• Home
  • Deception of Community Wind
  • Property Rights and Eminent Domain
  • What is The 1983 Mountain Ridge Protection Act or Ridge Law?
  • Legal Issues, Political Climate, Get Involved. Speak out!!!
  • Environmental Issues
  • Who are we?
  • Wildlife Issues
  • Appalachian Voices and Environmental Groups for Wind
  • Federally Subsidized Scam
  • Health and Quality of Life Impact
  • Appalachian State University Screaming Weasel Wind Turbine
  • Appalachian State University Problems
  • Life Under an Industrial Wind Plant VIDEO

Mountain Ridge Protection Act Alliance

Protecting North Carolina's highest mountain ridges from Commercial Wind Plants

Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Wind Turbines/ Wind Plants will not Displace Mountaintop Removal

Very Shaky Environmental Claims

Displacing Mountaintop Removal Mining with Wind Turbines

Dan Boone and Rick Webb

www.VaWind.org

The summer 2007 issue of UVA Magazine included an article titled,

Alden Hathaway, a wind-power broker with

the

development raised by Rick Webb, a Senior Scientist with the University’s Department of

Environmental Sciences.

Mr. Hathaway is quoted, saying that Webb’s “narrow anti-wind views [are] based on some

very shaky environmental claims.” The article further states:

Wind Chill, in whichEnvironmental Resources Trust (ERT) andVirginia Wind Energy Collaborative, responds to concerns about Appalachian windWind-generated electricity directly reduces the load from coal-powered plants, which in

turn reduces the need for coal, Hathaway argues. And while he acknowledges that wind

turbines alter mountaintop ecosystems, they are far less destructive than the mountaintopremoval

method of mining coal. He estimates each wind turbine offsets the need for 40 to 50

acres of coalfields.

We asked Mr. Hathaway to provide the analysis that supports his estimate that each turbine

offsets the need for 40 to 50 acres of coalfields. In

Mr. Hathaway’s response, he states:I do not remember telling the author

of the UVA Wind Chill Article that

the calculation was 40 – 50 acres

per turbine. My estimation is

approximately: 0.24 acres saved

per MW per year of installed wind

power capacity. I am struggling to

see what was lost in the

translation. . . . However, 18 acres of

saved mountain top over 30 years of

continuous operation is likely, for a

2.5 MW Wind Turbine operated in

the Appalachians, if we continue our

penchant for coal-fired electricity

generation.

We thank Mr. Hathaway for providing his analysis, and we certainly share his concern about

the destruction associated with mountaintop removal mining. However, we find that his

analysis doesn’t stand-up to close examination.

Aerial photograph of Mountaineer Wind Energy Center

Tucker County, West Virginia

Our first objection concerns Mr. Hathaway’s basic premise that wind-powered generation will

reduce the need for coal-fueled generation. The recent National Academies report on

Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects

Energy projections for growth in electricity demand with projections for growth in wind

generation. Between 2005 and 2020, annual U.S. electricity demand is projected to increase

by more than a trillion kilowatt-hours (kWh). The projected increase in wind generation is

expected to account for only 3.5% to 19% of this increase in total demand. In other words,

wind development may somewhat slow the growth in demand for electricity from traditional

sources – but it will not reduce the demand for electricity from traditional sources.

Our second objection concerns Mr. Hathaway’s estimation of “18 acres of saved mountain

top” per turbine. His calculations depend on a string of questionable data and assumptions.

compared U.S. Department of

•

the basis for calculating that an acre of strip mining/mountaintop removal yields 6,200

tons of coal. In contrast, EPA’s 2003 Draft Environmental Impact Statement on

Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fill indicates that an average acre of mountaintop removal in

West Virginia yields 10,000 tons of coal.

He relies on data published in Grist magazine and the Appalachian Voices newsletter as1

•

electricity –based on a report he submitted to the Virginia State Corporation

Commission. We previously responded to this report, noting that it relies extensively on

confidential and summary data that are not available or provided for independent review

and evaluation. As we argued in our response, this lack of transparency is well outside the

norm for either scientific assessment or public policy deliberation.

