More study needed on wind power

Pamela B. Weatherbee, Advocate, January 13, 2005

[Reprinted with permission of the author, a botanist and author of Flora of Berkshire County Massachusetts.]

______________________________________________________

To the Editor:

The recent news item about massive bat deaths in Backbone Mountain Wind facility in West Virginia (Berkshire Eagle Jan. 2) points up the fact that we know very little about the impact of these 340-foot-high towers that are being proposed for Northern Berkshire. What seems to be evident is that towers on the forested ridges of the Appalachians have a far different effect on birds and bats than wind farms out on the prairie or Midwestern farmland; every site is different in topography, orientation, height and location in ages-old migration patterns.

The problem will be compounded by the hundreds of towers built or planned for the Appalachian ridges. Birds and bats, which rely on updrafts along ridges to help sustain their tremendous efforts in migration, will need to thread their way south through a maze of spinning blades. So far, and we still don't know much, birds run into towers when there is fog or clouds. Recent research shows that birds are migrating at much lower altitudes, less than 400 feet, than previously thought. Bats always migrate at night, above the ridges, and may not be able to “see” the spinning blades with their echolocation, or they may not be using their “sonar” and are relying on some other directional aid. Bats reproduce slowly and their populations are declining. Some bird species are also in decline.

Research into the presence of birds and bats on wind-tower sites, both breeding and migrating, should be done before the towers are built, before the mega projects are well under way. During a site visit at the Hoosac Wind site this summer, hosted by Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, the legal representative of Enxco, Jay Wickersham, stated that Enxco, the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, EOEA and others would do a hawk migration study and a study of migrating birds and bats, using all the most modern technology available starting in Fall 2004. Almost immediately they went back on their word and said it would be too difficult to get the equipment up there, even though they had already built four meteorological towers 165 feet high on the ridge tops. They would do it next spring and fall, when of course they plan to complete the project! They also had claimed that they had already done the avian studies (see their Web site hoosacwind.com).

Gov. Romney bases his decisions on aesthetics; such as, Nantucket Sound is a National Treasure, but indicates out here we have nothing as beautiful. His administration says there are land-use regulations and zoning which would take care of land-based tower siting in Western Massachusetts. The reality is that few small towns have zoning that address wind towers. Hancock has no zoning. Special permits are easy to obtain. Land-use regulations are few. Some of the towns will reap tax revenues while adjoining towns, that have absolutely no say in the matter, get the view of the turbines. There are no statewide regulations for wind-tower siting. The governor should realize that out here our economy is almost totally dependent on aesthetics: first, the unique natural beauty which is the foundation of everything else, which enhances the presence of: Tanglewood, Mass MoCA, Clark Art Institute, Williams College Art Museum, many theater festivals, music festivals, second homes, outdoor recreation, galleries and tourism in general, which in turn fuels the restaurants and shops.

The wind towers are not gently set down on the ridges. In the case of Hoosac Wind, Enxco must blast miles of dirt road up steep slopes, across innumerable small streams. Then the ridge must be leveled, with high points bulldozed off and valleys filled, creating a 35-foot-wide road on 100-foot-wide fill. This destroys over 50 acres of wildlife habitat and, in the case of Hoosac Wind, hundreds of plants considered rare by the state. The wind towers may work for 20 years, then what? These ridges are the source of many streams, now clear and pure and still harboring wild brook trout. Pollution from construction is inevitable.

Instead of rushing to more destruction, first let's find out what the impacts are. Why not reduce emissions from coal plants, cement plants and fume-spewing trucks and cars? Industries and homeowners can reduce electricity use. The technology is there. Theindustries would rather mouth clichés about renewable resources rather than clean up their present polluting acts.

As Lauren Stevens so eloquently suggested in a recent column (Berkshire Eagle), try true conservation. More energy can be saved by conserving energy use than is produced by wind power. Everyone can do it.

Pamela B. Weatherbee