The YesWindCohocton Website has been updated with answer to questions posed at the Wind forum view it here

“It’s not the view; it’s the vision.”

This is the tagline of Cape Cod’s non-profit organization Clean Power Now. Their mission is to empower citizens to secure the local and regional benefits of wind power.
The vision of harnessing wind energy is quickly becoming a reality. In fact, US wind energy production increased 625 % from 2004 to last year. More than one million Americans are already enjoying the benefits of wind energy. In the near future, wind energy’s uses will include water desalination and hydrogen cell production.

Wind energy opponents often claim they are not against wind, per se—just not here (in the Finger Lakes) or not now (this isn’t the right time). Maybe we should consider here the perfect place and now the perfect time. In fact, environmentally, we cannot afford to wait much longer.

Why here?

Because we have abundant wind here—enough to power 20,000 homes from the Windfarm Prattsburgh project alone.

Because New York State will increase renewable power produced to 25 % within the next seven years.

Why now?

Because the world’s population will double over the next 50 years. During that time, if we don’t cut our usage, petroleum and natural gas will be used up and coal will be nearly gone.

Because the U.S. is the largest emitter of carbon dioxide worldwide. Acid rain, a by-product of Midwest coal plants threatens the ecology of our local lakes and streams and threatens the health of those who consume fish from these waters.

Because nuclear plants in the U.S. are getting old—soon they will need to be shut down or replaced. Do we really want to build new nuclear power plants in upstate New York?
The old arguments of bird kill, noise and government subsidies don’t hold water anymore. There is too much evidence to the contrary. For every 10,000 birds killed by human activities, (buildings, cats, vehicles etc.) only one is caused by a wind turbine.
Current data allows us to site wind farms away from bird migratory routes and modern technology has made turbines almost inaudible when you stand at their base.

Concerning subsidies—the U.S. began offering subsidies in 1947 to promote renewable energy production since start-up costs of any new energy are high. U.S. government has spent approximately $150 billion on energy subsidies for wind, solar and nuclear power--96.3% of this amount has gone to nuclear power. The government spends 350 million annually to pay for work-related disabilities of coal miners. This amount is not reflected in the true price of coal energy. In fact, the environmental damage caused by hydro-electricity and natural gas isn’t reflected in the price we pay for that energy either. Imagine the cost of fossil fuel if plants were forced to produce energy with the zero-emission standard of wind.
Two of the latest arguments against wind power concern efficiency and property values.
Wind energy, sometimes criticized as inefficient is anything but. The blades catch 30-35% of the wind that blows through them but any energy that they capture replaces an equivalent amount of non-renewable energy. It’s never wasted because an energy reserve is always in place to insure a constant supply. Since the base load, from coal or nuclear plants is fixed, the reserve, usually naturally gas, is adjusted to take up the slack. During hot and cold spells and during daily spikes, the reserve kicks in. When wind power is available, it takes the place of natural gas to make up the difference between the base load supplied by coal or nuclear and fluctuating demands. In other words, each kilowatt of energy that wind supplies replaces a kilowatt of energy from natural gas--which is expensive and in short supply.
We’ve all heard a lot about The Fenner Wind Project but for good reason—since it has been in operation for five years, it’s an ideal place to gain insight into the impact of a wind farm in a rural community. A report, Impacts of Windmill Visibility on Property Values in Madison County, New York was released last month. This report analyzed housing sales in Fenner from 1996 to 2005 and concluded that the turbines did not affect property values in a five-mile radius of the wind farm. Only 33% of the homes within a five-mile radius of the turbines could see them. In addition, data obtained from the Madison County Tax Office showed that houses with a view of the wind farm sold for the exact same price as homes without a view. (Alliance for Clean Energy New York (ACE NY).

According to Harold McConnell, Prattsburgh town supervisor, “Every community is looking for an industry. This is an industry that will not be a burden on the local school district, highway department or public works.”

Windfarm Prattsburgh will benefit the community in four ways:

1. The PILOT program --$300,000/year in payments. One half will go to the school district, one quarter to the county and one quarter to the town, for each town involved.
2. Compensation Package in addition to PILOT. This will give money to the historical society, wetlands and other community agencies to offset the presence of the wind farm.
3. A separate Home Heating Fund for low- income housing.
4. Rent to landowners totaling about $300, 000/yr.

In essence this gives over a half a million dollars to the local economy annually, not including jobs related to the construction and maintenance of the towers. Should we turn down this monetary shot-in-the arm to our struggling local economy?

