 |
 |
|
Audubon Texas opposes any further development of the wind farms WHEREAS Audubon Texas supports the responsible development of non-carbon producing alternative energy sources in environmentally acceptable locations and with appropriate environmental safeguards; and WHEREAS the location of the proposed wind farm on the Kenedy Ranch in Kenedy County is in one of most important migratory corridors for neotropical migrant songbirds, migrant waterfowl and migrant raptors in North America; and WHEREAS there have not yet been well designed and scientifically valid studies of bird movements in the vicinity of wind farms in major migratory corridors, covering all seasons for an adequate period of time and this wind farm has significant potential to have negative population impacts on a number of different bird species; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Audubon Texas opposes any further development of this proposed wind farm and other wind farms in critical migratory corridors along the Texas coast Adopted by Audubon Texas Board of Directors April 9, 2008 Texas Coast Wind Generation Sites Pose Severe Threat to Migratory and Resident Birds
CHA today released the results of a scientific review of two proposed wind energy generation projects for Kenedy County. According to the results of the analysis that was conducted by EDM International, Inc. using methodologies developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, these projects pose a severe threat to migratory and resident birds and bats. In fact, in terms of potential harm to migratory birds, the sites were determined to be almost as sensitive as a nationally renowned National Wildlife Refuge established for bird protection.
Click Here for Executive Summary
Check out the latest TV story from Austin: Here 'Mass mortality' of birds predicted Anton Caputo // San Antonio Express-News January 2, 2008 Two wind farms proposed for the Texas Coast "could result in the most significant impacts to birds in the history of North American wind energy," according to a consultant's report released Wednesday. The report was written by Colorado-based EDM International and contracted by the Coastal Habitat Alliance, a group of landowners and environmental organizations fighting the wind farms. The document warned of "mass mortality events" and concluded that the analysis of the property conducted by the wind energy companies was insufficient given the area's status as one of the country's largest migratory bird corridors. "It is difficult for our team to imagine that siting facilities of this magnitude at these locations would avoid the type of possible mass mortality events," said EDM project manager Lori Nielsen. PPM Energy, which is owned by the Spanish company Iberdrola, and Australian-based Babcock & Brown Ltd. are developing the wind farms. EDM's analysis, which Nielsen described as a first step, was a review of potential bird impact studies provided by PPM Energy. PPM studies found very little impact on birds. EDM used procedures outlined by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in its analysis and came up with very different conclusions. Babcock & Brown officials claim they have conducted an enormous amount of scientific study on their site, but did not provide the work to EDM. Both companies rejected the findings of Wednesday's report. "We just don't think that they have any merit to their studies. They haven't even done any on-the-ground investigation," said Babcock & Brown's Beth O'Brien. "If we thought it was going to have a negative impact we would not be building the project." The combined plans call for erecting as many as 500 wind turbines, with blades from the massive towers reaching roughly 400 feet high. Wind turbines are common in Texas, which leads the country in wind-power generation. But the issue of turbines killing birds has emerged recently as companies have turned their eyes from West Texas to the Texas Coast, which is known for some of the best bird habitat in the country. Typically, wind farms have little impact on birds. But there are a few infamous exceptions around the world. A collection of farms in California's Altamont Pass, for example, kills more than 1,000 raptors a year. This is an image the Coastal Habitat Alliance often conjures in its battle against the Kenedy County wind farms. The battle has proven difficult because there are no state regulations for siting power generating facilities in Texas. Typically, state laws governing their emissions or other pollution act to regulate the construction of such facilities, but this isn't applicable in the case of wind power facilities. And because the projects are on private land and don't impact any federally protected wetlands, no federal regulations apply for construction even though many of the birds that could be harmed are federally protected. The alliance was hit with a setback when the Public Utility Commission of Texas ruled in October that none of its members had standing to protest the transmission lines that would serve the project. But the group filed lawsuits in both state and federal courts last month.
THE DEADLY TOLL OF WIND POWER By Charles Burress // San Francisco Chronicle Wednesday, January 2, 2008 Wind turbines rise above the fog on the hills of the Alta... A golden eagle was found dead near one of the Altamont Pa... Members of Alameda County's avian-mortality monitoring te... Rick Koebbe, president of PowerWorks Inc., with some of t... More... The long hot summers of the San Joaquin Valley suck great tsunamis of cool coastal air through the Altamont Pass, producing winds so powerful that a person can lean nearly 45 degrees without falling down. Such awesome force gave birth in the early 1980s to the world's largest collection of wind turbines, pioneers in what is now America's fastest-growing form of renewable energy and an increasingly important weapon in the battle against global warming. But the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area is also a symbol of the wind industry's biggest stain - the killings of thousands of birds, including majestic golden eagles, by turbines. The result has been a wrenching civil war among those who are otherwise united in the struggle to save the planet and its creatures. It's been nearly a year since a controversial legal settlement was forged among wildlife groups, wind companies and Alameda County regulators. That agreement, opposed by some parties to the dispute, promised to reduce deaths of golden eagles and three other raptor species by 50 percent in three years and called for the shutdown or relocation of the 300 or so most lethal of the approximately 5,000 windmills at Altamont. But five scientists appointed by the county say the settlement and accompanying efforts to reduce bird deaths are not on track to meet the 50 percent goal, and they recently surveyed the Altamont to determine which additional turbines should be removed or relocated to spots less likely to kill birds. Known officially as the Scientific Review Committee, the panel agreed Dec. 21 that more turbines need to be removed or relocated. It issued a new list of 309 targeted turbines, plus 102 more if the wind companies refuse to continue a current, temporary shutdown of all their windmills into February. The wind operators had previously agreed to a two-month shutdown, for November and December. The newly named lethal turbines are in addition to the dozens already shut down under the settlement's plan to gradually remove the most deadly windmills. FPL Energy, the company with the most turbines in the Altamont, has not seen the specifics of the new recommendations from the scientists and cannot comment, company spokesman Steven Stengel said last week. The scientists' findings are advisory for a continuing "meet and confer process" among all the parties, who are under instructions from Alameda County officials - who exercise regulatory authority over the wind farms - to negotiate mutually acceptable solutions. "We are deeply distressed about the continuing bird deaths and about the companies not being on track for the 50 percent reduction," said Elizabeth Murdock, executive director of the Golden Gate Audubon Society, a chief plaintiff in the lawsuit that has reshaped the battle over the birds. But Stengel