View
4
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Impact of Wind Energy Development: Perception and Realties
What Drives Growing Opposition to Wind Power Projects
Jay VincentSVP – Energy Sector Practice Leader
Anaheim, CAMay 2011
Overview
• Review 2010 Saint Index Results
• High Level Review of Key Opposition Drivers
• Review of Strategies to Deal with Opposition
US Political Climate for Real Estate Development
The NIMBY Dilemma: Americans say they are more willing to support new development but also say their hometown does not need any new
development.
• 67% of Americans believe the relationship between developers and elected officials makes the approval process unfair – DEEP CYNICISM
• 73% grade their community a C or worse when it comes to deciding what does and does not get permitted – LACK OF TRUST
US Political Climate for Real Estate Development
74% of Americans Oppose Any Development In There Community
US Political Climate for Real Estate Development
MID – ATLANTIC top NIMBY region
MIDWEST most welcoming to development
Key Drivers to Opposition to Wind Energy Projects
1. Saint Index Survey Findings: Fear, Property Values, etc…
2. Education Gap
3. Method of Communication and Grassroots Education
4. Competitive Pressures
Strategies for Mitigating Opposition
1. Early political and opposition risk analysis
2. Fill education gap in a grassroots way
3. Respond directly and often to opposition fear mongering
4. Begin outreach early and before opposition arises
WIND ENERGY SECTOR PRACTICE
Over 30 controversial wind projects of 4000 MW company wide
Highly trained staff in specifically wind energy issues
Jay VincentSVP – Energy Sector Practice Leader312-212-8889 directvincent@tscg.biz
NEXT PRESENTATION
Robert O’NeilEpsilon Associates, Principal
Low Frequency Sound and Infrasound From Wind Turbines
Low Frequency Sound and Infrasound from Wind Turbines
Robert D. O’Neal, CCM, INCERobert D. Hellweg, Jr., INCE Bd. CertifiedRichard M. Lampeter, INCEEpsilon Associates, Inc.
May 24, 2011
The issue of Low Frequency Noise (LFN) and Infrasound are often raised during permitting
• “…significant issues related to audible low frequency noise of a persistent, pulsatile nature, such as created by wind turbines.” [from sworn affidavit filed in wind energy case]
• NextEra Energy Resources commissioned a comprehensive, scientific study to answer this recurring question
Purpose of this presentation is to summarize a scientific study that evaluated LFN and Infrasound
1. Literature search2. Field measurement program3. Comparison to criteria
What is Low Frequency Noise & Infrasound?
• Audible range: 20 Hz – 20,000 Hz
• Low Frequency: 12.5 Hz – 200 Hz
• Infrasound: Below 20 Hz
Guidelines/criteria for three areas of reaction were used to evaluate LFN and Infrasound
Can I hear it? [Audibility criteria]
Can I feel it? [Wall vibration and rattle criteria]
Is it annoying? [Disturbance/annoyance guidelines]
Development and Discussion of Criteria
Audibility ISO 226:2003 for 20 Hz to 160 Hz Watanabe and Moeller for 4 Hz to 20 Hz
Vibration and Rattle CriteriaANSI/ASA S12.2-2008 (indoor)ANSI/ASA S12.9 Part 4 (outdoor)
Disturbance/annoyance GuidelinesUK Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) proposed one-third octave band LFN criteria for use by environmental health officers.ANSI/ASA S12.2-2008 (indoor)ANSI/ASA S12.9 Part 4 (outdoor)
Data were collected for the two most common wind turbines in NextEra fleet• GE 1.5sle (1.5 MW)• Siemens SWT-2.3-93 (2.3 MW)• Horse Hollow Wind Farm, Taylor County, TX• Data collected at 1,000 feet and 1,500 feet from
strings of turbines.• Four houses used for interior/exterior
Sound levels were measured under period of maximum electrical power and light ground winds
Siemens turbines – outdoor measurements
Sample #34 = 1,847 kW; hub wind ~10.3 m/s; ground wind = 3.3 m/sSample #39 = 1,608 kW; hub wind ~9.7 m/s; ground wind = 3.4 m/s
Siemens turbines – indoor measurements
Window closed = 1,884 kW; hub wind ~10.3 m/s; ground wind = 3.2 m/sWindow open = 1,564 kW; hub wind ~9.6 m/s; ground wind = 3.7 m/s
Conclusions
Wind farms with Siemens SWT-2.3-93 and GE 1.5sle wind turbines at maximum noise do not pose LFN or Infrasound problem at 1,000 feet or more.
• Meet ANSI/ASA S12.2 indoor levels for LFN in bedrooms, classrooms and hospitals;
• Meet ANSI/ASA S12.2 indoor levels for perceptible vibration in walls/ceilings;
• Meet ANSI S12.9 Part 4 thresholds for annoyance and beginning of rattles;
• Meet UK DEFRA disturbance guidelines;
• Have no audible infrasound;
• Might have slightly audible LFN at 50 Hz and above depending on other LFN source levels.
