Windmills getting closer to the Whites - second and third Plymouth-area wind farms

The view from Rattlesnake Mountain in the WMNF this fall

If you like these views, you're going to love what's on its way:

Second international firm proposes 3rd Newfound Lake-area wind farm - Union Leader


Each turbine is nearly 400 feet tall at highest pass, has an expected lifespan of 20-25 years, and requires a concrete footing the size of a house filled solid. Like the nearly-completed Groton farm, the two proposed farms depend upon significant taxpayer subsidies.

I just heard rumor there is a third one being proposed, for Danbury, on top of the 2nd one proposed in Alexandria. Bridgewater people already have a petition out against the Alexandria turbines being proposed, since it will kill their view from lakeside homes. Apparently there was quite an uproar at a couple of meetings that were held, from people I spoke with who were there. This could decrease property values for lakeside homes. One homeowner who had just torn down an existing lakeside home and was about to build a larger home went into an uproar when he found out that his beautifuly mountain view was going to be filled with big ol' wind turbines. I think people who live in towns with less money, like Alexandria and Groton want the revenue it will bring for them.

I know I'm not alone, but many are not vocal about saying "I don't mind the looks or sounds of windmills." I understand they have some environmental impact for birds, but think the initial forest damage caused by putting them up is something that, if done properly, will recover for the most part. The views will change for people, but they've changed for many of us everywhere as houses and buildings and neighborhoods go in. I think the larger picture is how are we going to produce our own energy. Wind and solar are sound options. Better than coal mining.

A thought I keep coming back to is that electrical lines and telephone poles along most every street. Did people complain about them when they first went in?

erugs said:

I know I'm not alone, but many are not vocal about saying "I don't mind the looks or sounds of windmills." I understand they have some environmental impact for birds, but think the initial forest damage caused by putting them up is something that, if done properly, will recover for the most part. The views will change for people, but they've changed for many of us everywhere as houses and buildings and neighborhoods go in. I think the larger picture is how are we going to produce our own energy. Wind and solar are sound options. Better than coal mining.

A thought I keep coming back to is that electrical lines and telephone poles along most every street. Did people complain about them when they first went in?

Click to expand...

I'm with you, erugs. I love windmills and wind power. Best to keep them from the most scenic venues, but I like seeing them, for instance, on mountains near Mt. Greylock. Much cleaner source of electricity than the alternatives.

I'm also with you erugs. I frequently see the windmills on Tenney Mountain Highway when shopping and can't wait to see them running. It speaks to being 'natural'and to stop ruining our environment [and the WMNF] using fossil fuels.

Hiking the PCT cured me of any love of windmills I may have harbored.

RollingRock said:

I'm also with you erugs. I frequently see the windmills on Tenney Mountain Highway when shopping and can't wait to see them running. It speaks to being 'natural'and to stop ruining our environment [and the WMNF] using fossil fuels.

Click to expand...

I finally saw some of them moving Sunday while getting gas at the Plymouth Convienience. I was wondering how long it would be before the started to actually use them.

IMO they are no uglier than a large lakeside house.

I think it's important to consider the mountaintop impact of the turbines. They're expected to last 2 decades.

The massive concrete footings on the mountaintops will be there forever (whereas a high tension line can be removed and the corridor reclaimed). Good luck getting trees to grow over a 6 to 30 feet deep, 30 to 50 feet wide X 30 to 50 feet long concrete footing.

By the way, if built, these ridges (not on any prestigious lists or near any AMC huts, so I guess few care) will be off limits to the public.


Front row seats from Mt. Crosby in Crosby Mountain State Park


Upper deck seats from Stinson Mountain in the WMNF (only 1 of 3 ridges of turbines pictured)

Did those ridges have public access to begin with? For that matter, why did this company ever choose to own that land in the first place?

The project would be built on 3,000 acres owned by Maxam North America Inc., a worldwide manufacturer and distributor of commercial explosives.

Click to expand...