said, "It is too early in the process to accurately judge whether we are on track." The scientific review is meant to find ways of protecting the birds without putting the companies out of business, he said. No one knows for sure how many birds are killed by the Altamont turbines - a 2004 California Energy Commission report estimated the golden eagle toll to be between 75 and 116 a year, while total bird kills were put in the 1,766 to 4,721 range. The Audubon Society lawsuit targets four raptor species - golden eagle, red-tailed hawk, American kestrel and burrowing owl - which suffered 456 to 1,129 fatalities per year, the study estimated. Subsequent data indicate that bird deaths have not decreased since the settlement was reached last January and that efforts to achieve a 50 percent reduction in three years are far behind, said Shawn Smallwood, an independent consultant in avian ecology who co-authored the 2004 California Energy Commission study and is one of the five county-appointed scientists. James Walker, president-elect of the industry-backed American Wind Energy Association, said the wind companies also want to save birds and are helping to fund the study of the problem. He also said wind power helps save bird lives by combatting global warming, which the National Audubon Society acknowledges as a threat to many bird species. Rick Koebbe, head of Altamont Winds Inc., another of the half-dozen firms that own turbines in the Altamont, said the impact on birds has to be weighed against the human deaths and diseases that are reduced by using wind power instead of pollution-producing fossil fuels. Numerous surveys and studies of dead birds have taken place in the Altamont going back to at least 1992, but the analysis, according to a 2005 Government Accountability Office review of the studies, "has been complicated by confounding variables." The problem is not simply birds running into spinning blades. Many dead birds have been found around turbines that were turned off. Some have been electrocuted by live wires near operating turbines, while others apparently were killed by predators. Despite the perplexing data, many experts agree that a chief cause of bird deaths is the sheer number of windmills at Altamont, which features many old, small turbines in the 100-kilowatt range. More modern wind farms employ taller, more powerful machines able to generate 1 to 3 megawatts. Replacing the many old turbines with fewer, more powerful ones - a process termed "repowering" - is official county policy and would be "a big part of the solution," Murdock said. The idea is that bigger turbines would not only dramatically reduce the spinning blades to about one-tenth of their current number but also turn more slowly and be higher off the ground, presumably moving them farther away from raptors that dive for mice and other prey. "Repowering is supposedly the silver bullet, if there is one," said Chris Gray, chief of staff for Alameda County Board of Supervisors President Scott Haggerty, whose district includes Altamont. But full repowering would cost about $1 billion - money that the wind companies may not be able to afford, Walker said. Finding the right balance for wind and birds is the central focus of the settlement agreement, which brought a legal truce to a 3-year-old lawsuit by five chapters of the Audubon Society and Californians for Renewable Energy. The plaintiffs had sued Alameda County, contending that the renewed wind-power permits approved by the county in 2005 violated the California Environmental Quality Act and didn't do enough to protect the birds. About 78 percent of the Altamont turbines are in Alameda County, with the remainder in Contra Costa County, which is not part of the lawsuit or settlement. Implementing the agreement and its core mandate of figuring out which turbines are the most dangerous has meant spending a lot of hours among the windmills for the scientists. "This is one of the places that had the highest mortality rates," said Rutgers University biologist Joanna Burger, pointing to a ridge of turbines as she and the four other scientists huddled against the chilly wind on their recent four-day tour. It's a formidable task among the thousands of windmills that stand in irregular rows like a scattered army of propeller-headed sentinels on the rolling hills and ridges of Altamont. The site is spread over 50 square miles, an expanse larger than the city of San Francisco. An invaluable help in their search was Brian Karas, part of the bird-death monitoring group, which consists of six full-time workers who spend their days dodging rattlesnakes and cow pies to search for and count dead birds. Holding a map flecked with different-colored Post-it notes, Karas rattled off mortality data. "Kestrel," he said pointing to one turbine where a dead kestrel was found. "Nothing, nothing," he said of the next two turbines, where no dead birds have been found. "Two red-tail," he said of the fourth windmill. Although the settlement is supported by the county, most of the wind companies and the Audubon societies, it also faces opposition. Koebbe's company refused to join the pact, in large part because it didn't want to pay legal fees of the plaintiffs, he said. Also opposing the settlement is the Center for Biological Diversity, which filed a separate suit directly against the windmill companies, saying the firms were illegally killing wildlife protected by state and federal law. An Alameda County Superior Court judge rejected the suit, ruling that migratory birds are not "public trust property." The decision has been appealed; no court date has been set. Alameda County Supervisor Gail Steele voted against the pact because she wanted a more accelerated reduction in bird deaths. "I understand this is an economic hardship to the wind farms, but how do you know how much of a hardship?" she said. "Nobody ever opens their books." Nevertheless, Steele said, both the wind industry and the birds need to be protected. "All environmentalists should support both things," she said. E-mail Charles Burress at cburress@sfchronicle.com Original Article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/02/MNITTM9FA.DTL Coalition Sues Land Office Over Wind FarmsBy Robert Elder // Austin American-Statesman Wednesday, December 05, 2007 The famed King Ranch and a coalition of environmental groups sued Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson in federal court Tuesday, seeking to require extensive environmental review and public comment on two planned wind power projects along the Gulf Coast in Kenedy County. The coalition, the Coastal Habitat Alliance, also sued over the wind project in state District Court in Travis County. That suit claims that the state's Public Utility Commission illegally denied the alliance's request to participate in permit hearings for the wind project's transmission line. The lawsuits threaten to delay or stop the two massive wind projects, which could place more than 600 turbines on 60,000 acres near Laguna Madre, south of Corpus Christi. Part of the wind projects would place about 250 turbines just east of a portion of the sprawling King Ranch. The federal suit, filed in U.S. Western District Court in Austin, said the turbines could kill untold numbers of migratory birds and damage the bay. It seeks to overturn the decision by the Texas General Land office, which Patterson heads, to allow the projects to be built without environmental review or input from the public. The suit contends that the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and the Texas Coastal Management Program require a permit process for any energy generation facility on the coast, including wind farms. Besides King Ranch Inc., the coastal alliance includes four Gulf Coast-area Aubudon societies and several local environmental organizations. The land office said it doesn't comment on pending litigation. The federal suit also names the wind project developers: PPM Energy Inc., a Portland, Ore.