1.800.580.3765 • WWW.TETRATECH.COM
Cultural Resources:Connecting DevelopersWith Local Communities
AWEA WINDPOWER 2011May 24, 2011
Sydne B. Marshall, PhD, RPANational Cultural Resources Discipline Lead
sydne.marshall@tetratech.com973-630-8104
Goals of Presentation
Use cultural resources to connect with local communities
View cultural resources issues as you would other environmental issues
Present strategies for successful cultural resource management that save time, money, and headache
Broader View of Cultural Resources
Oregon Trail marked by wagon wheel rutsRock pile
Native American stone tools
Broader View of Cultural Resources
Hunting cabin in West Virginia Monticello in Virginia
Cultural resources include examples of vernacular and high design
Broader View of Cultural Resources
Landscapes and locations of local and national significance are other examples of types of cultural resources
Ground Zero, NY Three Mile Island, PA
Not All Cultural Resources Are Significant
Criteria For Listing in National Register of Historic Places - 36 CFR 60 Districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects that embody the quality of
significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture
A. associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history;
B. associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;C. embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or
method of construction; work of a master, significant and distinguishable entity;
D. yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history
National Register-Eligible Resources
Your cultural contractors make recommendations about resource eligibility using the National Register criteria
The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) makes determinations of eligibility
Federal law treats NRHP-eligible cultural resources and those listed in the NRHP equally
Locally Important Cultural Resources
Communities may have resources they deem locally important using their own criteria
Host communities may request avoidance of impacts to selected local resources
These local ‘landmarks’ may warrant further attention by a developer
Cultural Resources Identified In Project Area
Cultural resources in your Project Area do not signal the end of your Project
Reap Benefit From Cultural Resources
Use cultural resources as a gateway for communication with locals and an avenue for community support
Choose to identify cultural resources in Project Area, even if not required
Connect with local community by respecting local cultural heritage
Invest in addressing cultural resources to gain support from community, state regulators, and investors
Manage Cultural Resources Issues
Follow same paradigm as managing other environmental issues
• Establish baseline conditions
• Perform on-the-ground surveys
• Evaluate if inventoried resources qualify as significant
• Consider if impacts to significant or locally important resources may be avoided
If Impacts Cannot Be Avoided
Work with local community to understand historic preservation preferences
• Keep relevant permitting agencies involved and informed
• Consider mitigations that will be acceptable to your company and that would be locally meaningful
Strategies that Save Time, Money, and Create Good Will
Strategy 1 – Involve Cultural Resources Specialists in the Early Planning Process
• Cultural Resource Specialists have information that may be useful
• Include cultural resource information in early constraint mapping
• Begin process of site avoidance early in planning process
• These actions will help you anticipate some issues of local opposition
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Strategy 2 – Communicate
• Keep communication going among entire project team (including contractors)
• Engineering and development interests working together allow meaningful design modifications that minimize additional studies and additional regulatory reviews
• Inform regulators of project modifications
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Strategy 3 – Develop and Commit to an Unanticipated Finds Plan
• Required under Federal process (if National Historic Preservation Act applies to Project)
• Voluntary under most other scenarios
• Establishes process to be followed in event of discovery of human remains or unanticipated archeological site
• Paves way to address issue while minimizing delays in construction
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Strategy 4 – Understand and Respect Host Community’s Priorities for Cultural Resources Preservation
• Honor community-based requests to design around locally and nationally recognized cultural resources
• Engage with host community to sponsor a local historic preservation project
• Projects must be locally meaningful but not necessarily elaborate or excessively expensive
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Support requested to paint local historic structure
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Community requested funds to maintain historic cemetery and fence
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Scanner Donated to Local Historical Society To
Assist in Curation of Historical Documents
Strategies that Save Time, Money and Create Good Will
Interested parties may request opportunity to record their sacred sites
Presentation Take-Away
Use cultural resources issues as a way to connect with local host community
Demonstrate good environmental stewardship by identifying sites in Project Area and avoiding impacts to them, even when not required
Apply the strategies discussed to meaningfully engage the local community and gain project support
Visual Impacts: Providing Decision-Makers With the Information They Need
Thomas Priestley, Ph.D. ASLA/AICP
60
NEPA Requires Analysis of Visual & Aesthetic Resources
• Aesthetically pleasing surroundings• Preservation of important historic, cultural, and
natural aspects of our national heritage• A diverse environment• Integration of the environmental design arts in
planning and decision making
NEPA strives to use all practical means, to improve and coordinate Federal plans, functions, programs, and resources by assuring:
Many States Require Consideration of Visual & Aesthetic ResourcesEnvironmental Analyses in California mustdetermine whether a project would:• Adversely affect scenic vistas• Damage scenic resources in a scenic
highway• Degrade the visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings• Impact day or nighttime views with
light/glare
61
A Paradigm for Aesthetic Impact Assessment• In the US, an Outgrowth of NEPA’s Requirements and
Federal Agency Investments in the Development ofVisual Resource Management Systems
Systematic Assessment of Visual Change
• Forest Service Scenery Management System
• Bureau of Land Management Visual Resource Management System
• Federal Highway Administration Visual Impact Assessment Method
64
Standard Visual Impact Assessment Procedures
• Determine the viewshed• Identify key viewpoints• Assess existing conditions• Document the project changes• Analyze what the changes mean• Develop mitigation where needed
Assessment of Existing Conditions• Identify and Document Key Viewpoints
– photos of existing conditions– identify visual character, quality, and degree of
uniqueness of view
• Determine who sees the views, why they are important, and what formal recognition they have been given– consider viewer perceptions, values, and concerns– give serious consideration to management agency
plans and other adopted public policies that provide protection of the view
Document the Changes
• Visibility of turbines and degree of visual contrast created
• Visual effects of vegetative clearing and grading
• Visibility and degree of visual integration of ancillary facilities
What Do the ChangesReally Mean?• To what extent are the changes visible?• When are they visible?• Who sees the changes and under what
circumstances?• To what degree will the visual character
and quality of the view be altered? • What is the relationship of the changes to
identified landscape values and policies?
Identify Measures toMitigate Impacts
• A number of compendia of measures for good siting and design of wind power installations are available
Recommended