Whitman news since 1896

Whitman Wire

Vol. CLIV, Issue 9
Whitman news since 1896

Whitman Wire

Whitman news since 1896

Whitman Wire

‘Not in my backyard’ attitude ruins wind power prospects

If nine out of 10 Americans support wind development, why does it take over a million dollars and seven to 10 years just to assess the feasibility of a wind project?

Wind developers everywhere, from Nantucket, Mass. to our very own Walla Walla, Wash., are discovering that while the vast majority of Americans support the idea of wind development, there is no end to the litany of problems they come up with to stop wind projects proposed in their neighborhoods.

Currently wind energy is only 3% of the total electrical generation in the US. The Department of Energy predicts that we could reach 20% by 2030. If we’re ever going to reach that number, Americans need to start seeing wind turbines for what they are: signs of a cleaner and more equitable future. Now who wouldn’t want that in his or her backyard?

Right now, a lot of people. Environmental lawyer Robert Kennedy Jr.’s opposition to the Cape Wind project near his family’s vacation home in Nantucket because it would “damage the view” is regarded by many as a classic case of NIMBYism.

This “Not In My Backyard” (NIMBY) syndrome is equally applicable to ranchers in Walla Walla who oppose the proposed wind project on Lincton mountain.

Although the project is still in the hypothetical phase, if sufficient wind is found, the Lincton mountain project could put up to 133 turbines on  Lincton Mountain in the Blue Mountains, a location in Umatilla county a quick drive away from Whitman’s campus. Gaelectric Northwest, the company that is proposing the project, estimates that the project would could up to 50,000 homes.

According to Dr. Charles Shawley, Gaelectric’s  research and development expert, most of the ranchers in the area support the project. The majority of opponents live within city limits of Milton-Freewater or Walla Walla and do not own land that would be used for the project.

Whitman biology professor and rancher Delbert Hutchison, a landowner near a protected salmon stream below Lincton mountain, is one of the most surprising opponents to the proposed project. The main problem Professor Hutchison  has with the project is that Gaelectric is an Irish-based company and will be likely selling the power to California. As  he put it “the primary benefits (money and energy) are going outside the area while the risks (e.g. damage to streams, etc) will stay here.”

According to Dr. Charles Shawley, Gaelectric’s  research and development expert, most of the major wind developers in the U.S. are foreign.

Although America has been called the “Saudi Arabia of Wind” due to our country’s incredible wind potential, a series of policies have led to great stagnation in the renewable energy sector.

In 1990, the U.S. had 75 percent of  wind power capacity worldwide. By 2003, the U.S. world share was reduced to 16 percent, as markets in Germany, Spain, Denmark, and even India surged due to active support by governments.

This dramatic reduction in the U.S. share comes from the combination of a repeal of government incentives for renewable energy with a plunge in gas prices, a $130 million decline in federal research spending on wind development and aging transmission lines. This deadly mix led to the bankruptcy of most of the American companies.

American wind energy is finally starting to get on its feet again, largely due to concern over climate change. As this industry re-emerges,  we’re going to need as much public support as we can muster to catch up with the rest of the world.

Professor Hutchison and other opponents have also expressed concern over the ecological impacts of wind turbines, especially on the recently restored salmon streams.

While Hutchison agrees that his stance against the wind turbines is  a classic NIMBY case, as a conservation biologist, he  knows the importance of reducing the impacts of climate change for ecosystem preservation. He finds it annoying that instead of addressing consumption, our society is simply moving towards finding ways to increase our energy outputs. As he wrote in an email “Here we are asking to put turbines in a pristine area that truly might impact streams and wildlife.  Is it worth it?”

Shawley assures that Gaelectric would complete a two-year ecosystem study before building the project, and then conduct ongoing environmental impact assessments once the project is built.

The economic facts are on wind energy’s side. Gaelectric developer Shawley said that although Gaelectric is an Irish company, all of the labor is sourced from the U.S., including the 20 jobs that the Lincton mountain project would create locally. Another major economic boon to the area is the annual payment landowners would receive for letting Gaelectric put turbines on their land.  Umatilla county is one of the poorest counties in Oregon and has one of the highest unemployment rates in the state.

Although there are some legitimate concerns with the project,  staunch opponents need to think hard about the implications of opposing more renewable energy.  The alternative to meeting our growing energy demand: more coal and nuclear plants: will have to be sited in someone’s backyard too. Statistically, these mercury and radiation producing energy sources are far more likely to be placed in low-income communities where the locals’  protests are simply ignored.