-based subsidiary of Spanish utility Iberdrola SA; and Australian investment firm Babcock & Brown Ltd. PPM officials did not return a call for comment; Babcock & Brown could not be reached for comment. Houston lawyer Jim Blackburn, the coastal alliance's lead lawyer, said the federal coastal management act "mandates that Texas must conduct environmental assessments of all energy projects, including wind, in order to receive federal money." King Ranch backed unsuccessful legislation earlier this year that would have required the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to establish a permit process to take into account the environmental consequences of wind turbines. relder@statesman.com; 445-3671 Coastal Habitat Alliance Virtually Certain to Take PUC to Court By Michel Angel // Rio Grande Guardian AUSTIN, October 19 - Coastal Habitat Alliance, or CHA, founder and environmental lawyer Jim Blackburn said Friday that he is "virtually certain" they will take the Public Utility Commission of Texas to District Court in Travis County. The coalition wants a hearing to examine the potential impacts from the transmission line to coastal migratory birds, bats, butterflies and other species. On Wednesday, the Public Utility Commission denied the conservation group intervener status in the wind turbine transmission line case in Kenedy County. The coalition of 11 Texas-based and national organizations are working to be included as a participant in the hearings for the 345 kv transmission line through the Laguna Madre coastal region. The two PUC commissioners who voted to reject CHA's standing, Julie Parsley and Barry Smitherman, cited agency precedents of only allowing property owners within 500 feet of a proposed line standing. Chairman Paul Hudson was the lone dissenter, supporting the public's interest in hearing the environmental impact of the power lines. "Traditionally, in cases involving transmission lines, property ownership is the standard," said Terry Hadley, spokesperson for the PUC. Intervener status gives a group or person the ability to participate in contested case hearings. "This decision is legally wrong," said Blackburn. "Public interest groups with definable interest in the development of a transmission line should not be excluded from the process simply because they are not property owners." He said that other state agencies and the federal government grant intervener status, based on things other than property ownership. Blackburn said that there is legal support for a determination that groups with demonstrated economic, recreational, or environmental interests that will be impacted by a transmission line, to participate at the hearing. The transmission line would extend for 21 miles east and west across the county, to serve the 600-turbine industrial wind project. "This is really bad for wind siting," said Elyse Yates, spokesperson for the alliance. "This is the most active migratory pathway in North America. Turbines in the pathway would be problematic. Lines that connect the project to the grid would mean the clearing of habitat for endangered species." Yates said that almost all of the members of the alliance are positive and passionately in support of wind energy. The group supports the responsible siting of any industrial installations, with participation. "All developments within the coastal area should undergo an environmental review process to ensure the integrity of our coastal waters, " said Blackburn. "Siting is paramount," Yates added. She noted that wind projects in West Texas are located in a very different habitat than the coastal wetlands. "Wind energy at the cost of degradation to habitat is so bad," she added. The PUC has no precedent for permitting and policies surrounding the new energy technology. Wind issues, the danger to birds and sensitive ecosystems need to be heard, and the PUC has the ability to hear concerns, said Yates. "This 345 kV transmission line should be thoroughly reviewed and all environmental impacts related to it should be fully explored and carefully considered by the PUC," said Blackburn. "CHA members have a unique and valuable connection to the area affected by this transmission line. By refusing the participation of experts who have come to the table to offer their experience and assistance, the PUC is denying itself and our state the benefit of their knowledge and insight." "Safeguarding one of the world's most unique natural habitats and preserving thousands of migratory birds - many of them government-protected species - is clearly in the best interest of our state. This ruling rejects some of the best resources available from helping the Commission act in the public interest," added Blackburn. Endangered species found in the Laguna Madre region are the peregrine falcon, ocelot, pygmy owl and whooping crane. The CHA formed to protect the migratory flyway of the Texas Gulf Coast and related coastal habitat from the ecological effects of building the infrastructure to the wind project. Millions of birds, including raptors, shorebirds, wading birds and newtropical songbirds migrate twice a year to breeding grounds. Alliance members include the American Bird Conservancy, Armstrong Ranch, Audubon Outdoor Club of Corpus Christi, Coastal Bend Audubon Society, Frontera Audubon Society, Galveston Bay Conservation and Preservation Association, Houston Audubon Society, King Ranch, Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, Matagorda Bay Foundation, and the Travis Audubon Society.
Group to appeal wind farm ruling Corpus Christi Caller-Times Wednesday, September 12, 2007 An alliance of business and environmental groups expects to appeal a judge's ruling against letting the group intervene in the construction of two wind farms in Kenedy County. The Coastal Habitat Alliance, a nine-member conservation group whose representation includes the King and Armstrong ranches, had requested a public hearing with the Public Utility Commission on American Electric Power's application to install a 21-mile, high-voltage transmission line. The line would service wind farm projects for PPM Energy and Babcock and Brown Ltd. in adjacent properties owned by the John G. and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation and the John G. Kenedy Jr. Charitable Trust. Babcock and Brown plans to spend as much as $800 million to build 157 turbines on foundation land. The initial phase of the PPM project calls for 84 turbines on about 15,000 acres owned by the trust. A state administrative law judge ruled Friday that a public hearing was not the forum for review of the project and the group hadn't shown that its members would be affected because the project won't cross their land, according to The Associated Press. Elyse Yates, an Austin attorney representing the alliance, said she is unaware of public meetings to gather comment on the projects and that is one of the main reasons the group would like a hearing. A public hearing was held by PPM Energy at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi in February 2006. Among the coalition's arguments is that 60,000 acres would be irreparably harmed from the infrastructure needed to build and support the turbines, Yates said. Estimates at sites around the country show that 20,000 to 37,000 birds die annually to collisions with wind turbines. Marc Cisneros, CEO of the Kenedy foundation, said radars have been in place on the land for the past two years and said the impact to wildlife and the foundation property's neighbors, the King and Armstrong ranches, would be minimal. "(The group) is using these scare tactics to control what happens in the area," Cisneros said. "They're extremely overstating the balance of things." Cisneros said there is a need for alternative energy and the Babcock and Brown project, which would be on the foundation's land, would help bring in revenue that the foundation would use to continue helping to educate and employ South Texas residents. "Or, you can keep them barefoot and pregnant and not help anyone down here," Cisneros said. Officials with the trust released a statement Tuesday saying their primary responsibility is to administer the trust as expressed by the late Elena Suess Kenedy and her beneficiaries. "We are satisfied that the proposed wind farm project helps advance Mrs. Kenedy's expressed wishes to preserve the ranch ... both in terms of ensuring continued ranching operations, as well as protecting the environmental sensitivities of the area," said the statement. Calls to officials with Babcock and Brown and PPM were not returned Tuesday. