By JUSTIN MASON
Reformer Staff
Thursday, May 27, 2004 - WILMINGTON -- Representatives from the Glebe Mountain Group voiced opposition to the Londonderry wind turbine project to members of the Windham Regional Commission.

During the commission's monthly meeting on Tuesday evening, James Wilbur, co-chairman for the Glebe Mountain Group, said there were too many unanswered questions about the project for Catamount Energy Corp. -- a subsidiary of Central Vermont Public Service -- to move forward.

For nearly a year, the group had been consulting with officials from Catamount during the project's planning phase. But last week, Wilbur indicated that his group had terminated its collaborative effort with Catamount, citing that very little had been accomplished between the two parties.

The project calls for the erection of 27 wind towers, which stand nearly 330 feet tall and would produce about 50 megawatts of electricity, slightly more than the Bellows Falls hydroelectric dam. The towers would span across a 312 mile stretch on the ridge and is estimated to produce electricity for more than 18,000 homes.

"This project is going to be huge," Wilbur said. "Gargantuan might be a better word."

To illustrate the immensity of the project, Wilbur said the area Catamount Energy planned to use was nearly large enough to accommodate nine full-sized Wal-Mart stores on a largely undeveloped ridge of the mountain. Only three wind fields east of the Mississippi River would be larger than the one proposed for Glebe Mountain, he said.

Also, due to the size of the towers, Wilbur said the Federal Aviation Administration would require them to be equipped with some type of lighting.

Because the turbines are considered a utility, Wilbur said Catamount can apply for a permit through the Public Service Board under section 248, the statute governing the state's public utilities. By doing this, Catamount could sidestep Act 250, which approves projects on the basis of a regional and town plan.

Wilbur lauded Gov. James Douglas' effort to create a study commission for measuring the effects of wind-turbine developments on Vermont ridges. Earlier this month, Douglas advised the Public Service Board not to proceed with any new large-scale wind projects until more information about their potential impact was available.

Robert Woolmington, an attorney that represents the group, said there was already many indications about the negative effect the towers would have on the ecology at the proposed site.

"They are going to have a lot of very serious impacts on the ridge," he said.

Woolmington said the study tower that Catamount built had already damaged the mountain ridge. He said the tower's construction had used nearly twice the amount of space that had originally been called for.

Wilbur expressed concern that the turbines might become a hazard for the surrounding community and recreational mountain visitors. Ice forming on the turbines could possibly be launched many miles, Wilbur said. Also, vibrations generated by the rumbling towers could resonate throughout the surrounding communities, he said.

Any assurances that the project would create long-term jobs in the area were also false, Wilbur said. Although Catamount might employ up to 40 people to build the towers, he said the company would likely operate them remotely from far away.

"The long-term jobs are minuscule," he said. "The job side of this wouldn't be a major issue."

Aesthetically, the turbines would harm the mountain's view, Wilbur said, which could have a drastic impact on surrounding property values. He said area tourism would likely suffer if the project goes forward. "Most people don't come to Vermont to see industrial turbines," he said.

In the short term, Wilbur said the turbines would be superfluous to Vermont's energy needs. Most of the energy generated by the towers would likely be sold to out-of-state sources, he said.

Even with the additional power produced by the turbines, Wilbur said the state's long-term energy needs would still be an issue. With nearly two-thirds of Vermont's energy sources up in the air, he said, wind power wouldn't be a plausible alternative.

"Wind power can't meet that need," he said. "Even if you were to put wind turbines on all the private lands in the state."

Justin Mason can be reached at jmason@reformer.com