Dear Jim,
The whole point to our email was to respond to Larry's (LMWatBullRun@yahoo.com) suggestion to "craft some language" into the bill to "suggest some way for preferred sources (like those with less impact (solar, wind) or those most reliable (WVO diesel, etc)) to supersede more traditional sources, too." We trust that the bill "in the hopper today at 3 p.m.", as stated by John Christensen, does not include language promoting industrial-scale wind power.
We all have one common goal: reduce the amount of coal used to generate electricity. Industrial-scale wind turbines have not been proven to do this and there is ample evidence that indicates they cannot. However, small scale residential windmills bypass the grid entirely and therefore provide an excellent alternative. All that is necessary is to provide incentives for more people to incorporate small residential windmills. Also, the PSC is in the process of hiring a consultant for the carbon credits issue to determine whether there are offsets to carbon dioxide emissions. This should provide an excellent education on the matter.
Pam and Art
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Christensen" jbc329@earthlink.net To: "Frank Young" fyoung@mountain.net; "Art and Pam Dodds" pamelart@hughes.net; "James Kotcon" James.Kotcon@mail.wvu.edu; "Bill Howley" billhowley@hughes.net; ec@osenergy.org; "John balasko" mjmb@westco.net; "Larry" LMWatBullRun@yahoo.com Cc: dsgjr@aol.com; wvapath@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 1:27 AM Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
The net metering bill is officially in the hopper today at 3pm, should come out with a number next week if all goes well. Will advise. Anybody planning on coming down for E-Day on the 24th?
John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org
[Original Message] From: Frank Young fyoung@mountain.net To: jbc329@earthlink.net; Art and Pam Dodds pamelart@hughes.net;
James Kotcon James.Kotcon@mail.wvu.edu; Bill Howley billhowley@hughes.net; ec@osenergy.org; John balasko mjmb@westco.net; Larry LMWatBullRun@yahoo.com
Cc: dsgjr@aol.com; wvapath@yahoogroups.com Date: 2/4/2010 5:58:11 PM Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative"
energy
John, 2000 KW (2 megawatts) is the generating capacity of only one single wind turbine in the typical "wind farms" of today.
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Christensen" jbc329@earthlink.net To: "Art and Pam Dodds" pamelart@hughes.net; "Frank Young" fyoung@mountain.net; "James Kotcon" James.Kotcon@mail.wvu.edu; "Bill Howley" billhowley@hughes.net; ec@osenergy.org; "John balasko" mjmb@westco.net; "Larry" LMWatBullRun@yahoo.com Cc: dsgjr@aol.com; wvapath@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 5:52 PM Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
Art and Pam, there is nothing in the bill that promotes large wind
farms
to my knowledge. How many KW would those type generators produce? The
max
in this bill would be 2000 KW total for industrial applications.
John Christensen WV Environmental Council Lobby Team Member 410-499-4873 cell www.wvecouncil.org
[Original Message] From: Art and Pam Dodds pamelart@hughes.net To: jbc329@earthlink.net; Frank Young fyoung@mountain.net; James
Kotcon James.Kotcon@mail.wvu.edu; Bill Howley billhowley@hughes.net; ec@osenergy.org; John balasko mjmb@westco.net; Larry LMWatBullRun@yahoo.com
Cc: dsgjr@aol.com; wvapath@yahoogroups.com Date: 2/4/2010 10:42:59 AM Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative"
energy
Greetings:
The use of solar and wind, which are volatile sources, requires more
coal
to
be burned than if they were not in the system at all. This makes the
waste
products such as tires, bio-fuel, methane from coal beds, and trash,
more
reliable and will reduce the amount of coal used instead of increasing
the
amount of coal used.
Residential solar panels and residential small windmills provide energy
that
can be stored in batteries and used when needed, without negative
impacts
to
the grid or to the environment. Residential renewables save coal and
money
to the person at the residence by storage of energy in batteries and by
net
metering. HOWEVER, industrial-scale wind turbines require electricity
from
the grid in order to operate properly, require coal-fired plants to
operate
at all times for the required reliable back-up, and require that the coal-fired boilers ramp up and down to keep pace with the volatile wind source. It is important to remember that the generating capacity of
the
coal-fired or nuclear plants must be maintained at the projected load, regardless of what other volatile sources of energy, such as wind and
solar,
are in the system.
Additionally, construction of industrial-scale wind turbines on our
mountain
ridges requires thousands of acres of deforestation, results in habitat fragmentation, causes negative impacts to our water resources due to increased stormwater runoff and decreased groundwater recharge, and slaughters bats and birds (for example, it is estimated that 3,000 bats
are
killed annually at Backbone Mountain alone). The cumulative negative impacts to our water resources by deforestation for transmission lines
and
industrial-scale wind turbines, in addition to the horrid mountain-top removal operations, will create water resource problems that will
ultimately
be irreversible. We strongly advise that you NOT add wording that
promotes
construction of industrial-scale wind turbines. Incentives for SMALL, RESIDENTIAL windmills would help tremendously to reduce the need for electricity from the grid.
Pam and Art Dodds
----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry" LMWatBullRun@yahoo.com To: jbc329@earthlink.net; "Frank Young" fyoung@mountain.net; "James Kotcon" James.Kotcon@mail.wvu.edu; "Bill Howley"
ec@osenergy.org; "John balasko" mjmb@westco.net Cc: dsgjr@aol.com; wvapath@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 6:02 AM Subject: Re: [WVaPATH] Re: [EC] WV Net Metering rules vs. "Alternative" energy
I think that this is an improvement. There are two issues- reducing
the
need for new plants, and reducing the environmental impact. Does this
bill
address the 1% cap issue? There is no technical reason not to permit
a
greater percentage than 1%, especially for relatively reliable sources
such
as waste to energy boilers.
We might also suggest some way for preferred sources (like those with
less
impact (solar, wind) or those most reliable (WVO diesel, etc)) to
supersede
more traditional sources, too. I can craft some language for that if desired.