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Contact Fanny S. Chirinos at 886-3759 or chirinosf@caller.comhttp://www.caller.com/news/2007/sep/12/group-to-appeal-wind-farm-ruling/ Ruling a setback for groups fighting South Texas wind farms The Associated Press Sept. 11, 2007 PORT MANSFIELD, Texas — An alliance including the King Ranch and environmental groups opposed to the construction of two wind farms in South Texas said it will fight a judge's rejection of its bid to intervene in a case before the Public Utility Commission. The Coastal Habitat Alliance had requested a public hearing into American Electric Power's pending application to build a 21-mile, high-voltage transmission line to serve the projects. The group, which includes the American Bird Conservancy and the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, is opposed to two wind farms planned for Kenedy Ranch property. An administrative law judge ruled Friday that a public hearing was not an appropriate forum for review of the project. The judge said the group hadn't shown that its members would be affected, because the project won't cross their land. The coalition said it will appeal to the commission. Jim Blackburn, a Houston attorney representing the group, said it has "standing to argue for the protection of one of the world's most unique natural habitats as well as the preservation of thousands of migratory birds, many of them government-protected species." The Kenedy Foundation called the ruling a victory for private property rights. Marc Cisneros, chief executive officer of the John G. and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation in Corpus Christi, said he was "glad to see the integrity of government" despite the influence of the King Ranch. Babcock & Brown Ltd., an Australian investment bank, plans to spend up to $800 million to build 157 turbines on a lease secured from the foundation. The initial phase of a project by PPM Energy of Portland, Ore., calls for 84 turbines on about 15,000 acres owned by the John G. Kenedy Jr. Charitable Trust. Walt Kittelberger, founder of the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation in Port Mansfield, said the proposed wind farms could threaten the migratory flyway and tourism based on visiting birds. Cisneros said a two-year study found that the wind farms wouldn't affect with migratory birds. Blackburn said the alliance's appeal will argue construction of a transmission line would destroy as much as 60,000 acres of coastal habitat and threaten migratory birds. *The AP story above was posted on the following sites:
Austin American-Statesman:
Houston Chronicle:
KGBT-TV (CBS affiliate - Rio Grande Valley):
KRGV-TV (ABC affiliate – Harlingen, Weslaco, McAllen, Brownsville):
KTEN-TV (NBC affiliate – Dennison):
KTRE-TV (ABC affiliate – Lufkin/Nacogdoches):
KTRK-TV (ABC affiliate – Houston):
KXAN-TV (NBC affiliate – Austin):
San Antonio Express-News: Groups seeking public hearing on proposed wind farms Valley Morning Star September 10, 2007 PORT MANSFIELD — Environmental groups will appeal a judge's ruling that denied a public hearing into construction of a transmission line for two proposed wind farms planned in Kenedy County, attorneys said Monday. Friday, a state judge denied the Coastal Habitat Alliance's request for a public hearing into the construction of a transmission line that would carry electricity from two proposed wind farms planned south of Baffin Bay. The coalition of groups that includes the King Ranch, the American Bird Conservancy and the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation "expressed extreme disappointment" but will appeal to the Texas Public Utility Commission, attorneys said. The group has "standing to argue for the protection of one of the world's most unique natural habitats as well as the preservation of thousands of migratory birds, many of them government-protected species," Jim Blackburn, a Houston attorney representing the group, said in a press release. In his decision, Judge Michael Field ruled a public hearing was not "the appropriate forum for that review." "None of the (group's) members own land that will be crossed by the proposed (project)," Fields wrote in his ruling. "The (group) has shown no direct affect of this proposed (project) on any of its members." The Kenedy Foundation called the ruling a victory for private property rights. "I'm glad to see the integrity of government despite the (influence) of the King Ranch," said Marc Cisneros, chief executive officer of the Kenedy Foundation in Corpus Christi. Babcock & Brown Ltd., an Australian investment bank, and PPM, an energy company, each plans to develop wind farms with a total of about 300 wind turbines on the Kenedy Ranch, Cisneros said. The companies plan to build the wind farms about seven miles west of the Intracoastal Waterway, south of Baffin Bay, Cisneros said. A two-year study monitored radar that showed the site did not lie along the migratory flyway, Cisneros said. But environmentalists arguedd that the 400 feet tall wind turbines would stand along the major flyway used by migratory birds across much of the Western Hemisphere. "All we're asking for is a public hearing. It's the public's money after all. All this (resembles) taxation without representation," said Walt Kittelberger, founder of the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation in Port Mansfield. "It was not unexpected. (The PUC) hasn't been open-minded at all. I think it was set in stone a long time ago." The proposed wind farms could threaten the Rio Grande Valley's burgeoning eco-tourism industry that was built around birds along the migratory flyway, Kittelberger said. In its appeal to PUC commissioners, the Coastal Habitat Alliance will argue construction of a transmission line would destroy as much as 60,000 acres of coastal habitat and threaten migatory birds, Blackburn said. The group could also appeal to Travis County District Court and federal courts, he said. "It's a long ways from over," Kittelberger said. http://www.valleymorningstar.com/news/public_9775___article.html/proposed_hearing.html Groups to fight ruling in wind farm case San Antonio Express-News Monday, September 10, 2007 An environmental alliance that opposes two large wind farms planned for the Texas Gulf Coast will appeal a ruling that the group cannot intervene in a case now before the Public Utility Commission. The Coastal Habitat Alliance had sought to intervene in a pending application before the PUC by American Electric Power to build a 21-mile, high-voltage transmission line to serve the project. It also wants the PUC to hold public hearings on the project. But Friday, it got a setback when an administrative law judge rejected its request. "I believe this ruling is legally incorrect," said Jim Blackburn, attorney for the nine-member group formed to protect a migratory bird flyway from the wind project. A spokesman said the alliance would ask the three PUC commissioners to reverse the judge's ruling and allow it to participate. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA091107.2B.windfarm.c0c1e330.html Location a Valid Reason to Fight Wind FarmsBy Walt Kittelberger Not in my back yard, or NIMBY, is a perfectly valid reason to oppose the development of certain projects. Often, people or organizations are marginalized and ridiculed for using NIMBY as their reason for opposition. I maintain that NIMBY is not only a valid argument, but in point of fact the basis for most, if not all, disputes involving private property. Such is the case for the wind farms planned for the Kenedy Ranch near the west shoreline of the Laguna Madre. At first glance, it seems outrageous for anyone to oppose or infringe on any landowners’ right to build something within the confines of their own fences. If only it were so simple. This is very similar to the cases involving the industrial-scale shrimp farms that were built near the Laguna Madre some years ago. When the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation first opposed these “farms,” we were labeled environmental alarmists meddling in the affairs of landowners. Shrimp farms started discharging millions of gallons of untreated or undertreated wastewater into the Arroyo Colorado and started stinking up the whole area. Once these aquatic feedlots were unmasked, people took a rather