Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 15:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Green Bean
Subject: Wind - 75 Cents per Watt

Less than $1 (Canadian?) per watt.
Josh

Jul. 28, 2003. 07:56 AM

Energy firm to harvest the wind
67 giant turbines proposed for gusty Blue Mountain

$150 million farm expected to supply 32,000 homes

ROBERTA AVERY
SPECIAL TO THE STAR

A Hamilton energy company has been acquiring the wind
energy rights for about 1,800 hectares of land on top
of Blue Mountain in preparation for building a giant
wind farm.

As many skiers know, the top of Blue Mountain is one
of the windiest places in Ontario and with a major
electricity transmission power line crossing the top
of the mountain, it is an ideal location to harvest
wind power, said David Boileau, spokesperson for
Superior Wind Energy Inc.

"There's wind in all four directions,'' said Boileau,
whose northwestern Ontario company Harmony Wind Energy
owns a 49 per cent stake in Hamilton-based Superior
Wind Energy Inc. Brascan Power Inc. owns the remaining
51 per cent.

Following extensive wind-power mapping across the
province, which identified seven areas where the wind
is strong enough to make wind farms viable, Superior
conducted an 18-month test on top of Blue Mountain,
just west of Collingwood.

The average wind speeds on top of Blue Mountain were
measured at 7.5 metres per second compared with a wind
speed average in most other areas of 5.5 metres per
second.

The extra two metres per second means a 250 per cent
increase in electrical power generated.

Reaction to the company's proposal to build a $150
million wind park called Blue Highlands with 67 giant
turbines on top of one of Ontario's prime tourist
attractions has been mixed.

"About 80 per cent are in favour, but there are those
who have expressed concerns about wind turbines in
their viewscape, '' said John Worts, who lives on the
mountain and has been hired as a consultant by
Superior Power.

Worts' mandate is to find landowners interested in
signing 30-year leases for the wind turbines to be
built on their property.

The company is selecting properties that are 20
hectares and larger so that the turbines can be built
away from homes and roads.

Lea McKean and her husband, whose family has owned
property on top of the mountain for five generations,
won't be signing a lease.

"What an imposition on the escarpment — it (the wind
farm) is going to destroy the scenic beauty of the
area so it's not only the landowners whose property
the turbines will be built on who will be affected,''
said McKean.

The proposed turbines will be 85 metres tall and have
40-metre blades.

"That's one-fifth the size of the CN tower and that's
not even counting the blade,'' said McKean.

Those who are moving up to the area to escape city
life should be aware that this will alter the
landscape, said McKean.

"It's said that tourism may profit from wind parks
because they are quite a spectacle to see, but will
people actually want to live with turbines in their
backyard?'' said McKean.

Worts disagrees.

"I've had numerous calls from people asking us to
select their property as a site,'' he said.

People who have property facing out toward Georgian
Bay won't see the turbines and trees will obscure most
of the turbines from anywhere on the top of the
mountain, said Worts.

The turbines won't be visible from the slopes of Blue
Mountain, but will likely be seen on the horizon from
Collingwood, 10 kilometres away, he said.

Superior plans to build turbines in clusters of two to
three on each property and will pay landowners a
royalty estimated to be around $3,000 per year for
each turbine.

The power lines will be buried underground.

After initial public consultation, the company has
scaled back its plan to build 200 turbines and has
moved the wind park back from the brow of the Niagara
Escarpment.

It's estimated the 67 turbines will produce up to 200
megawatts of electricity, enough power to supply
32,000 homes.

Boileau, who built a hydroelectric power plant in
northern Ontario, believes the time for wind power has
come.

"It's no longer experimental,'' he said.

A commitment by Ontario's alternative energy
commissioner, Steve Gilchrist, to add 3,000 megawatts
of renewable energy-generating capacity by 2014 will
be phased in starting in 2006.

That means firms such as Superior, which is also
planning a wind farm near Sault Ste. Marie, will be
able to seek the power purchase agreements they will
need to get financing for wind farm projects, said
Boileau.

