1

Wind Energy for EasthamBOS Presentation

Eastham Energy Committee

Brian Eastman, ChairJoseph Mistretta, Clerk.

George KatzGwen Pelletier

John Sherff

Jack Slavin, Staff

                                    

2

Recent activity

• Group of neighbors have organized to oppose the wind project.

• Constructed a web site with their concerns.

• EEC has answered many questions already. We post the on our website.

• EEC prepared to address each & every concern.

• Small group of land owners advanced issues.

3

Background

• Eastham needs a wind energy by-law

• Memo to Planner last summer

• Provided CLC Model By-law for reference

• Hesse Petition Article submitted

4

Energy Committee Position

• Eastham needs a Public Wind Energy Facility By-law

• Energy Committee supports the Planning Boards proposed Public By-law with amendments

• Energy Committee also supports the language of the new MA DOER Model Bylaw

5

Eastham Wind Siting- MA GIS

6

Why the property line SETBACK doesn’t work

Fatal Flaw:

• PB By-law requires 5 acres per turbine, but

• Hesse 700 ft setback requires 45 acres per turbine

• None of the four MA Coastal turbines would have been built!

• Use the MA DOER language> 1.5 times height

7

700 Foot SETBACK

8

Setback of: 700 feet  

   

Area = Length X Width

  1400 X 1400

   

Area = 1,960,000 SQ FT

   

One Acre = 43,560 SQ FT

   

By-law Area = 45 Acres

       

Fatal Flaw

• 45 Acres!

9

USE>>MA DOER MODEL SETBACKS

Setbacks

• Wind turbines shall be set back a distance equal to 1.5 times the overall blade tip height of the wind turbine from the nearest existing residential or commercial structure and 100 feet from the nearest property line and private or public way.

Setback Waiver

• The special permit granting authority may reduce the minimum setback distance as appropriate based on site-specific considerations, if the project satisfies all other criteria for the granting of a special permit under the provisions of this section.

10

Setbacks from buildings

• Precedents:

– Hull 1> School at 262ft & Homes at 788ft

– Hull 2> Homes at 425ft, 500ft, 600ft, 700ft, 800ft. Multi-story apt bldg at 725ft

– MMA> Home at 500ft; home plate at 200ft; Inn at 525ft; Office Bldg 125ft

– IBEW> Office Bldg at 100ft; SoEast X-way at 200ft

11

Hull 2

12

Hull 2- Distances- MA GIS

13

Eastham Turbine Distances- MA GIS

14

What is a safe distance?

• Precedent:

Cell towers> no special setbacks

Telephone poles/Nstar distribution pylons> no special setbacks

• No national setback standards:

.75X 1.0X 1.1X 1.5X 2X 4X, etc

• Contrary to the alarming photos:

No reported U.S. PUBLIC injury or death, EVER!

15

Photos are alarming…

• Tower Failure

16

Photos are alarming…

• Blade Failure

17

Photos are alarming…

• Ice throw

18

What are the Safety FACTS-

• Tower failure:– No PUBLIC injury or death reported, EVER!

• Blade throw:– No PUBLIC injury or death reported, EVER!

• Ice throw:– 2 German Public injuries reported– No PUBLIC deaths reported, EVER!– No known U.S. liability or injury insurance claims (’04)

• No U.S. Public injury or death reported, EVER!

Source: wind-watch.org

19

MA Model> Tower Collapse

“It should be emphasized that modern wind turbines are engineered so that risk of collapse is minimal. “

20

MA Model> Ice Throw

“In extreme weather conditions and usually at higher elevations, ice can accumulate on rotor blades. Because modern turbines are designed to detect imbalance and shut down, the risk of ice being thrown from blades is typically very minimal. “

Risk is: an ever-present person 750 feet from a big turbine = one-in-a-million.

21

MA Model> Blade Throw

“This model by-law recommends that minimum setbacks are established to protect public health and safety, and adjacent property interests in the unlikely event of turbine collapse, broken rotor blades, etc.”

22

Turbines require Special Permit

• PB can set conditions

• PB can require mitigation

• PB can require landscaping

• PB can require controlled access

• PB can etc etc etc etc

• PB has control

23

Health & Welfare - NOISE

• EPA says: 55 decibels limit OK

• WHO says: 55 decibels limit OK

• WHO says: 45 dB OK at night, so that people may sleep with bedroom windows open .

• Not required in zoning by-law> UMass RERL– “Since sound is measurable and quantifiable, zoning boards

should be able to take wind generator sound out of the realm of the subjective and make it more objective. Hearsay and speculation are no basis for decision making.” Tony Rodgers

• Use MA DEP Reqs. (310 CMR 7.10)– Both model by-laws support

• Noise impact study should confirm compliance

24

Opponent’s View of Sounds> ??????

25

Opponent’s pitch- Needs an Acoustic Study!

26

EEC View of Sounds- Worst Case (no trees)

UMASS

RERL

27

Ambient Noise

• Opponents say:

Background noise in neighborhoods like North Eastham is usually below 40 dB.

• Experts say:

Background noise in neighborhoods like North Eastham is probably above 40 dB.

28

U.S. EPA Examples of Ambient Noise

29

Who is right?

• While there is significant data that suggests wind turbines do not produce noise levels that will be annoying, unhealthy, or unsafe,  the acoustic impact study planned for the proposed turbine location will provide site specific information about the current ambient sound levels and the effect of wind turbines on those levels.

30

Health & Welfare – Shadow Flicker

• Shadow Flicker

– NO national, state or local standard

– Due to prevailing winds (sw), tree cover, Cape Cod weather, angle of sun in the East

>>Most likely MINIMUM IMPACT

– Flicker study will confirm> release soon.

– No health impact below 1Hz. (V80 = .8Hz)

31

Health & Welfare - Environmental

• Local, State & Federal permits strictly apply

• No surprise issues raised yet

• No available evidence indicating that wind energy construction has any permanent or temporary effect upon an area’s groundwater resource.

32

Property Values

• All studies say: “ The claim that wind development will affect property values is unsupported.”

• Hull> No declines or abatements due to Hull Wind 1 or 2.

• Hingham> No abatements due to Hull 2

• EEC> “Claims unsupported”

33

Zoning for need

• Need> Electricity, phones, cable tv

– Allows big poles & ugly pylons & hanging wires

• Need> wireless communication

– Allows cell towers

• Need municipal water

– Created Water Resources Protection District-G

– One of the new requirements…………………>

34

Future considerations

• Public Water Supply Storage Tower

35

Visual Simulations

• So what do these turbines really look like….

36

Photo Simulation 1: Nauset Road

37

Photo Simulation 2: Linda Lane

38

Photo Simulation 3: Route 6 @ Nauset

39

Photo Simulation 4: Nauset Light Beach

40

Photo Simulation 5: 210 Cross Cart

41

Photo Simulation 6: Oak Leaf Road

42

Photo Simulation 7: Marconi Platform

43

Photo Simulation 8: Fort Hill

44

Photo Simulation 9: Eldrege RD

45

The biggest concentration of lights (from top to bottom) are the cities of Boston, New York, Philadelphia and Washington.

MiamiHouston

Dallas

Chicago

Still daylight in California.

Puerto Rico

46

EasthamWind

• We need clean, renewable, local energy

• Eastham Wind will power 1,500 to 1,800 homes

• Eastham Wind will offset taxes

• Please support alternative energy with an Article for the amended Public By-law.

• Please include the land lease Article in warrant.

• BOS resolve land issues?

47

THE END

• End of Presentation

48

New Site E & Site F Options