different view of just how much freedom their shrimp farm neighbors should have. Should your neighbor have the right to make your property less livable, enjoyable and valuable? There were no regulations back then and the state of Texas, in its zeal to foster a new industry, allowed shrimp farmers to do as they pleased. Only after the LLMF and other organizations joined forces did the state finally step in and impose much-needed regulations on this industry. Unfortunately, profound damage was done and substantial public money was wasted in the process. The LLMF spent tens of thousands of dollars to protect property owners and the Laguna from this threat. We are quite proud of the role we played. The same sad story is about to be repeated. Instead of shrimp farmers, this time it is wind farmers and, once again, the LLMF is the first organization to step up to the plate and try to bring some reason to a situation before it gets out of hand. The state should step in and do what needs to be done but, sadly, the state is more concerned with being the No. 1 producer of wind energy and refuses to even look at the potential down sides. One elected official who is paying attention is District 43 state Rep. Juan Escobar. In a recent conversation with a spokesman for Rep. Escobar, the topic of coastal wind farms was discussed. Like most reasonable people, Rep. Escobar feels that the environmental concerns of groups like the LLMF need to be taken seriously when it comes to building wind farms in sensitive areas like the shores of the Laguna Madre. Location, location, location! Like most informed people, the LLMF understands that there is a need for renewable energy. We simply ask that care be taken as to where to locate these industrial wind farms. The size of a modern wind turbine is roughly 400 feet tall, with some as tall as 600 feet. When you consider that they plan to build many hundreds of these turbines along the Laguna without any meaningful regulations as to where they locate them or even an environmental assessment, I think you can see the LLMF’s concern. The wind industry has a checkered past when it comes to harming property values, birds and bats. To find more information about wind farms, visit our Web site at www.lowerlagunamadre-foundation.com. To locate huge industrial wind farms along the Laguna Madre is foolish. The Laguna and the adjacent ranchlands are prime habitat for many species of birds, bats and other animals that would be negatively impacted by these farms. The busiest flyway for migrating birds in the Western Hemisphere is in close proximity to the planned location of the Kenedy Ranch wind farm. This is a terrible location and one that is sure to result in the deaths of many birds and bats. In a recent letter to the LLMF, the National Audubon Society’s executive director, Anne Brown, wrote, “We recognize the importance of the Laguna Madre as a migratory pathway and habitat for birds. Audubon Texas works on a daily basis to conserve and restore this important habitat. “We recognize wind power has the potential to be a great alternative source of energy, but some wind farms have caused unnecessarily high rates of bird mortality,” she wrote. If the citizens of Arizona allowed wind farmers to ring the Grand Canyon with turbines, would you say nothing just because it was in their back yard? I think most people would say the Grand Canyon is a national treasure and should be left alone for future generations to enjoy. To my way of thinking, the Laguna Madre is no less beautiful and worthy of the same protections. The fact that the Laguna Madre happens to be in the LLMF’s backyard should not be a disqualifier. Kittelberger is chairman of the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation. Conservationists Lose Wind Farm Ruling By Janet Elliott // Houston Chronicle AUSTIN — A divided Public Utility Commission shut the door Wednesday on conservationists' efforts to air concerns about the effect of planned Gulf Coast wind farms on migratory birds. The groups sought to intervene in an application for a 21-mile transmission line that would run through the sparsely populated Kenedy Ranch. It is envisioned to bring power from hundreds of wind turbines that eventually may be turning along the Gulf Coast. The Coastal Habitat Alliance, a coalition that includes area Audubon Societies and other groups working to preserve the coast, along with the King Ranch and Armstrong Ranch, said the east-west power lines would cross a major north-south migratory flyway. Commissioners Julie Caruthers Parsley and Barry Smitherman said that the alliance couldn't intervene because none of its members owns land within 500 feet of the route for the wires. Chairman Paul Hudson dissented, saying it would be in the public's interest for the commission to hear about the environmental impact and that denying the intervention would prevent the PUC from ever looking at the alliance's argument. Because the wind generation facility is proposed for an area of the state that was deregulated under a 1999 state law, no permit is required to erect the turbines. But the commission still regulates the placement of transmission lines. The lines would be built by Electric Transmission Texas, a joint venture of American Electric Power and Midamerican Energy Holdings Co. Other companies would construct the turbines. The PUC will continue reviewing the transmission line application, agency spokesman Terry Hadley said. He said he did not know when the case might be finalized. Environmental lawyer Jim Blackburn, founder of the Coastal Habitat Alliance, said the group may take the issue to court. "We think that the commission was legally wrong," Blackburn said. "Public interest groups with definable interest in the development of a transmission line should not be excluded from the process simply because they are not property owners." The venture that would build the proposed transmission line, in filings with the PUC, said the "true purpose" of the alliance intervention is to stop the construction of the two wind farms. A preliminary assessment of potential impacts from the wind farms, conducted for the alliance by EDM International of Fort Collins, Colo., found potential threats to local and migrating bird populations in South Texas. The wind industry has said the installation would not harm migrating birds. Blackburn said the transmission lines might not result in daily kills but could prove deadly when bad weather and other factors force birds to fly at lower altitudes. But he said the real danger is from the turbines. "The coastal migratory bird corridor is unique certainly in Texas and in the United States," he said. Smitherman said it would be up to the Legislature to establish a process for hearing issues related to wind farms. Several lawmakers weighed in on the dispute with letters to the PUC. Rep. Joe Straus, R-San Antonio, asked that the alliance be granted intervenor status. "I am simply asking that in conducting your review of the application before you, you allow for a fair and open hearing process with input and full participation from these credible intervenors regarding the environmental impacts to this most important region of the Texas coast," Straus said. But a Panhandle lawmaker, State Affairs Committee Chairman David Swinford, R-Dumas, said that "special interest groups who do not meet the statutory and regulatory criteria for standing should not be allowed to infringe on the private property rights of the Kenedy Ranch." "Laguna Madre Wrong Place for Wind Farm" By Jim Blackburn // Valley Morning Star Two developers are pushing to build large wind farms on the Texas Gulf Coast, the last great habitat area of the United States. The Lower Laguna Madre region of the coast is not only one of America’s most active migratory bird routes, it also includes coastal prairies, oak mottes, sand dunes, freshwater wetlands, wind tidal flats and coastal marshes, all providing habitat for wildlife. The Laguna Madre is one of only three hypersaline bays in the world; its waters and sea grass meadows hold extremely productive wetlands for shrimp, fish, shellfish and waterfowl. Texas has an abundance of wind in many areas and this year outpaced California as the nation’s top producer of wind power. More importantly, it has an abundance of