He assumes that 100 MWh of wind generated electricity will displace 88 MWh of coalgenerated2

•

coal that is mined through strip mining/mountaintop removal. According to the U.S.

Energy Information Agency, more than 60% of coal mined in the Appalachian region is

extracted from underground mines.

He assumes that wind-generated electricity will only displace generation associated with

•

operating at a 35% capacity factor, with a lifespan of 30 years. There are no 2.5 MW

turbines installed on central Appalachian ridges, most are 1.5 MW, and the largest are 2.0

His estimate of per-turbine electricity generation is based on 2.5 MW wind turbines,

1 U.S. EPA. 2003. Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Mid-Atlantic Mountaintop Mining – Chapter 3,

page III.J-17 (see:

2 Mr. Hathaway’s submission to the Virginia State Corporation Commission and our submission in response are posted on

the Virginia Wind website. (see :

http://www.epa.gov/region3/mtntop/eis.htm)http://www.vawind.org/Assets/Docs/Comments/Hathaway_and_Jacobsen_070506.pdf

and

http://www.vawind.org/Assets/Docs/Comments/Response_To_HNWD_Backdown_Study_080906.pdf)

MW. For turbines installed in the U.S. since 2000, the cumulative annual capacity factor

(CF) in 2004 was 30% – and the average CF of all the windplants in the eastern U.S. is less

than 30%.

20 years.

3 The rated operational lifetime for turbines installed to date in West Virginia is4

The combined effect of these questionable data and assumptions is an unrealistically high

estimate of potential mountaintop removal offset. We have used original data sources and

more-realistic assumptions to obtain a more-credible estimate.

•

of area mined by mountaintop removal.

We rely on the above cited EPA estimate for West Virginia of 10,000 tons of coal per acre

•

technology and actual observation. That is, our calculations are based on 2.0 MW

turbines, with a capacity factor of 30% and an operational lifespan of 20 years.

We have less-optimistic expectations for turbine performance, based on current

•

accounts for:

We calculate a

mountaintop removal offset (MRO) of 22.8%, which is the product of ando

generated with coal (65.3%)

Potential coal displacement, based on the percentage of Appalachian region electricity5

o

coal extracted by surface mining (34.9%)

Potential surface mine displacement, based on the percentage of Appalachian region6

•

coal is equivalent to 2 MWh of electricity generation.

Consistent with the Hathaway analysis and EIA statistics, we further assume that 1 ton of7

We apply the above assumptions to estimate a potential per-turbine coalfield offset:

(2.0 MW x 30% CF x 20 yr x 8760 hr/yr x 22.8% MRO) / (10,000 tons-coal/acre x 2 MWh/ton-coal)

= 1.2 acres

3 Energy Information Administration. 2004. Form EIA-860, Form EIA-906, and Form EIA-920 Databases.

4 Det Norske Veritas. 2004. Type Approval of NM72C – Approval number A-642052-5 [NM72C is the model number of the

1.5-MW NEG Micon wind turbines installed at Mountaineer windplant in WV; Appendix 1 on p. 3 of the Approval indicates

this turbine's "Design life time" is "20 years". See also:

5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. eGRID2006: Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database

(containing 2004 information) - available via:

VA, and WV.)

6

7

http://www.wt-certification.dk/UK/Approved.htm]http://www.epa.gov/solar/egrid/index.htm (Region defined as MD, PA,http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/page/acr/table7.pdf (Region defined as MD, PA, VA, and WV.)http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/coaldemand.html

This 1.2 acre estimate is substantially less than the 40 to 50-acre estimate reported in the

Wind Chill article or the 18-acre estimate subsequently provided by Mr. Hathaway.

8

Consider that modern turbines are installed on ridgelines at approximately 8 turbines per

mile and that each wind energy project may clear an average of 3-5 acres of forest per turbine.

The impact on wildlife and habitat due to forest fragmentation is an even larger issue when

turbines and connecting roads are constructed on forested ridges, with a per turbine loss of 15

to 20 acres of interior forest habitat.

