The responses to these questions and the comments made by those who spoke
to the full group at the end of the meeting are summarized below. Please
note that the responses are combined rather than being sorted by question
because many of the responses overlapped. The responses are presented by
topic, so that the reader can see the full range of perspectives on a given
topic.
Policy Development Process and the Role of the State
Discussion process worked well—would like to see this process
for wind power in general
Opportunity to have a conversation, develop working relationships,
and work on these issues as a community
Develop a vision first, then a policy
Take time—there’s no rush
Urgent that we act now
Vermont should be a leader in renewable energy development
State government should be leader in wind development
ANR should be leader re wind education
Consider future technologies in policy—these could mitigate impacts
Consider creating new public entity to acquire land for wind development
Permitting should be by citizen-based panels
Develop regional, multi-state wind energy development plan
Decision should be made by the public
Double funding for energy education and conservation
Promote positive change
Add environmental criteria to 248 process as needed
Start w/ pilot demonstration projects
Begin w/ net-metering for ANR facilities
State should act as advocate for private sector wind development
State should assist small communities in developing locally-based,
environmentally sound energy production
Consider economic, environmental and social factors in developing
a balanced policy
Consider creating a state power authority
Use of ANR Lands
Wind development not appropriate on public lands
Wind development on state lands should be maximized
Wind is a natural resource to manage akin to timber
Consider acquiring land for wind development
Public lands shouldn’t be primary source of wind power
Wind energy development on ANR lands is in the public good
Wind energy development on ANR lands is not in the public good
Public good of wind power greater than currently allowed uses:
ski areas and logging
Wind energy development is inconsistent w/ ANR mission
Wind development consistent w/ other development on state lands
(ski areas, dams, etc.)
Wind development on ANR land should be a model for private
wind development –might diffuse myths
State lands are the “soul” of the state
Keep wild land wild
Multi-use doctrine on ANR land
Stay w/ precedent of no non-recreational development on ANR lands
Select sites for pilot projects
ANR should identify sites and seek developers of wind energy projects
Consider development by public utilities, not private developers
Give preference to Vermont-based companies
Charge appropriate fees (reflecting full project value) for use
of ANR lands
Rental income should be used for public land management; shouldn’t
go into general fund
Sites should be carefully chosen
Consider natural resource, recreation and aesthetic impacts
State buildings should be as self-sufficient as possible
Use small-scale wind for parks, hatcheries, etc.
Projects should have an educational component
Information Needed
Review wind projects in other states and countries
Well-designed, independent, intensive and comprehensive studies
of wildlife habitat impacts and bird mortality
Information as to why Class 3 wind resources are not viable for
commercial wind development
Statutes and processes used in Europe
Role of Wind Power
in Vermont’s Energy Mix
Lack of wind power planning
No current need for additional energy sources
Buying dams more appropriate than wind development
Combine wind and hydro
Important for Vermont to generate its own power
Combine wind development w/ energy conservation
Explore solar as well as wind
Current dependence on “dirty” out-of-state power
Need non-polluting energy sources
Need renewable sources in Vermont
Consider increased wood/biomass energy production
State should take lead in siting wind projects
Need to be proactive in diversifying energy sources
Wind is not a significant source of power
Wind won’t replace fossil fuel plants, since they don’t
exist in Vermont
Wind isn’t base or peak load power
Need affordable power
Chance to catch up w/ the rest of the world technologically and
sociologically
Consumers should have more say as to where their energy comes from
Keep power generated from wind in-state
Could stabalize energy prices
Enter into agreements w/ private developers very carefully
Develop wind at ski areas —ski areas use a lot of power
Economic Issues
Negative impact on tourism
Positive impact on tourism
Negative impact on property values
Wind doesn’t provide cheaper power
Municipalities should get taxes from wind developments
Wind is a potential green industry w/ economic development potential
Look at who benefits
Look at ways to consult with and involve surrounding communities
Look at ways to spread tax benefits to surrounding communities
Profits should go to Vermonters
Favor publicly-owned projects
Burke Mt has said it will close if towers go up
Impacts on forest products industry
Project Life Span and Decommissioning
Searsburg project became obsolete in less than seven years
Clarify who pays to take them down
Environmental Considerations
Impact on ridgelines and pristine high elevation areas
Minimize wildlife, natural resource and recreation impacts
Minimize environmental impacts including access road construction
and erosion
Limit use of project access roads
Develop sites that already have development and access roads
Reduces fossil fuel consumption
Wind power is clean
Wind power reduces greenhouse gases and other air pollutants; could
help reduce climate change
Wind power doesn’t stop acid rain or global warming
Bird migration
Positive benefits: doesn’t produce greenhouse gases or nuclear
waste, reduces power lines from distant sources, financial benefits
Reduction in dependence on foreign oil has national security benefits
Wind is sustainable
Alternatives (nuclear, coal power) have health impacts
Undeveloped natural resources are finite
Address air pollution from fossil fuels at the fuel plant sources
Visual Impacts
Scale is important
Consider reducing tower size to reduce visual impacts and minimize
lighting
Site towers off the ridgelines
Get FAA to change lighting requirements
Concentrate development rather than stringing it along ridgelines
Can be aesthetically pleasing—part of our working landscape
Limit number of turbines at any one site
Good to have a visual reminder of our energy use
Ridgelines are small in acreage, but are visible from large parts
of Vermont
Site turbines in industrial areas
Recreation and Safety
Separate ski areas and wind development for safety considerations
(ice throw)
Consider increased access from new roads and mange for recreational
access where appropriate
Explore designs that prevent ice throw