locations where industrial wind power projects not only make economic sense, but environmental sense as well. However, the proposed site in the Laguna Madre isn’t one of them. For all the benefits that wind power could bring, it’s important to understand the very real impact these industrial wind power projects would have on this sensitive area. Roads and turbine construction would fragment more than 60,000 acres of undeveloped habitat. Each windmill covers more than an acre of airspace, as its 100-foot blades spin and each turbine requires 1,000 tons of concrete to anchor it to the ground. This project would include more than 21 miles of new electrical towers to support the high-voltage transmission line. More roads, more cranes, more impact. That kind of construction might make sense in West Texas, where wind is plenti-ful and the land is resilient, but it just doesn’t make sense in a sensitive ecosystem like the Laguna Madre. The harms from construction are only part of the problem with this site. Millions of migrating birds pass through the Laguna Madre and rely on the coastal habitats for shelter and food. Studies show that between 20,000 and 37,000 birds are killed by wind turbines per year from collisions. Bad weather could force tens of thousands of migrating birds to be forced from higher altitudes down into the rotor-swept area. This is a perfect example of a good idea in the wrong place. That’s why groups ranging from The Nature Conservancy and Environmental Defense to the members of the Coastal Habitat Alliance have raised concerns about this project. These groups understand the potential benefit that more wind power will bring to Texas, but they also believe that the environmental benefit must outweigh the environmental cost. To that end, these groups have urged the Public Utility Commission of Texas to require a public input process and more study before approving the project. The PUC hasn’t agreed or refused yet, but the wind power companies have argued that the PUC doesn’t even get a say when it comes to the construction of the wind turbines themselves. Wind companies across the country are watching this proposal carefully. Will these construction projects receive the scrutiny and attention their massive footprints deserve? Or will they get a free pass and be allowed to threaten the very environment their marketing brochures say they are trying to protect? Depending on PUC’s answers, the landscape of Texas’ sensitive regions could be forever changed. Wind power will be part of Texas future. In the right locations, it can be a very positive and profitable part. But everything has a place. And the Laguna Madre is a place for vastness, clean water, birds and nature, not concrete, steel and rotor-swept areas creating a hemispheric threat to migratory birds. The public should have a say in the matter. Blackburn is founder of the Coastal Habitat Alliance, based in Houston. "Study Finds Wind Farm May Harm Birds" By Melissa McEver // Valley Morning Star Two proposed wind farms on Kenedy Ranch could pose “significant” risk to migrating birds, according to a preliminary environmental study comissioned by an environmental group. The Coastal Habitat Alliance, a group of 11 organizations that opposes the wind farms, commissioned Colorado-based EDM International to perform the assessment. A preliminary draft that report was released Monday. But the two companies who plan to build the wind farms say they have conducted their own studies and found the electric-generating turbines pose little risk to birds. After visiting the wind-farm sites, the environmental consultants concluded that the wind projects would be too close to active bird migration pathways and that bird fatalities could result. The consultants are working on a more extensive study, which likely will be completed in about 6 weeks, said Elyse Yates, a spokeswoman for Coastal Habitat Alliance, which paid the consultants to conduct the assessment. “(The environmental consultants have) done a lot of work with wind companies and have extensive siting experience,” Yates said. “They are experts in this area.” Members of the alliance include King Ranch, the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, Frontera Audubon Society and American Bird Conservancy, among others. PPM Energy, a subsidiary of Spain-based Iberdrola, and Australia-based Babcock & Brown are planning to build the wind projects on Kenedy Ranch. The projects should be operational by late 2008, company representatives have said. When complete, about 250 turbines will be located on the ranch, producing about 388 megawatts of electricity — enough to power about 90,000 homes. Placing wind turbines on a remote portion of Kenedy Ranch could have serious impacts on migratory birds, the alliance-commissioned assessment says. One concern, according to the consultants, is the number of birds who use the ranch as a “fallout” habitat, meaning migrating birds tend to “fall out” of the sky during long journeys to rest along marshes and wetlands on the Gulf Coast. A portion of the wind-farm site is covered by wetlands. The report recommends that the companies follow a U.S. Fish and Wildlife service protocol when deciding what sites are best for wind projects. The companies also should undertake their own assessments, determining the risk to birds. PPM Energy has conducted its own studies and “stands behind” its project, spokeswoman Jan Johnson said Monday. “We have done extensive avian studies since August 2004,” Johnson said. “We’ve found in our studies that the site is a good one for wind power and for economic development.” Johnson said the company has provided copies of its studies to the Sierra Club, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and several other environmental organizations. Babcock & Brown representatives say the company also has conducted migratory bird assessments, and believe the birds fly west of the site and wouldn’t be affected. “We’ve conducted extensive studies over the past three years by onsite ornithologists and biologists using state-of-the-art radar technology to study local avian species, including habitat and migratory patterns,” said Matt Dallas, spokesman for Babcock & Brown. “These in-depth, on-the-ground studies found there were no endangered species in the area of the project and that there would be no material impact on any avian species or their habitats.” Coastal Habitat Alliance members said they haven’t seen the companies’ studies, and that they want the results to be made public. “We hope that by bringing in some recognized experts, we can encourage them to release their own studies, or conduct new ones,” Yates said. The alliance is releasing this report in time for a Public Utility Commision of Texas hearing Wednesday, at which AEP Texas is requesting the go-ahead to construct a transmission line connecting to the wind farms. The commission has agreed to consider the alliance’s request for intervenor status in the line’s construction. Towering Turbines: Installations Could Blow an Ill Wind for Birds and Bats By Richard Moore // Valley Morning Star The state’s first coastal wind turbine industrial complex is under construction in South Texas, and it is generating a storm of controversy throughout the state and nation. Improperly sited wind turbine installations are well-documented killers of birds and bats, and Texas has virtually no regulation of where these facilities are located. Between 500 and 600 towering wind turbines are planned for construction on lands administered by the Kenedy Trust and Kenedy Foundation, with the first windmills spinning as early as the spring of 2008. One facility is backed by Spanish utility giant Iberdrola and the other is being built by Australian investment firm Babcock and Brown. The combined projects could impact more than 60,000 acres of coastal prairie and wetlands, transforming vital wildlife habitat into a vast energy generation and transmission complex. Placement of wind turbines along the lower Texas coast would have a profound impact on the region. Each tower is some 300 feet tall and each blade about 100 feet in length, and with the blade in the upright position the entire array looms 400 feet skyward. The blades whirl at speeds approaching 200 miles per hour and sweep over an acre of air. A