View Comments (7)
More to Discover

Comments (7)

All Whitman Wire Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • A

    AnnMar 18, 2010 at 3:57 pm

    I have said NO to putting up a windmill onto my land. The guy has sent a certified letter asking persmission for a biologist walk through my land. I have said no. I have said that if this land is so important to them, then pay alot of money for what you want, as they will make lots more money themselves for years. I do not want to let a biologist do a spring wildlife survey, here on my land. My property is not involved in the wind farm project they are doing.

    Reply
  • B

    BrianNov 16, 2009 at 6:44 pm

    This is becoming a catch 22 situation. Alternative energy is needed to reduce the carbon footprint by decreasing the use of non renewable resources (oil, coal and gas). As the demand for energy continues to increase we will need to replace that demand with alternative energy instead of non renewable’s. USA must stop the large demand for foreign energy as conflicts with the middle east will continue to get worse. As for wind energy the problem is having it to close to communities. Here’s the problem. The lack of transmission lines going to remote area’s to feed the windmills. This is where the NIMBY comes in. No one wants transmission line close by. But to have Wind farms away from communities you need to have lines in remote area’s passing through peoples homes. This is the catch 22. Something has to give or war will continue. USA is to wind what oil is to Saudi Arabia.

    Reply
  • S

    SusanNov 15, 2009 at 9:40 pm

    Lisa, you are correct that the issue of human energy usage requires us to make some hard choices. However, there is an old saying, “two wrongs do not make a right.” We need to focus on energy efficiency and conservation instead of trying to find new ways to depredate nature to extract electricity. The spatial footprint of wind energy is very large, and the actual output is a relative piddle. The industry themselves say they need 60 acres per megawatt.

    If you consider yourself an environmentalist, I ask you to think critically about a development scheme before accepting it just because someone says it’s “renewable.” Wind developments harm wild areas and make them “non-renewable” to the species that inhabit them.

    Contempt for “NIMBYS” is also contempt for people who are actually attached to their places, their eco-systems. We ALL need to be attached our places. That is the only way to truely “save the earth.” Save where you live.

    Reply
  • R

    RonNov 5, 2009 at 9:45 am

    Oh if it was JUST a wind farm… It so much more complex than that, and as a environmental studies major, I would expect that you would be informed of such. The NIMBY issues are really the tip of the iceberg. Wind farms tend to be remotely located, and have serious impacts on the flora and fauna. The remoteness requires transmission lines, to connect to the grid. The Intermittency of wind will require increasing ancillary facilities
    as more of the wind farms are developed. These are not benign developments, and typically, the impacts are to rural,undeveloped areas, and amount to sprawl. If this was the ONLY effective way to reduce the pollution and GHG impacts of energy generation, it would be one easier to digest, however it is NOT the ONLY or best approach. There is no ONE Size fits all application for energy. However, Localized Renewable Energy development is a model that reduces the sprawl affects and would return more benefits to local communities.
    Energy-Electricity issues are incredible complex, this complexity has created many of todays problems…

    Reply
  • C

    CherylNov 5, 2009 at 7:00 am

    Lisa, Just curious how long you have lived in close proximity to a wind farm? You seem to have an opinion that they are harmless and have very little impact to our environment. Sadly, I used to be just like you and called people nimby’s. After all we must save our planet right?

    Now I will share my reality. Three years ago our neighbor was granted permission to put up a wind turbine in our neighborhood. Welcome to the last two years of my life in hell. Loud doesn’t even touch the noise this turbine made. The noise was so bad we had to leave our home at times just to get a good nights sleep. And most of the wildlife left as well. Except for the rabbits that multiplied as there were no predators to be found.
    Luckily for us the turbine was removed. Deer and other wildlife are starting to return. For our family though we will never be the same. It was so much easier being “green” before we knew the tremendous impacts these things cause. And I can back up all statements made here with absolute proof.

    Reply
  • B

    BobNov 5, 2009 at 6:57 am

    If you ever got a good look at a old windmill from up close, it could make the case for NIMBY. Oil oozing down the sides of the tower, unrepairable turbines left standing as an eyesore blades dangling in the breeze, explosions in the underground cable systems, and the grind of poorly lubricated bearings echoing through the valleys are problems that could be fixed with enough money, but aren’t for many windfarm operators in this valley despite the obvious violation of their contracts.

    Reply