013 and 2014.

In my opinion, that is because rural Wisconsinites are educating themselves on the hazards of living 1,250 feet from these massive wind generators as set by Public Service Commission guidelines. They won’t tell you about the over 100 wind project residents in five counties who have completed notarized affidavits submitted to their county Boards of Health and reporting the above adverse health symptoms.

When these residents leave their homes for a few days, the adverse symptoms disappear. They can sleep at night. They do not experience the ear pressure and pain and tinnitus. After years of the state ignoring these complaints and their calls for a state-ordered scientific health study, last week the Brown County Board of Health weighed the scientific data collected, including the December 2012 noise testing from Shirley Wind in southern Brown County, and voted unanimously on the following resolution:

“To declare the Industrial Wind Turbines at Shirley Wind Project in the Town of Glenmore, Brown County, WI a Human Health Hazard for all people (residents, workers, visitors, and sensitive passersby) who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions potentially harmful to human health.” (Brown County Board of Health, 10/14/2014)

These victims in five Wisconsin counties can no longer be dismissed and discredited by some journalists and the wind lobbyists.

Joan M. Lagerman of the town of Marshfield is a member of Concerned Citizens of Fond du Lac County.

Saul Alinski’s Rules for Radicals, and the Path to Communism….FIGHT AGENDA 21

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

SAUL ALINSKY’S
RULES FOR RADICALS

(or understanding current Democratic tactics)

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have

Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.

Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of the enemy.

Rule 4: Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy.

Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag.

Rule 8: Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period.

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself.

Rule 10: Maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.

Rule 11: If you push a negative hard and deep enough, it will break through into its counterside.

Rule 12: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

Rule 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it.

COMMUNIST MANIFESTO 10 PLANKS

10 Conditions For Transition To Communism

  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
  2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
  3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
  5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
  6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
  8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of the population over the country.
  10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.