Talk about a case of "not in my backyard"

Union Leader article on the Plymouth/Rumney NH windfarm "The Groton farm turbines will generate 48 megawatts of electricity. The power will go to the Boston area because the purchase agreement was acquired by NStar, now a subsidiary of Northeast Utilities. The electricity will serve 20,000 homes." Full article here http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120715/NEWS02/707159943

So the folks in the area will have their property values (ie their life savings) slashed so Boston will get power. Interesting. I wonder how popular this would be if towers were built in the Blue Hills? It certainly wasn't popular in Nantucket sound with some people who were in favor of wind power in general.

There are 24 wind turbines in the existing farm, which by the calculations above means that each turbine will "service" 833 homes. At that rate, they would have to build 5400 more turbines to power metro Boston (4.5 million population) homes, not including businesses, parks etc. How would 5400 towers look in and around the Whites? Environmental impact? Turbines this size can power 500-1000 homes depending on seasonal fluctuations in winds etc, and assumes they will be running all the time, ie no break downs shut offs.

And if you oppose the Northern Pass on scenic/environmental grounds, how would expanding wind turbines around the whites be different?

Most of the wind farm permits in the region require the developer to post a bond adequate to "remove and restore the site" when the farm ceases commerical operation. The bond is essentially an insurance contract purchased from a third party so even if the developer is bankrupt, the decommisioning gets paid for. Of course scars will remain as the topsoil is gone but generally the turbine bases have to be removed down to the local grade.

I expect the technology has improved in the last ten years but generally the gearboxes on these units require major overhaul/replacement at 6 to 7 year intervals. The only way to swap a gearbox is to use a huge crane and the cost is very high so in the past when gearboxes went bad, some developers walked.

The wind turbine market is going to get real slow as the generous wind production incentives are over in 2012 unless extended by congress.

I am not sure of the 48 MW capacity referred to in the union leader article, most plants rarely if ever get near their peak power. On a year round basis 30% of the rated capacity is doing real good.

Northern Pass is going to be bringing in renewable power for when the wind isnt blowing. Unless more fossil fuel plants are built in New England, the indirect effect of building wind turbines is to encourage Northern Pass, not discourage it.

peakbagger said:

Most of the wind farm permits in the region require the developer to post a bond adequate to "remove and restore the site" when the farm ceases commerical operation. The bond is essentially an insurance contract purchased from a third party so even if the developer is bankrupt, the decommisioning gets paid for. Of course scars will remain as the topsoil is gone but generally the turbine bases have to be removed down to the local grade.

I expect the technology has improved in the last ten years but generally the gearboxes on these units require major overhaul/replacement at 6 to 7 year intervals. The only way to swap a gearbox is to use a huge crane and the cost is very high so in the past when gearboxes went bad, some developers walked.

The wind turbine market is going to get real slow as the generous wind production incentives are over in 2012 unless extended by congress.

I am not sure of the 48 MW capacity referred to in the union leader artical, most plants rarely if ever get near theri peak power, on a year round basis 30% of the rated capacity is doing real good.

Northern Pass is going to be bringing in renewable power for when the wind isnt blowing. Unless more fossil fuel plants are built in New England, the indirect effect of building wind turbines is to encourage Northern Pass, not discourage it.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this expert input from one connected to the industry, P/b. My question would be, at the end of a turbine's life, is it possible to install new turbines? What's the anticipated lifespan of the towers? Can new ones be installed on the same bases? If yes, this would help minimize the environmental footprint of the windfarms.

from the Union Leader story:

"The Groton farm turbines will generate 48 megawatts of electricity. The power will go to the Boston area because the purchase agreement was acquired by NStar, now a subsidiary of Northeast Utilities. The electricity will serve 20,000 homes."

Those 48 MW will, in all likelihood, replace more expensive and "dirty" power like Salem Harbor or Brayton Point. To state that the power goes from the Groton wind farm to Boston shows a fundamental ignorance of how a power grid functions.

Fundamental ignorance from the Union Leader? Wash your mouth out!