On a recent vacation, I had the chance to observe two wind farms; one between the Pyranees Mountains and the Mediterranean in Spain and the second on the shores of the Great Lakes on our return flight from Chicago. In each case, the turbines appeared one or two at a time as our vantage point changed. And, rather than towering monstrosities, they were simply slow turning blades above a spindle-like base.

The Finger Lakes has a couple of things in common with the Mediterranean coast and the Great Lakes region. All are beautiful tourist attractions and all have sufficient wind to warrant the harvesting of energy. As special as our lakes and tree-studded hillsides are, maybe we should look past the trees to see the forest that is our planet. It really is about the big picture—the vision, not the view.

Barb Rathbun

Dear Sirs:
"THE FARMER"S WIFE" rocks!!! I have seen very few logical or practical arguments against windfarms anywhere, it's mostly emotional, old-school NIMBY sniveling. She trashes all that. Even the zoning guy wasn't convincing.... Enclosed is my post to those other guys, before I even visited your site. I wonder how many opposed to your windmills will actually come all this way to Fenner to check them out? If they do, they will have to deny what they see, if they are to maintain their anti-position back home. These windmills are unobtrusive, quiet, and most importantly to some of us, a sign of the future: that there's a small attempt, here, to do things differently and hopefully, better. [ Not Teddy Kennedy, tho, I guess?]
Anyway- here ya go. Keep up the fight.
JT Watkins, Hamilton, NY
[" no powerlines!"]

>>>Hey, WindWatch,

Have you guys come to Madison, NY to check out the windmills there? They are pretty cool, built on the Stone farm, I think, or right next to it. I think they got hayfield under the turbines now, the cows are across the road. There's a great view to the northwest -[where the wind comes from outa Canada]- from there, you can see the smaller, more numerous windmills of the Fenner windfarm. [ It's nice up there, too, little country roads & farmland...] We go up to Madison often, a "shortcut" on the way to shopping in Utica. The slight swishing sound of the blades rotating is very relaxing. [I'm a school teacher, I know noise.]
Sometimes the white of the windmills blend right in to the atmospheric background and you can hardly see 'em, [Teddy Kennedy wouldn't be able to see those proposed turbines, half of the time, from his Nantucket compound.] Other times they are a cool landmark. If you know where to look, on a good day you can just make them out, from 20 miles away from top of the hills west of New Berlin.
But sorry, we don't see any cadavers, or even any blood on the blades, of migrating birds. Of course, Griffis Air Force base in Rome has been closed for many years, so there's no radar to get cluttered by them... You really should check it out, it's not as bad as everybody makes it out to be. [If you come, check out the proposed NYRI Powerline route that is to put 165' DC high-voltage towers directly over the houses in all these small communities from Utica, south thru Clayville, Cassville, Waterville, Hubbardsville, Poolville, Earlville, Sherburne, etc, etc, on down the Delaware River National Scenic River etc etc...Things are tough all over, aren't they?]
Would your windfarm really look like the one in your banner, @ Tehachapi Pass in CA? No wonder you guys are upset; but NY isn't like that part of CA, that's the pass leaving the southern San Joaquin Valley, heading into the Mojave Desert, so there's not much else there, they got a lot of room, and need to power LA. Maybe Cohocton wouldn't be as bad as that?
I found your site thru some anti-NYRI links, thought you'd appreciate a local's point of view.
Thanks... JT Watkins, Hamilton, NY<<

Thank You

UPC Cohocton Wind would like to offer our appreciation to the Cohocton Fire Department for the fast response to the fire in the building that houses our office. Your quick action along with the mutual aid from Perkinsville, Atlanta, and Wayland was astounding. Within moments you had what could have been a potential disaster under control. Thank you to Deputy Coordinator, Don Fredericy and the Steuben County Fire Investigation Team for their efforts. Thank you to the Junior Firemen for helping us put the equipment back into our office. A special thanks to Sue Sabins, John Sabins and Ronda Sick who helped to vacate the office without thought of their own safety.

Rick Towner

Response to posting of James Lince on Cohocton Wind Watch Blog
Printed with permission from Marion Trieste ACENY

Lince reply LTE

I appreciate the time you have taken to review Mr. Hoen’s study, but respectfully disagree with your conclusions. Going back to Mr. Hoen’s study, the homes in the community surrounding the wind farm did not show evidence of a decline in property values. That said, I would be glad to correct your interpretations of the Hoen study by answering each of your questions in your letter dated Aug. 2, 2006.

