COMMENTARY			

	A SEARCH FOR CONSISTENCY

A number of Vermont ridgelines have been targeted by developers for future construction and installation of wind generation facilities.  At least six projects have been proposed in the Northeast Kingdom alone. Although I have concerns about the impact of these projects, I am more troubled by the lack of consistency in Vermont policy.  The proliferation of wind power projects along Vermont ridgelines is contrary to the intent of Vermont’s public policies regarding protection of fragile high elevation habitats, preservation of important scenic resources, promotion of tourism, Act 250 protections, anti-billboard legislation, and Vermont’s special emphasis as a state of unparalled beauty.  

Our mountain ridgelines and high elevation habitats should be preserved and protected for future generations.  Wind project developers should have the burden to demonstrate that there is a compelling reason to sacrifice these resources for an energy source of such limited potential.

Wind power must be placed in perspective and analyzed in the Vermont context.  For example, wind energy proponents have claimed that wind projects will reduce Vermont’s dependence on foreign oil.  The fact of the matter is that wind generation will not have any significant impact on Vermont’s use of oil because only 1% of Vermont’s electric power is produced by oil.  Wind power could theoretically displace some oil if Vermonters converted their  homes to electric heat.  This is impractical and would only increase our electrical demand. 

It is also claimed that wind power will reduce dioxides and other harmful air omissions. The biggest source of air pollution are the coal burning facilities of the mid-west.  Vermont does not produce electricity with any coal and does not purchase electricity from any sources which burn coal.  Most of Vermont’s energy sources are air pollution friendly.  

Information published by the Vermont Public Service Department states that Vermont’s energy mix is made up of 43% hydroelectric, 36% nuclear, 5% wood chip/waste generation, 1% natural gas, and 1% oil.  The remaining 14% is made up of spot purchases through NEPOOL comprised primarily of hydro and natural gas.

Hydroelectric power and nuclear power provide the bulk of Vermont’s baseload generation.  Baseload electric power must be available all the time.  Wind power is a highly intermittent and unreliable energy source which cannot be used as baseload power.  For Vermonters concerned about nuclear energy, wind power is not an effective alternative.  In fact, one of the ironies of wind power is that it builds a dependence on base generation and may actually promote further development of nuclear sources.

Wind energy proponents have also claimed that wind generation could produce a substantial percentage of Vermont’s electric power.  In some cases, these claims have been the most overstated.   The megawatt ratings and capacity of a wind turbine project are theoretical and largely irrelevant.  Utility experts agree that the only meaningful analysis is a determination of the actual number of megawatt hours produced by the facility on an annual basis and the time of year that the electricity will be available for sale on the spot market.  Critical analysis of the actual hours of energy output from wind facilities dramatically illustrates their limited contribution.

There has been no demonstration that wind generation will reduce Vermont’s electric energy costs.  In fact, if we require consumers and businesses to subsidize wind generation facilities, we may increase electrical costs, thereby placing further economic burdens on our businesses, making them less competitive than their counterparts in other states who have lower energy costs.

The environmental impacts of these projects should not be minimized.  The proposed wind turbines stand 330 feet tall.  The new towers dwarf the Searsburg towers which are 193 feet tall and which are still visible more than 35 miles away.   The new turbines require an average of 2 acres of clear cut per turbine, plus additional clear cuts for transmission lines and roads to provide access to the turbines at all times of the year.  At 330 feet in height, the turbines greatly exceed the FAA threshold of 200 feet, so the turbines must be lighted 24 hours a day with steady state lighting or flashing strobes.  Siting of wind generation facilities on Vermont mountaintops will also have adverse impacts on birds, various species of wildlife, and wildlife habitat.  The projects will result in forest fragmentation and limit public access. 

The potential economic impacts are similarly profound.  Construction of wind power projects will create temporary logging and construction jobs, but when the projects are completed, there will be very few permanent jobs for Vermont residents.  The State has not undertaken any study to evaluate the potential loss in employment resulting from adverse impacts to travel and tourism.  The State’s economist recently reported to the Governor that Vermont tourism was the single strongest factor supporting the Vermont economy during our recent downturn.

Wind turbine projects will also have an impact on the Vermont legal and regulatory community. Act 250 and thirty years of case law have identified Vermont mountain ridgelines as one of Vermont’s most important scenic resources deserving of special protection.  The State has not undertaken any study to evaluate the impact on the interpretation and administration of Vermont’s environmental laws if the State allows its most visually sensitive landscape areas to be commercially developed.  If we back away from our commitment to preserve and protect our fragile high elevation landscapes, then our environmental and aesthetic regulations may be rendered meaningless and thirty years of environmental case law may no longer have significance.

Unfortunately, we cannot rely on Act 250 to evaluate the impacts of wind turbine projects because electric generation facilities are exempt from Act 250 review.   These projects need only obtain a Certificate of Public Good from the Public Service Board, a three member utility panel.

The State of Vermont has not sufficiently studied the suitability or desirability of developing wind generation facilities on Vermont ridgelines.    Vermonters need time to learn about all the implications of wind power projects.  I believe it would be appropriate for the legislature to consider a moratorium on the siting, construction, and installation of wind generation facilities until we have reached public consensus and have developed a state-wide policy regarding the feasibility and desirability of this energy source.  We need a coordinated state-wide energy policy.  The evaluation of wind generation on a project by project basis will be adversarial and litigious and will lead to inconsistent results and fragmentation of our energy sources.

Vermont is the envy of other states who have compromised their landscapes through misguided land use and energy policies.  Vermont’s landscapes and unspoiled ridgelines are its heart and soul.  We cannot remain indifferent to this challenge.  As a sixth generation Vermonter who values the natural beauty and environmental integrity of this State, I hope that we have the courage to decide that a small amount of electric power is not worth the commercial development of Vermont ridgelines.  It has been said that “History will judge us not by our progress - but what we allow to endure.”  

8/11/03

Lawrence G. Slason is a partner in the law firm of Salmon & Nostrand of Bellows Falls, Vermont.  A substantial portion of Mr. Slason’s law practice is devoted to land use issues and environmental permitting matters.  Mr. Slason represents Glebe Mountain Group which was formed to increase public awareness about the limitations of wind power and the environmental, economic and legal  implications of such projects.