Experts rip anti-wind claims

Even though the quotes below from pre-filed statements take the form of rebuttal testimony in the PSC proceedings on We Energies’ Glacier Hills Wind Park, they can stand on their own. You need not read the filings they rebut in order to make sense out of what they’re saying.

The pre-filed testimony stands among the strongest redupiation of anti-wind arguments.

These filings will be formally entered into the record when the technical hearings begin on November 2nd, but they (and all other filings) are available online at the Web site of the Public Service Commission and link directlyi to case 6630-CE-302.

Richard Larkin, a state certified real estate appraiser, rebuts a “study” of property values paid for by the Coaliton for Wisconsin Environmental Stewardship (CWESt), a group opposing the Glacier Hills project:

I am responding to testimony submitted by Kurt Kielisch on behalf of CWESt, in 1 which he claims that paired sales analyses at the Blue Sky Green Field and Forward wind projects shows that proximity to wind turbines results in a significant negative impact on residential real estate values. There are significant (and probably fatal) problems with his analysis, which I will explain in my testimony. . . .

. . .it is my opinion that Appraisal One’s Wind Turbine Impact Study is significantly flawed, and in my opinion, likely meaningless.

Read all of Larkin’s testimony here.

William Roberts, PhD in Epidemiology, former faculty member with the Medical College of Wisconsin (Dept. of Preventative Medicine), former Oklahoma State Epidemiologist dissects Dr. Nina Pierpont’s “research” and rebuts CWESt’s acoustical consultant. He summarized his testimony as follows:

+ “Wind Turbine Syndrome” is not a medical diagnosis supported by peer reviewed, published, scientific literature;
+ The materials presented to support “Wind Turbine Syndrome” are not of sufficient scientific quality nor have they received the rigorous scientific review and vetting that is customarily part of the peer review and publishing process;
+ The tried and true scientific method of developing a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis, publishing the results and having others attempt to repeat the research has not been done to test the existence of a health condition called “Wind Turbine Syndrome;”
+ An accumulation of anecdotal interviews with self-selected persons living near a wind turbine does not constitute an epidemiological study and is not sufficient to determine causation;
+ The bases for claimed adverse health effects due to wind turbines cited by Mr. James either cannot withstand scientific scrutiny or have nothing to do with wind turbines; and
+ Siting a wind turbine within view of a residence and the operation of that turbine could be a source of annoyance to those living in the residence.

Read all of Roberts’ testimony here.

Geoff Leventhall, acoustical consultant, PhD in acoustics, presented testimony to rebut CWESt’s acoustical consultant.

Based on my experience of infrasound and low frequency noise, it is my belief that the infrasound from wind turbines is of no consequence. Attempts to claim that illnesses result from inaudible wind turbine noise do not stand up to simple analyses of the very low forces and pressures produced by the sound from wind turbines. Additionally, the body is full of sound and vibration at infrasonic and low frequencies, originating in natural body processes. As an example, the beating heart is an obvious source of infrasound within the body. Other sources of background low frequency noise and vibration are blood flows, muscle vibrations, breathing, fluids in the gut and so on. The result is that any effect from wind turbine noise, or any other low level of noise, which might be produced within the body is “lost” in the existing background noise and vibration. This is considered in more detail in my Appraisal of Wind Turbine Syndrome, which is submitted as Exhibit 18.

More broadly, my testimony establishes that the claims of health effects from the low levels of infrasound and low frequency noise from wind turbines, as described in the Wind Turbine Syndrome and Vibroacoustic Disease hypotheses, fail. However, higher frequency noise from wind turbines, if it is audible, can cause disturbance to some residents, but this effect is no different from that of noise from another source.

Read all of Leventhall’s testimony here.

Solar outlook set to dim in 2010

A news release issued by RENEW Wisconsin:

Utilities’ voluntary incentives hit limits

(Madison, WI – October 23, 2009) In contrast to the rapid growth experienced in the last three years, a leading state renewable energy advocacy group expects a sharp decline in installed solar electric capacity in 2010.