Boileau hopes construction will begin next year at
Blue Highlands, but admits there are a lot of
regulatory hoops to jump through.

They include conducting an environmental assessment
and getting planning approval from different levels of
local government.


=====
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø

All-Energy News and Discussion
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/All-Energy

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø
- posted by Daniel @ 3:01 PM

 
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 15:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Green Bean
Subject: Congress Considers More Wind-Power Rules

Congress Considers More Wind-Power Rules
Fri Jul 25, 6:26 PM ET

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The sudden burst of interest in wind
power, from Cape Cod to the Smoky Mountains, has led
Congress to consider a stricter approval process for
wind farm projects.



The legislation, being drafted by Sen. Edward Kennedy
(news, bio, voting record), D-Mass., in discussions
with Lamar Alexander (news - web sites), R-Tenn.,
would require local or state governments to approve
the projects — tossing a potential roadblock in front
of the $700 million Cape Wind plant planned for
Nantucket Sound.

The Cape Wind Associates project is the first proposed
offshore wind farm in the country, but many others are
on the horizon and members of Congress say there is no
federal regulatory process for approving the gangly
producers of renewable energy.

Spiking up to 420 feet above the water, the wind
turbines are towers topped with three-pronged
helicopter rotors that spin with the wind to generate
power.

Environmentalists praise wind power as clean energy.
But opponents say local communities should have a say
in the projects, which can have a broad impact on the
environment and aesthetics. Lawmakers also want the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (news - web
sites) to have a say in how projects fit into a
region's energy needs.

Lawmakers insist the amendment — which may come up
next week during Senate debate on the energy bill — is
not an attempt to derail the Cape project or any other
specific proposal.

Spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Kennedy supports
renewable energy. But, she said, "he has significant
concerns about the lack of a regulatory framework,
specifically a process through which local communities
would have a say into the siting of these proposed
projects."

Alexander, who has seen opposition to wind farms in
northeastern Tennessee, heads the Senate energy
subcommittee, and has been working on the wind power
issue. But there is no agreement yet on an amendment.

Limited almost exclusively to California a decade ago,
wind farms started to spread across the country in
1998. By the end of this year, they will be in about
100 locations.

"This is very new, that's why it's controversial,"
said Tom Gray, deputy executive director of the
American Wind Energy Association.

The industry's main concern, he said, is that the
legislation must not send projects — like Cape Wind —
"back to square one." But he agreed that siting
approvals for the wind farms vary widely
state-by-state, and said, "We're open to looking at
ways to handle projects built off shore."


=====
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø

All-Energy News and Discussion
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/All-Energy

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø
- posted by Daniel @ 2:56 PM

 
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 15:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Green Bean
Subject: Massive energy bill lumbers to Senate floor

Massive energy bill lumbers to Senate floor this week

By Gail Russell Chaddock
The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON — With 392 possible amendments in the
wings, the Senate this week takes on the biggest
overhaul of energy policy in a decade — and aims to
wrap it up within a matter of days.

It's a huge and highly complex bill, covering
everything from pilot programs for bicycles to the
first incentives for new nuclear-power production in a
quarter-century.

With natural-gas prices soaring, everyone agrees a new
national strategy on energy is needed. But winning
consensus on such a massive bill has never been easy.
The fights over energy are often regional, rather than
partisan. They involve clashes among some of the most
powerful corporate and environmental groups in
Washington. And the process often fails of its own
weight.

Unlike last year's energy bill, which was drafted on
the floor of the Senate and foundered in conference,
this bill is the result of carefully calibrated
back-room negotiations, mainly involving GOP
lawmakers.

The Senate bill includes more than $35.5 billion for
research and development, including $1.7 billion for
nuclear energy, $2 billion for clean coal and $1.8
billion for President Bush's hydrogen fuel-cell
initiative. It authorizes a new natural-gas pipeline
from Alaska and eases permits for oil and gas
exploration. At least $15.5 billion in tax incentives
for energy efficiency, renewable energy, clean coal
and natural gas are expected to be added this week on
the Senate floor.