1. No property was analyzed within 4,000 feet (3/4 mile) of a turbine. In addition, the average distance of a property with any view of a turbine was 3.5 miles.
Ans: The study is very clear about this, and states that there might be an effect inside of 3,000 feet that exists that the study did not discern. What size the effect might be, if it exists, seems to be the important question. The study used all houses that sold during the study period, it did not choose which ones to study. Why the houses inside 3,000 feet did not sell seems as an important question. Have you talked to the folks that live inside of 3,000 feet? Mr. Hoen has, and they do not feel impacted. I suggest you go to Fenner and talk to them if you don’t believe Mr. Hoen’s account.

2. Out of the 280 properties analyzed only 43 had any view of a turbine. 38 of these 43 were 2 miles or more (up to 5.99 miles) away from the nearest turbine.
Ans: This is not correct. The study states that 5 homes were inside of 1 mile that had a view and the rest were between 1 and 5.99 miles. Regarding the number of homes with a view, the model does not need or want all, or a large percentage of home to have a view. In fact, if all homes had a view it would not be able to control for those without a view. Having 43 homes out of 280 that had a view, half of which sold before the wind farm was put up means that 30% of the homes that sold after the wind farm was put up (43 out of 140) had a view. This seems like a large percentage to me.

3. The concept of “vista” or value of a view shed was specifically mentioned and excluded as a variable in the study (no value for view from a property).
Ans: It seems you are confused about what the study concluded. The author makes an important distinction between view (of turbines) and vista (a nice view). Mr. Hoen recommends a variable for vista be included in future studies because it might influence the results of the variable for view (of turbines). It was not excluded intentionally as you suggest. The author suggests that the close in effects would most likely not have been influenced by vista. He goes on to suggest that homes further from the wind farm that can both see the wind farm and have a nice vista might be mixing their results. But homes close in that can see the wind farm do not necessarily have a nice vista. Either way, if the effects were strongly negative in regards to view from the wind farm, they would have shown up, as other variables, such as number of acres did.

I hope I answered all of your questions to your satisfaction.

Marion Trieste
Alliance for Clean Energy New York

July 30, 2006

Dear Mrs. Trieste,

You were a panel member at the YESWindCohocton Forum on July 26th, 2006.

You stated in regards to a question about property values that the study completed by student Ben Hoen was evidence that property values did not go down as a result of wind turbine projects.Mrs. Trieste are you aware of the following issues (among many) regarding this study?

1. No property was analyzed within 4,000 feet (3/4 mile) of a turbine. In addition, the average distance of a property with any view of a turbine was 3.5 miles.

2. Out of the 280 properties analyzed only 43 had any view of a turbine. 38 of these 43 were 2 miles or more (up to 5.99 miles) away from the nearest turbine.

3. The concept of “vista” or value of a view shed was specifically mentioned and excluded as a variable in the study (no value for view from a property).

You may believe it is responsible for you to continue to cite Hoen’s thesis as “fact based” assurance to a community. I suggest that the responsible and ethical position would be to provide disclosure. This would avoid property owners closest to these proposed projects relying on your statements as proof that their property values will not be impacted.Obviously those closest to these turbines have the most concern. These citizens deserve responsible answers from those who represent themselves as having researched and detailed factual knowledge of the issues with industrial wind power.

Sincerely,

James G. Lince

Cohocton, NY

YOUR QUESTIONS

Because of the time restraint, the YES! Group coordinated similar questions together, clipping the index cards and presenting the group of questions as one question. The moderator then presented the question to the panel, stating that there were several questions submitted addressing the same issue.

It was explained at the Forum that the panel would not be answering any technical questions. It was stated that questions of a technical nature could be submitted, but that the questions would be turned over to the developer UPC for the answers and that the answers would not be available at the Forum.

It was the sole intention of the Wind Forum to give those attending the Forum answers to questions pertaining to living in an area with a Wind Turbine Farm.

We will be publishing the answers to the technical questions as soon as they are received back from the developer.

Thank you for your input at the Forum.


YES! Wind Power for Cohocton

YES! Wind Power for Cohocton continues to post the comments of everyone who submits and identifies themselves. However, it is interesting to note that Cohocton Wind Watch does not allow ANY comments to their blog and yet they continue to hammer away with commentaries that are less than truthful and misleading.