In statements directed to the Public Service Commission (PSC), three utilities – Wisconsin Electric Power (WE), Wisconsin Power and Light (WPL), and Wisconsin Public Service (WPS) – acknowledged yesterday that their voluntary solar incentive programs will be discontinued for new customers. All three had offered, on a limited basis, a special buyback rate for the generated electricity, which effectively cut in half the payback period for the systems.

“These three incentive programs spurred homeowners and businesses to install nearly 2.5 megawatts of solar electric capacity,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. “But for those incentives, we wouldn’t not have reached the milestone that PSC Chair Eric Callisto recently celebrated at the installation of a system serving the Town of Menasha.”

“Though voluntary initiatives are certainly welcome, they cannot by themselves sustain a vibrant solar marketplace. By far the most effective way to maintain solar’s momentum is for the Legislature to require utilities to purchase a set amount of renewable energy from their own customers at a reasonable price,” said Vickerman.

Going into 2010, the only investor-owned utility that has a special buyback rate is Madison Gas and Electric (MG&E), which pays its customers 25 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity generated from their solar systems. MG&E’s voluntary program still has room for another 600 kilowatts of customer-owned solar.

Until their voluntary initiatives had reached capacity, both WPS and WPL had been paying the same rate as MG&E, while WE had offered a 22.5 cents for each kilowatt-hour generated.

“If renewable energy is to drive job growth in Wisconsin, lawmakers must create favorable marketplace conditions to support new installations going forward. No policy will accomplish that goal more effectively than a state initiative to establish higher buyback rates,” Vickerman said.

Experts rip anti-wind arguments

Even though the quotes below from pre-filed statements take the form of rebuttal testimony in the PSC proceedings on We Energies Glacier Hills Wind Park, they can stand on their own. You need not read the filings they rebut in order to make sense out of what they’re saying.

The pre-filed testimony stands among the strongest redupiation of anti-wind arguments.

These filings will be formally entered into the record when the technical hearings begin on November 2nd, but they (and all other filings) are available online at the Web site of the Public Service Commission and link directlyi to case 6630-CE-302.

Richard Larkin, a state certified real estate appraiser, rebuts a “study” of property values paid for by the Coaliton for Wisconsin Environmental Stewardship (CWESt), a group opposing the Glacier Hills project:

I am responding to testimony submitted by Kurt Kielisch on behalf of CWESt, in 1 which he claims that paired sales analyses at the Blue Sky Green Field and Forward wind projects shows that proximity to wind turbines results in a significant negative impact on residential real estate values. There are significant (and probably fatal) problems with his analysis, which I will explain in my testimony. . . .

. . .it is my opinion that Appraisal One’s Wind Turbine Impact Study is significantly flawed, and in my opinion, likely meaningless.

Read all of Larkin’s testimony here.

William Roberts, PhD in Epidemiology, former faculty member with the Medical College of Wisconsin (Dept. of Preventative Medicine), former Oklahoma State Epidemiologist dissects Dr. Nina Pierpont’s “research” and rebuts CWESt’s acoustical consultant. He summarized his testimony as follows:

+ “Wind Turbine Syndrome” is not a medical diagnosis supported by peer reviewed, published, scientific literature;
+ The materials presented to support “Wind Turbine Syndrome” are not of sufficient scientific quality nor have they received the rigorous scientific review and vetting that is customarily part of the peer review and publishing process;
+ The tried and true scientific method of developing a hypothesis, testing that hypothesis, publishing the results and having others attempt to repeat the research has not been done to test the existence of a health condition called “Wind Turbine Syndrome;”
+ An accumulation of anecdotal interviews with self-selected persons living near a wind turbine does not constitute an epidemiological study and is not sufficient to determine causation;
+ The bases for claimed adverse health effects due to wind turbines cited by Mr. James either cannot withstand scientific scrutiny or have nothing to do with wind turbines; and
+ Siting a wind turbine within view of a residence and the operation of that turbine could be a source of annoyance to those living in the residence.