typical South Texas water tower that can be seen for miles is about 100 feet tall. Jack Hunt, President of the King Ranch and neighbor to the Kenedy Ranch, has been a consistent opponent of coastal wind farms. “It is a bad site. It is probably the worst site you could find anywhere for an industrial wind turbine facility,” Hunt said. Many others share Hunt’s bleak assessment. A coalition of 11 Texas-based and national organizations have banded together to form the Coastal Habitat Alliance, CHA, including the King Ranch, Armstrong Ranch, American Bird Conservancy, Frontera Audubon Society and Lower Laguna Madre Foundation. The CHA opposes the proposed wind power project because it could cause significant harm to migratory birds, endangered species, wetlands and the Laguna Madre. “One of the issues that we have is that although Texas is the leading state in terms of numbers of wind turbines, there have been zero published reports of environmental studies prior to the General Land Office granting permits,” Dr. Michael Fry of the American Bird Conservancy based in The Plains, Virg, said. Fry is a member of the National Wind Coordinating Committee comprised of representatives from the utility, wind industry, environmental and government sectors. According to the NWCC, wind turbines in the United States kill between 30,000 to 60,000 birds a year, including golden eagles and more than 50 species of songbirds. “At the current mortality rate and growth rate of the wind industry, by 2030 a projected 900,000 to 1.8 million birds would be killed per year by wind turbines, unless protective measures are implemented,” Fry said. However, this figure may well be underestimated, as the wind industry is essentially self regulating, particularly in Texas. “The reason why there have not been more birds killed by turbines is that they have not been built anywhere as ‘birdy’ as the lower Texas coast,” Walt Kittelberger, President of the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, said. The need for renewable energy is widely supported, and that includes members of the CHA, but there is often a tragic hidden cost to the development of poorly-sited wind turbine industrial complexes. One of the worst examples of wind farm placement is the infamous Altamont Pass east of San Francisco. A 2004 report by the California Energy Commission found that 880 to 1,300 raptors were killed at Altamont every year, including red-tailed hawks and golden eagles. Two major flyways, the Central and Mississippi, converge along the coastal plains of southernmost Texas, and millions of birds migrate through in the spring and fall. “The majority of neotropical migrants east of the Rockies first make landfall on the coast of Texas,” Dr. Andrew Kasner, Director of Bird Conservation Audubon Texas, said. “Millions of birds cross or travel along the Texas coast every spring and fall. If severe impacts to these birds occurred in Texas, there could be ramifications for populations on a continental scale. The question is, do we want to risk this uncertainty in an area with such sensitivity?” Despite the potential loss of native and migratory birds and bats along coastal wind farm sites and massive fragmentation of habitat, neither the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department require environmental impact studies or permitting for wind farm construction on private land. Voluntary environmental assessments have been conducted by the companies set to erect turbines along the coastal migratory corridor in Kenedy County. The studies have been reviewed by both the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and Texas Parks and Wildlife Department biologists. Neither agency has filed an objection to site construction. “Our studies indicate the project would have minimal impact,” said Jan Johnson, Communication Director for PPM energy of Oregon, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iberdrola and represents their interests in the United States. “Small numbers of raptors and relatively few migratory birds pass through the area proposed for wind development.” However, industry-funded assessments have not been as rigorous as many would like to see, and while the potential for bird kills remain a major concern, the likelihood of significant bat mortality may be even greater. “I am unaware of any credible study that would show that this coastal wind turbine facility would not be a problem for bats,” Dr. Merlin Tuttle, President of Bat Conservation International, BCI, in Austin, said. Bats are of tremendous economic value to the state’s agricultural sector and are worth literally millions of dollars annually. According to BCI, bats in the Texas Hill Country consume 1,000 tons of insects nightly. “As we are doing more and more accurate monitoring, we are finding that the problem is far more widespread than we initially realized for high bat kills going on from the Appalachians in the northeast to the prairies of Alberta, Canada and the farming areas of the central United States,” Tuttle said. Wind turbine complexes, such as the Maple Ridge Wind Power Project in New York, kill thousands of bats annually, and Tuttle believes there may be an insidious cause. “I think there is a lot we are yet going to discover, and the thing that is scariest is that all available evidence suggests that the bats are actually attracted to turbines,” Tuttle revealed. “There are multiple hypotheses, but I personally think that the bats are queuing on low frequency sounds from the turbines. Bats use low frequency sounds to assist them in finding feeding grounds. We are conducting studies right now that will help elucidate these issues. “We don’t know nearly enough about the risks or the solutions we would employ if they turn out to be as bad as we think they may be,” Tuttle said. “Until we know more about the risks, we should not be building in high-risk areas, and certainly this coastal migration flyway is one of the most high-risk areas in all of North America.” A 21-mile long transmission line is proposed to link the Kenedy Ranch wind turbine complex to the grid. In an effort to establish some type of regulatory authority regarding the development of wind power projects, the CHA will appear before the Public Utility Commission, PUC, on Oct. 17 to request “intervener” status in the transmission line approval process. It is the position of the CHA that a failure of the PUC to review the wind power projects would violate the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, which requires a regulatory process over all energy generation facilities in the coastal region, as well as guaranteed public participation in the permitting process. According to the CHA, if these requirements are not upheld, Texas could be at risk of losing millions in federal funding currently used to protect the Texas coast. Change in the Wind? Sep. 30, 2007 Debate swirls about turbines' effect on migrating birds By Melissa McEver // Valley Morning Star NORIAS — Out of sight doesn’t mean out of mind to Dave Delaney, general manager of King Ranch. From this stretch of the King family’s property north of Raymondville, he might not be able to see the nearly 250 large, whirling wind turbines that soon will be built on about 20,000 acres of nearby Kenedy Ranch. But that doesn’t mean their presence won’t affect King Ranch or the birds that migrate through this area, he said. “We think this coastal habitat is too sensitive for this (wind project),” Delaney said. “It involves thousands of acres, hundreds of miles of roads, huge, turning blades … we feel there should be some public input.” King Ranch is one of 11 regional and state organizations, including the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, Frontera Audubon Society and American Bird Conservancy, that have united in their opposition to two proposed wind farms in Kenedy County that are scheduled to be up and running by late 2008. Known as the Coastal Habitat Alliance, these groups differ in their support of wind energy — Delaney, for example, says it doesn’t provide sufficient power to replace fossil fuels; other groups say they’re champions of “green” energy. But they agree on one thing: the Kenedy property is the wrong place to put turbines. “On this particular site, the infrastructure will have a different