Early on, Republicans ruled out issues that have been
the most divisive in the past, such as drilling in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. But that issue could
come up in final negotiations between the House and
Senate.

New regulations mandating the use of 5 billion gallons
of renewable-fuel additives in gasoline also gave the
bill an early lift. The boost for ethanol is a high
priority for corn-belt Democrats, who are now expected
to support the bill.

Republicans also deliberately backed the bill up
against the August recess, one of the most inflexible
dates on the Senate calendar. Majority Leader Bill
Frist of Tennessee says he will not allow the Senate
to recess without an agreement on energy.

"We simply must diversify our sources of energy, and
we must do so in a way that lessens our dependence on
foreign sources for this energy," he said last week.

Environmental activists say it's a formula for bad
legislation.

"It will be very difficult to vote against an energy
bill. There are lots of things in this bill that most
people don't know about that need to be addressed,"
says Robert Perks, spokesman for the Natural Resources
Defense Council, which opposes the bill.

Environmentalists worry that the Senate bill, as well
as the House bill, which passed last April, are too
heavily weighted toward traditional polluting
industries, and not enough toward renewable fuels,
such as wind, waves, biomass, ethanol, solar and
geothermal power.

Two-thirds of the tax incentives in the House bill
were directed toward oil, coal and nuclear interests,
they note. In addition, new measures to expedite
permits for oil exploration and drilling on public
lands will cut the public out of the process and
increase destruction, they say.

"The Senate should scrap the energy bill and come back
with more 21st-century solutions, especially raising
fuel-economy standards," said Brendan Bell of the
Sierra Club.

Democrats concede they may not have the votes to block
an energy bill this year or even the will to do so.
But they insist the issues are sufficiently complex
and important to warrant more time.

"Our senators have legitimate concerns and need to
have an opportunity to have fair and serious
consideration of their amendments," said Bill Wicker,
a spokesman for the Democrats on the Energy Committee.


=====
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø

All-Energy News and Discussion
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/All-Energy

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø
- posted by Daniel @ 2:55 PM

 
Several interesting posts on Alt Power Digest today:

Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 15:11:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Green Bean

Subject: Turning trash into power

Saturday, Jul 26, 2003

Turning trash into power

With the flip of a switch, the dream of turning
garbage into electricity became a reality in Burnaby
Thursday.

But the dream was more costly than originally thought
after a provincial tax break aimed at encouraging
investment actually added $1 million to the price tag
because it was a public - and not private - venture.

Thursday, the Greater Vancouver Regional District
brought online a new turbo generator at its
Waste-to-Energy Facility, formerly known as the
Burnaby incinerator. The turbo generator will use
steam produced by burning garbage to generate enough
electricity to power 15,000 homes.

"Turning waste to energy is an exciting concept," said
Pitt Meadows Mayor Don MacLean, chair of the GVRD's
solid waste management committee.

"And the concept of looking at garbage as a commodity
to be used, rather than discarded, reflects this
region's innovative thinking."

The incinerator, operating since 1988, burns 250,000
tonnes of garbage each year, which is roughly 20 per
cent of the trash generated in the region.

Until now, the steam produced by incineration was sold
to Norampac, a paper-recycling mill next to the
incinerator, but a downturn in the paper industry cut
Norampac's need for steam.

Rather than waste the excess steam, the region will
use it to generate electricity for sale to B.C. Hydro,
earning between $5 million and $6 million annually.
That revenue will offset the region's solid waste
management costs.

Greenhouse emissions will also be cut by up to 59,000
tonnes per year by reducing the region's reliance on
dirtier energy sources, helping Canada meet its Kyoto
Accord commitments.

Yet for all its benefits, the project is costing
Greater Vancouver homeowners more money than
originally thought simply because it was initiated by
the regional district, not a private company.

In July 2001, the B.C. government exempted companies
buying or leasing machinery used for manufacturing
from paying provincial sales


=====
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø

All-Energy News and Discussion
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/All-Energy

¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø
- posted by Daniel @ 2:54 PM