Read all of Roberts’ testimony here.

Geoff Leventhall, acoustical consultant, PhD in acoustics, presented testimony to rebut CWESt’s acoustical consultant.

Based on my experience of infrasound and low frequency noise, it is my belief that the infrasound from wind turbines is of no consequence. Attempts to claim that illnesses result from inaudible wind turbine noise do not stand up to simple analyses of the very low forces and pressures produced by the sound from wind turbines. Additionally, the body is full of sound and vibration at infrasonic and low frequencies, originating in natural body processes. As an example, the beating heart is an obvious source of infrasound within the body. Other sources of background low frequency noise and vibration are blood flows, muscle vibrations, breathing, fluids in the gut and so on. The result is that any effect from wind turbine noise, or any other low level of noise, which might be produced within the body is “lost” in the existing background noise and vibration. This is considered in more detail in my Appraisal of Wind Turbine Syndrome, which is submitted as Exhibit 18.

More broadly, my testimony establishes that the claims of health effects from the low levels of infrasound and low frequency noise from wind turbines, as described in the Wind Turbine Syndrome and Vibroacoustic Disease hypotheses, fail. However, higher frequency noise from wind turbines, if it is audible, can cause disturbance to some residents, but this effect is no different from that of noise from another source.

Read all of Leventhall’s testimony here.

Solar outlook set to dim in 2010

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 23, 2009

MORE INFORMATION
Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
608.255.4044
mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

Utilities’ voluntary incentives hit limits

(Madison, WI – October 23, 2009) In contrast to the rapid growth experienced in the last three years, a leading state renewable energy advocacy group expects a sharp decline in installed solar electric capacity in 2010.

In statements directed to the Public Service Commission (PSC), three utilities – Wisconsin Electric Power (WE), Wisconsin Power and Light (WPL), and Wisconsin Public Service (WPS) – acknowledged yesterday that their voluntary solar incentive programs will be discontinued for new customers. All three had offered, on a limited basis, a special buyback rate for the generated electricity, which effectively cut in half the payback period for the systems.

“These three incentive programs spurred homeowners and businesses to install nearly 2.5 megawatts of solar electric capacity,” said Michael Vickerman, executive director of RENEW Wisconsin. “But for those incentives, we wouldn’t not have reached the milestone that PSC Chair Eric Callisto recently celebrated at the installation of a system serving the Town of Menasha.”

“Though voluntary initiatives are certainly welcome, they cannot by themselves sustain a vibrant solar marketplace. By far the most effective way to maintain solar’s momentum is for the Legislature to require utilities to purchase a set amount of renewable energy from their own customers at a reasonable price,” said Vickerman.

Going into 2010, the only investor-owned utility that has a special buyback rate is Madison Gas and Electric (MG&E), which pays its customers 25 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity generated from their solar systems. MG&E’s voluntary program still has room for another 600 kilowatts of customer-owned solar.

Until their voluntary initiatives had reached capacity, both WPS and WPL had been paying the same rate as MG&E, while WE had offered a 22.5 cents for each kilowatt-hour generated.

“If renewable energy is to drive job growth in Wisconsin, lawmakers must create favorable marketplace conditions to support new installations going forward. No policy will accomplish that goal more effectively than a state initiative to establish higher buyback rates,” Vickerman said.
END

Over 100 communities support “25×25” clean energy goal

From a news release issued by Govenor Jim Doyle:

MADISON – Governor Jim Doyle today announced over 100 communities have joined the Wisconsin Energy Independent Community Partnership. The communities, which come from every region of Wisconsin, have pledged to work toward Governor Doyle’s “25×25” goal of generating 25 percent of the state’s electricity and transportation fuels from renewable resources by the year 2025.

“I’m pleased that communities across Wisconsin have accepted my clean energy challenges head on,” Governor Doyle said. “Together we are making great strides toward energy policies that create jobs, clean our air and water, and save us money. I look forward to working with Energy Independent Communities as we continue Wisconsin’s clean energy leadership.”