impact,” said Elyse Yates, a spokeswoman for the alliance. “The land is different than for other projects, because it’s on coastal marshland … it’s more ecologically diverse than the (Florida) Everglades. “One of our biggest questions is what will the impact be? Nobody really knows.” Two companies — PPM Energy, a subsidiary of Spain-based Iberdrola, and Australia-based Babcock & Brown — are planning the wind projects. The two farms together would produce about 388 megawatts of electricity, at least in the first phase of construction, according to an AEP Texas filing with the Public Utility Commission of Texas. AEP is requesting the go-ahead from PUC to construct an electricity transmission line connecting to the wind farms. The farms would supply enough electricity to power about 90,000 homes, according to figures from the Energy Information Administration. The companies say that they are trying to minimize the projects’ impact on habitat and birds, and it’s “unfortunate” that the alliance is opposing the projects. “We think it’s a great project with a great story — we’re offering clean, renewable energy for the state,” said Chris Shugart, project developer for the Babcock & Brown wind farm. Environmental impact Despite the companies’ reassurances, alliance members say they are concerned about the wind projects’ impact on endangered and threatened bird species in the region, as well as on the coastal habitat. The tall turbines and their fast-spinning blades could lead to substantial bird kills, the groups say. The needed infrastructure — including concrete bases for the towers and roads running throughout the site — will deplete natural habitat, they said. Wind turbines made today typically have towers from 200 to 260 feet tall, with rotors from 150 to 260 feet in diameter, according to the National Wind Coordinating Committee. At their tips, the blades can turn as fast as 138 to 182 miles per hour. Bird fatality rates at other wind-turbine sites have varied widely, from less than one bird per turbine at a site in Oregon to 10 per turbine at a site in Tennessee. The average, according to the National Wind Coordinating Committee, is two per turbine per year. The companies counter that they’ve conducted assessments of the bird populations in the area, and concluded the turbines would cause minimal bird fatalities. “Since 2004, we’ve been doing migrating bird studies, breeding bird studies,” said Jan Johnson, spokeswoman for PPM Energy. According to PPM, these studies have shown, for example, that raptors like the aplomado falcon — one of the species of concern to the alliance — fly west of the site and wouldn’t be affected. Babcock & Brown has come to similar conclusions, Shugart said. Also, the company is planning to construct turbines and the connecting roads so as to minimally disturb wetlands, he said. “We’ve worked with local environmental agencies and the Army Corps of Engineers on the project, on avoiding the wetlands,” Shugart said. Most of the land will remain undisturbed, he said. “It’s not like a sprawling Wal-Mart parking lot,” Shugart said. However, because the companies have generally funded their own studies, and in some cases haven’t made the results public, alliance members are unconvinced. “It’s not the same as having people from environmental agencies, qualified biologists, discuss the studies that need to be done,” said David Newstead, president of the Coastal Bend Audubon Society. “It needs to be legitimate, peer-reviewed research … in Texas there are essentially no studies like that.” Nearby Baffin Bay and the Laguna Madre area sees many species of birds migrating year-round, Newstead said. Shorebirds like the white-faced ibis, osprey, egrets, sandpipers and little blue heron frequent these coastal wetlands, he said. A recent helicopter flight over the proposed wind-farm sites revealed a chain of wetland ponds, with flocks of shorebirds stopping to drink and rest. Other than a few roads and quail runs for hunting, the land looks close to untouched. “It’s hard to think (the farms) wouldn’t have some impact on these species,” Newstead said. Jumping into the fray Because the projects are being built on privately owned land, no public hearings are required in the construction process. So the alliance has taken its fight to the Public Utility Commission of Texas. On Oct. 17, the PUC will consider AEP’s request to construct a transmission line to the wind farms, and the alliance has filed for “intervenor” status in that request. If granted, the alliance could ask for an environmental-impact study of the projects, Yates said. At first, it appeared the environmental groups wouldn’t have a chance to comment — last month, a state administrative judge denied the alliance’s request to intervene. But later in the month, the PUC agreed to consider the groups’ request after all. “We see that as a really good sign,” Yates said. The companies say they don’t necessarily object to the alliance having a say in wind-energy projects. However, the arguments against the Kenedy County projects haven’t convinced the entities who have heard them so far, said Johnson of PPM Energy. “The state administrative judge did not grant standing for them after weighing the arguments,” she said. The Texas Legislature also hasn’t agreed to impose more regulations on wind energy, as some environmental groups have requested, she said. Delaney, of King Ranch, acknowledged he is frustrated with the “mad rush” to construct wind farms on the Texas coast and offshore without environmental protections. But constructing a wind farm on this site in particular isn’t a good idea, he said. “Just because (wind farms) don’t produce any carbon emissions doesn’t mean there aren’t any problems with them,” he said. Wind Farm Opponents to Appeal to the PUC Sep. 30, 2007 Anton Caputo Express-News Staff Writer The Public Utility Commission of Texas has agreed to consider at its Oct. 17 meeting whether a coalition of conservation organizations can fight two wind farms proposed for the Texas Coast. "We're very pleased that they will listen to our point of view," said Winnie Burkett of the Houston Audubon Society. "We think there should be public input to this kind of decision. We're worried because these wind farms and this transmission line are in the middle of a major migratory corridor." Australian-based Babcock & Brown Ltd and PPM Energy, which is owned by the Spanish company Iberdrola, want to build the first wind farms on the Texas Coast in Kenedy County. The Coastal Habitat Alliance, a combination of the King Ranch and local and national environmental organizations, is fighting the plans. Because permits are not needed to site power generation facilities in Texas, the group is fighting the transmission line that would serve the farms' 241 turbines. An administrative law judge has already denied the alliance status to protest the project. The alliance asked the PUC to overturn that ruling, which the PUC has now agreed to consider. "If this hadn't happened, we would be out of luck," said alliance attorney James Blackburn. PUC Agrees to Consider Windfarms Challenge Sept. 30, 2007 VALLEY MORNING STAR The Coastal Habitat Alliance, with includes the Lower Laguna Madre Foundation, Frontera Audubon Society and King Ranch, among others, announced Friday that the Public Utility Commission has agreed to hear the group’s appeal to intervene in the permitting process for two wind projects. The two proposed farms – one owned by Spain-based Iberdrola and the other by Australia-basedBabcock & Brown – would cover a total of about 60,000 acres of land on the Kenedy Ranch, said Elyse Yates, spokeswoman for the alliance. The investors are requesting a permit for a 345-kilovolt transmission line that would connect the wind turbines to the electric grid. Alliance members have said the wind farms would be in the flyway for several endangered and threatened bird species. Also, the construction of about 300 turbines could mean destroyed habitat, soil erosion and interruption of water flow to wetlands on the ranch, alliance members said. The hearing will be held Oct. 17 in Austin. |
| Alliance opposes ST wind farms: Groups say habitat, birds to be
affected August 29, 2007 By FERNANDO DEL VALLE/VALLEY MORNING STAR |
© 2007 Coastal Habitat Alliance. All Rights reserved.