Utility warns against changes in wind rules
Toolbox
By Susan Smallheer Rutland Herald - Published: September 22, 2004
WILMINGTON — The state's second-largest utility warned a state wind energy commission Tuesday that any major changes in Vermont's energy rules could doom a proposed big expansion of the state's only commercial wind project in Searsburg.
The Governor's Commission on Wind Energy Regulatory Policy had visited the Searsburg project earlier in the day and then met at the Haystack Golf Club in nearby Wilmington.
Winds were so light Tuesday morning that the facility was not generating power during the visit, although the turbines' blades continued their counter-clockwise rotation.
The commission is evaluating whether current state law can adequately evaluate commercial wind projects.
Stephen C. Terry, senior vice president of Green Mountain Power, told commission members that any necessary changes could be handled through the rule-making process, rather than a complete revision of Section 248 of Vermont's utility laws.
"Green Mountain Power is comfortable making an investment based on a process we know," Terry said. Any change, he said, "would be pretty daunting for us."
The current regulatory process is difficult, he said, but it works.
"It takes time, it's not easy, but it's not impossible," he said. "If you have a certain amount of patience, you can make it work."
Green Mountain Power owns and operates the state's only commercial wind facility — the 11-turbine, 6-megawatt project in Searsburg.
Green Mountain Power, along with its partner enXco, wants to triple the size of the facility, adding 22 turbines, for a total of 33 megawatts. Those turbines would be much taller, going from 198 feet up to 320 feet tall. They would also be much more productive, according to John Zimmerman of Vermont Environmental Research Associates, GMP's consultant.
At the same time Terry said some estimates that up to 20 percent of the state's power could come from wind were probably too optimistic.
Right now, Searsburg produces half of 1 percent of GMP's total energy demand, Terry said. With the expansion, that would jump to 3 percent.
Terry estimated that GMP would be comfortable with between 5 to 8 percent of its energy portfolio coming from wind.
He said it would be "remarkable" if 10 percent of the state's power needs — currently about 1,000 megawatts — could come from wind.
"Wind is not a panacea for this state," he told commission member Sam Matthews, vice president of Greater Burlington Industrial Corp.
He said sites close to transmission lines stood a stronger chance of being developed.
Terry told the commission that one difference between Act 250, the state's land use law, and Section 248 was that Act 250 evaluated projects case-by-case at the local level, while 248 reviewed energy projects on whether they were in the "public good" statewide.
He recommended that state regulators work under a definite timetable for a decision, and suggested 12 to 14 months from submission to decision.
The current $12.2 million Searsburg project, dubbed Searsburg 1, was heavily subsidized by $4.4 million in grants from the U.S. Department of Energy, as well as an electric industry trade group.
Terry said the Searsburg facility, which went online in 1997, was essentially a research project toward which GMP contributed $7.8 million.
It produces power at 7 cents per kilowatt hour, slightly higher than the state's contract with Hydro-Quebec. Without the subsidy, the price would have been closer to 10 cents per kilowatt hour.
Terry said the proposed Searsburg 2 project, which would involve expanding south into Readsboro and to a neighboring ridgeline in Searsburg, probably wouldn't start construction for about four years — assuming it gets federal and state approvals.
He said Searsburg 2 would be built without any grants.
Searsburg 2 has to go through both federal and state reviews since the project would be on national forest land. The U.S. Forest Service has never given permission for a commercial wind project on federal lands, although it is considering both the Vermont project and one in the Monagela National Forest.
In the Searsburg case, it would need a special-use permit, and must go through the National Environmental Policy Act review, which Terry estimated would take two years.
Zimmerman, who has been working with GMP on wind energy issues in Vermont for 20 years, said a recent survey revealed good wind development sites, close to transmission lines, totaling 150 megawatts.
He said recent evaluations of state-owned lands showed few potential sites, but he said the federal Green Mountain National Forest contained sites that had good potential.
Pointing out the window at the Haystack Golf Club, which is on the edge of the National Forest, he said: "That's a lot of windy land."
Zimmerman said "a real bugaboo" affecting the development of some ridgelines for wind power were the energy policies adopted by the Green Mountain Club and the Appalachian Trail Conference.
According to Zimmerman, the Appalachian Trail Conference is opposed to any wind development within five miles of the trail.
He also told the wind commission to avoid designing a public hearing process that would allow any project opponents to "hijack" the process. "They can be manipulated to death," he said.
Earlier in the meeting, John Whitman, chairman of the Readsboro Planning Commission, said he felt there was general public support in his town for expanding the project, even though there wouldn't be any tax benefit to the town.
Whitman said that since a proposed land swap with the Green Mountain National Forest fell through earlier this year, it removed the possibility the project would be developed on private land.
Whitman called himself a wind energy advocate, and said during the GMP-funding collaborative study process that too much attention was paid to the environmental impacts of expanding Searsburg 1, rather than the economic benefits.
Terry said Green Mountain Power supported the collaborative planning process because it addressed stakeholders' concerns before the project was finalized.
"We think there is still a lot of promise," he said of the process.
The commission, which is to make a recommendation to Gov. James Douglas in December, will hold two public meetings next month.
Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com.
38