The Wisconsin Energy Independent (EI) Community Partnership is the first of its kind in the nation and is an integral part of Clean Energy Wisconsin, Governor Doyle’s plan to move Wisconsin toward energy independence. The plan details strategies to move Wisconsin forward to promote renewable energy, create new jobs, increase energy security, and improve the environment.

The community partnership, which is led by the Wisconsin Office of Energy Independence, helps individual communities take advantage of their unique resources and develop new strategies to foster innovative clean energy solutions.

New members of the Energy Independent Community Partnership include: City of Two Rivers in Manitowoc County, City of West Allis in Milwaukee County, City of New London in Outagamie County, Village of Stratford in Marathon County, City of Whitewater in Walworth County, City of Jefferson in Jefferson County, Village of Oxford in Marquette County and Iowa County.

Over 100 communities support “25×25” clean energy goal

From a news release issued by Govenor Jim Doyle:

MADISON – Governor Jim Doyle today announced over 100 communities have joined the Wisconsin Energy Independent Community Partnership. The communities, which come from every region of Wisconsin, have pledged to work toward Governor Doyle’s “25×25” goal of generating 25 percent of the state’s electricity and transportation fuels from renewable resources by the year 2025.

“I’m pleased that communities across Wisconsin have accepted my clean energy challenges head on,” Governor Doyle said. “Together we are making great strides toward energy policies that create jobs, clean our air and water, and save us money. I look forward to working with Energy Independent Communities as we continue Wisconsin’s clean energy leadership.”

The Wisconsin Energy Independent (EI) Community Partnership is the first of its kind in the nation and is an integral part of Clean Energy Wisconsin, Governor Doyle’s plan to move Wisconsin toward energy independence. The plan details strategies to move Wisconsin forward to promote renewable energy, create new jobs, increase energy security, and improve the environment.

The community partnership, which is led by the Wisconsin Office of Energy Independence, helps individual communities take advantage of their unique resources and develop new strategies to foster innovative clean energy solutions.

New members of the Energy Independent Community Partnership include: City of Two Rivers in Manitowoc County, City of West Allis in Milwaukee County, City of New London in Outagamie County, Village of Stratford in Marathon County, City of Whitewater in Walworth County, City of Jefferson in Jefferson County, Village of Oxford in Marquette County and Iowa County.

Over 100 communities support “25×25” clean energy goal

From a news release issued by Govenor Jim Doyle:

MADISON – Governor Jim Doyle today announced over 100 communities have joined the Wisconsin Energy Independent Community Partnership. The communities, which come from every region of Wisconsin, have pledged to work toward Governor Doyle’s “25×25” goal of generating 25 percent of the state’s electricity and transportation fuels from renewable resources by the year 2025.

“I’m pleased that communities across Wisconsin have accepted my clean energy challenges head on,” Governor Doyle said. “Together we are making great strides toward energy policies that create jobs, clean our air and water, and save us money. I look forward to working with Energy Independent Communities as we continue Wisconsin’s clean energy leadership.”

The Wisconsin Energy Independent (EI) Community Partnership is the first of its kind in the nation and is an integral part of Clean Energy Wisconsin, Governor Doyle’s plan to move Wisconsin toward energy independence. The plan details strategies to move Wisconsin forward to promote renewable energy, create new jobs, increase energy security, and improve the environment.

The community partnership, which is led by the Wisconsin Office of Energy Independence, helps individual communities take advantage of their unique resources and develop new strategies to foster innovative clean energy solutions.

New members of the Energy Independent Community Partnership include: City of Two Rivers in Manitowoc County, City of West Allis in Milwaukee County, City of New London in Outagamie County, Village of Stratford in Marathon County, City of Whitewater in Walworth County, City of Jefferson in Jefferson County, Village of Oxford in Marquette County and Iowa County.