9

It is not our intention to compare the ecological impact of mountaintop removal coal mining

and ridgeline wind energy development. It is our intention to provide some perspective. We

should all be concerned about the environmental and human costs of mountaintop removal

and other forms of coal mining. We suggest, however, that it is not in anyone’s interest to

exaggerate the potential role of wind development in addressing

Leave a Comment »

  • Topics

    • Deception of Community Wind
    • Property Rights and Eminent Domain
      • Property Values decrease by 40% if view of wind turbines!
      • What a power substation could look like on your land if your neighbor has wind turbines
      • Wind Driven Electrical Power Plants are not FARMS
    • What is The 1983 Mountain Ridge Protection Act or Ridge Law?
    • Legal Issues, Political Climate, Get Involved. Speak out!!!
      • Contact these representatives first and voice your support of the Ridge Law
      • Europe’s Carbon Mafia, and Ours?
      • Demand Renewable Energy that Produces when we need it! Let your voice be heard!
      • Protest Against Commercial Wind Plants in the NC Mountains in Boone
    • Environmental Issues
      • Study: Coal plants generate more emissions due to added wind capacity
      • Wind Turbines/ Wind Plants will not Displace Mountaintop Removal
    • Who are we?
    • Wildlife Issues
      • Court Rules/Endangered Species
    • Appalachian Voices and Environmental Groups for Wind
      • APPALACHIAN VOICES SUPPORTS BLOWING UP THE MOUNTAINS TO RAM IN WIND TURBINES
      • Why Does Appalachian Voices support Mountain Top Removal for Wind Turbines?
      • Appalachian Voices’ Wind Shill, Austin P Hall, Brainwashes the Students at Appalachian State University
      • Propaganda Techniques of ASU, Appalachian Voices and the Wind Industry
        • Biased Poll on Wind Power Manufactured by Dennis Scanlin and ASU Energy Department
      • Austin P Hall / Appalachian Voices will not Engage in Debate on Commercial Wind Power
    • Federally Subsidized Scam
      • What is Windgate? Cover-up Hides the Truth About Wind Energy and Green Jobs
      • Wind Energy Stimulus Money to other Countries
      • Wind is not about Energy, Wind does not produce
      • University of Maine Wind Turbine produces 40% less electricity than hoped for!
      • Wind Energy and Wind Industry Robs Each and Every One of Us
        • The Deception of Community Wind
    • Health and Quality of Life Impact
      • Man Sells Property at a Loss to get away from Negative Health Impacts of Wind Turbines
      • Recent Findings on Low Frequency Noise
    • Appalachian State University Screaming Weasel Wind Turbine
    • Appalachian State University Problems
      • Biased Poll on Wind Power in NC manufactured by Dennis Scanlin and ASU Energy Department
      • ASU blasted for Using Student Paper to lobby
    • Life Under an Industrial Wind Plant VIDEO
  • What’s New

    • ABOUT THE MOUNTAIN RIDGE PROTECTION ACT ALLIANCE
    • What is the 1983 Mountain Ridge Protection Act?
  • Blogroll

    • Allegheny Treasures
    • Keepers of the Blue Ridge
    • Mountain Preservation Association
    • Stop Ill Wind
    • Virginia Wind
    • Wind Concerns Ontario
    • WordPress.com
  • Tweets

    • RT @scannerfood: Lots of homeless people coming in tonight, Haven of Rest shelter is currently able to help. SF01 2 days ago
    • RT @scannerfood: Abingdon VA - Report of possible stabbing 201 Hagy St (Multiple victims) SF01 2 days ago
    • He was a felon who skipped NC probation. Wow. RT @wcnc: Occupy protester is facing charges http://t.co/SV7Bj01b #cltnews 2 days ago
    • Busch Bros? They might be testing a new car, LOL. RT @nh70744: @Ridgekeeper But they are in the Winston/Thomasville/High Point area. 2 days ago
    • RT @CarolinaScanner: Photo of heavy fire the multiple alarm fire in Myrtle Beach: http://t.co/PjFNbGcT 2 days ago
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 4 other followers

Blog at WordPress.com.

Theme: MistyLook by Sadish.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Powered by WordPress.com