A previous poster said something about these farms not being on famous mountains so people don't care. I don't look at it that way. If we are to get electricity to the masses, it will have some environmental impact. IMO wind and solar's impacts are the least, and the wind resource in northern New England is sizable. Replacing coal, in particular, is a big bonus. Not a question of not caring, but rather one of measuring alternatives.

peakbagger said:

Northern Pass is going to be bringing in renewable power for when the wind isnt blowing. Unless more fossil fuel plants are built in New England, the indirect effect of building wind turbines is to encourage Northern Pass, not discourage it.

Click to expand...

My primary concern with the Northern Pass is allowing it to go through the WMNF. Really, there are beautiful places everywhere, and it is a shame when they are blighted, but there is no free ride energy-wise. We can all do our small part, but that's pretty small in comparison to the larger scope of world-wide power abuses. If it were an easy problem, wouldn't it already be solved?

Just a few more points to add to what peakbagger said...
- Wind farms in New England produce a fraction of what their install capacity is.
- The wind turbines generally require grid power to operate (I haven't been able to find out how much power they consume). When there is a local power outage, the turbines shut down.
- Unlike coal, oil, pumped storage hydro, etc., wind isn't particularly scalable. In other words, if the turbines are spinning at capacity in the wee hours of the morning but are stationary during peak hours, there's no way with current technology to directly store that power off peak and use it on peak.
- I'm not aware of any studies that determine the actual fossil fuel usage for a wind farm - form oil in concrete footing, oil for operation, fuel for international transport of equipment and install. It's significant.
- The wind farms in New England would not be remotely viable without massive taxpayer subsidies.
- In regard to reusing components when the turbines break down (20-25 years in the sales pitches, but presumably a lot less according to peakbagger)...I doubt there is anything on the books in NH for this, but in the ski industry, if you intend to reuse an existing concrete footing for a chairlift tower, you have to do a pull test. This could be a difficult process for something 10X taller than a chairlift tower.

Part of the reason for the local opposition to the projects is that we're essentially talking about giving millions in taxpayer dollars to foreign companies for a low-yield energy solution that will only last two decades, but will have a permanent effect.

I'm also a supporter of wind power as well as PV. I'll listen to people complain about windmills and PV when I see them march down to the lake and pitch their laptops, toasters, hair dryers, flat screen TV's, etc into it.

I used to live near the biggest wind farm in the country. The noise doesn't become to compare with the destruction of mountaintops and pollution of streams caused by the coal industry. You can never put a mountain back.



I'd rather look at a windmill than this -

Anyone interested in Rocket21's concept of parasitic load can find info here (Windfarms require more power to operate)
http://www.aweo.org/windconsumption.html

Construction of the Spruce Mountain windfarm in Maine utilized a crane that required 34 truck loads to deliver. It is a 440 ton crane. This is good support of Peakbaggers idea that repairs will not happen on any regular basis; especially in small hard to reach wind farms.

Finally, my favorite. Rarely discussed is the idea that reserve power is required when the wind stops blowing. Conventional plants are not readily dispatchable, they require "ramp up" time that can extend to multiple days. So, these plants are operated in "spinning reserve" burning fuel & dumping excess heat (steam) into the atmosphere, just so they are ready to generate power when the wind slows down (or blows too fast) Further, when the conventional plants are operating in a derated mode, they are often not operating in the most efficient manner for emission control.

Well sited, in easily accessible areas with very consistent wind speeds, wind power is a reasonable part of our energy diversity portfolio. Unfortunately, most all of the wind farms in New England would never have been built without the taxpayer subsidies offered by our government.

"It's not easy being Green." Kermit

I do believe each region should somehow be responsible for their own power generation, fuel needs, garbage, septic, etc. Deal with with it. It's yours.
If a thousand wind farms produce the energy one nuke will, maybe the views will improve.

There will always be pros and cons to any technology. As we know, improvements are made to any device as we learn more about how to make them better by using it. At the end of the day, it really just comes down to, isn't a windfarm the right thing to do and the right direction to take to get off of using fossil fuels?