Magnetek receives order for large wind power inverters

From a news release issued by Magnetek:

Menomonee Falls, Wis. – Magnetek, Inc. (NYSE: MAG) today announced that it has received a follow-on production order for wind power inverters valued at $11 million. Magnetek’s modular utility-scale wind power inverters regulate and transform DC power generated by wind turbines into utility-grade AC power, which is distributed to the power transmission grid. Magnetek’s E-Force Wind Inverters are to be delivered to its customer beginning in December 2009 through November 2010.

Wind power has been one of the fastest growing sources of power generation globally. In the United States, which has surpassed Germany as the largest wind power market, the five-year average (2004-2008) annual growth rate for wind power installations was 32%, according to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). With an installed base of 25,369 MW in operation at the end of 2008, the U. S. was also the 2008 world leader in new wind installations. While AWEA estimates a slower growth rate in 2009, wind power installations are still projected to grow by 5,000 MW (20%) or more this year. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 extended the production tax credit for the wind industry to 2012, with an alternate option to secure a grant from the Treasury Department in the amount of a 30% investment tax credit.

Comments in opposition to PSC staff recommendation to raise rates in MGE's Energy for Tomorrow program

COMMENTS FILED ELECTRONICALLY IN

Application of Madison Gas and Electric Company for Authority to Change Electric and Natural Gas Rates 3270-UR-116

Commentor Information:
Name: Michael Vickerman
Address: 509 Elmside Blvd.
City: Madison State:WI Zip:53704
E-mail: mvickerman@renewwisconsin.org

To the Commission:

I would like to comment on the recommendations from PSC staff (witnesses John Feit and Jerry Albrecht) to increase the premium charged to Green Power Tomorrow subscribers. I approach this issue from a multiple of perspectives: (1) as a professional renewable energy advocate; (2) as a 100% program subscriber (since 1999); and (3) as a proud owner of a 1.7 kW solar electric system that was installed after Madison Gas and Electric launched its Clean Power Partners program in 2008.

All of MGE’s Clean Power Partners, (including me) sell the output from our solar systems to Green Power Tomorrow program subscribers through a 25 cents/kWh buyback rate. Among these customer-producers of clean energy are TDS Custom Construction, Goodman Community Center, City of Madison, Dane County Regional Airport, Madison No Fear Dentistry, and Isthmus Engineering.

The solar buyback rate is supported through voluntary purchases of renewable electricity. When the Clean Power Partners program was announced, MGE envisioned a 300 kilowatt ceiling on solar energy purchases through the special tariff. All Clean Power Partners must subscribe to Green Power Tomorrow. At the same time Clean Power Partners was launched, MGE reduced the subscription premium to a penny per kWh. The declining premium sparked a significant upsurge in subscribership, which enabled MGE to carve out a larger space for solar electric production supported by the program. The ceiling on the Clean Power Partners program is now one megawatt.

I mention Clean Power Partners to highlight the link between subscription volume and solar electric production. The larger the volume of electricity flowing through Green Power Tomorrow, the greater the amount of solar generation that the program can support. The reverse, however, is also true.

The participation rate of these programs is very sensitive to premium amounts. According to research compiled by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the median premium price of voluntary programs nationwide is about a penny per kWh. Programs with higher premiums have a significantly smaller participation rates than Green Power Tomorrow. Forcing MGE to increase its renewable energy premium would trigger a falloff in participation, which in turn would very likely result in higher rates to nonparticipating ratepayers. Moreover, a contraction in subscribership may very well force MGE to curtail its Clean Power Partners program due to insufficient program revenues.

Clearly, the special buyback rates offered by MGE, Wisconsin Power & Light and We Energies have delivered a positive jolt to Wisconsin’s solar electric marketplace. Wisconsin is actually a regional leader in solar electric capacity. No other Midwestern state comes close to where Wisconsin is right now. Given the significant progress made in the last three years, how does it benefit the state to choke off the one enabling policy that makes solar generation a reasonable value proposition to responsible energy users?

Shifting gears somewhat, there is an implicit understanding among program subscribers that they are committing to energy resources whose costs are fixed through long-term contracts. Many of these subscribers are likely to react negatively to a higher premium, because they know that the renewable resources leveraged through Green Power Tomorrow are not going up in price. They are likely to interpret an increased premium as expressing a public policy preference for burning more fossil fuel to take advantage of temporary dips in coal and gas prices. Is that really the message the PSC wishes to convey?

Let’s summarize the consequences of a higher premium:

1) Decline in program participation rate, due to a combination of economic impacts and negative reinforcement.
2) Decline in program revenues, forcing MGE to compensate through higher rates on all customers.
3) Premature seizing up of the solar electric marketplace in the Madison area.

It is highly ironic that the PSC would consider inflicting such a cascading sequence of perverse outcomes to a nationally recognized renewable energy program like Green Power Tomorrow. Just last month, MGE’s renewable energy program received the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Utility Green Power Program of the Year Award. The award was announced at the Green Power Leadership Awards banquet in Atlanta, Georgia. The honor bestowed to MGE was well-deserved, as evidenced by the letter I wrote in support of its program (see below).

Let’s not wreck a good thing. Please refrain from forcing MGE to raise its premium on current and future renewable energy subscribers. Thank you.

Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin
222 S. Hamilton Street
Madison, WI 53703

Home address:
509 Elmside Blvd.
Madison, WI 53704
+++++++++++++++++

June 5, 2009

Mr. Courtney Welch
Green Power Leadership Awards
Navarro Research & Engineering for
U.S. DOE Golden Field Office
1617 Cole Blvd, MS 1501
Golden, CO 80401

Dear Mr. Welch:

It is with great pleasure that I submit this letter of support on behalf of Green Power Tomorrow, the highly popular renewable energy subscription program offered by Madison Gas & Electric. I offer this letter of support not only in my capacity as a professional renewable energy advocate, but also as a customer purchasing 100% of household electrical use through this program.

By any objective standard, MG&E’s program is a hit with its customers. As reported in NREL’s annual assessment of leading green power programs, Green Power Tomorrow has the second-highest customer participation rate (9.7%) among investor-owned utilities in the United States. The program ranks sixth among all utilities in sales as a percentage of total retail electricity sold (3.8%). Through a judicious blend of wind projects from the region, MG&E was able to lower its premium to one cent/kWh, which set the stage for the upsurge in customer participation in 2008. Many a Madison landmark, from the State Capitol to Monona Terrace Convention Center, is powered in part through Green Power Tomorrow.

Notwithstanding its modest premium, the program also supports customer-owned photovoltaic systems through a special buyback rate fixed at $0.25/kWh for 10 years. Called Clean Power Partners, this initiative has motivated dozens of customers to install PV on the residence or business. Last August, I became a Clean Power Partner, when the electricity from the newly installed 1.7 kW system on our house began flowing into the grid. With this installation we now produce nearly emission-free 2,000 kWh/year on top of the 4,000 kWh/yr of emission-free electricity we buy from MG&E. In the 18 months since Clean Power Partners was launched, customer participation has surpassed MG&E’s initial expectations, prompting the utility to increase the ceiling on this initiative from 300 kW to one megawatt.

More than a renewable energy program, Green Power Tomorrow is a community-based sustainability initiative that supports about 50 MW of windpower that otherwise would not have been part of MGE’s resource portfolio. Instead of settling for small, incremental growth for its program, MGE elected to pursue a more ambitious path that would be appealing and affordable to a broad cross-section of its customer base, and the results are impressive. In my estimation, it is an outstanding candidate for this year’s Utility Green Power Program of the Year.

Sincerely,

Michael Vickerman
RENEW Wisconsin

Cranberry Growers Association gets grant to study wind and solar

From an article by in the Wisconsin Rapids Tribune:

MADISON — The Wisconsin State Cranberry Growers Association will receive a $16,500 grant to conduct energy audits on cranberry marshes, the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection announced Friday.

The Wisconsin Rapids-based association will partner with Focus on Energy to assess the feasibility of cranberry marshes as sites for wind and solar energy production. The study is one of 12 projects and eight state-facilitated programs to collectively garner nearly $750,000 awarded to make specialty crops more competitive.