New Haven Independent

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 29, 2007 1:09 PM

I am all for clean energy...but problem is most inner city dwellings are small with very little yards and small roof tops. This is a fun idea but can it be practical for the inner city???? Is this a side track on a solution for our rising electic rate?? trying to make us think that somethings is being done?? Really I am serious?? We really need a power plant of our own. Unless there is a way of harnessing the sound for energy?

Posted by: Bruce | May 29, 2007 2:01 PM

Cedarhill, the main problem in our region is not so much availability of power but the inability to move it around where it needs to go. We have major bottlenecks in the transmission system and they ultimately lead to an inefficient power grid and more expensive electricity. "Distributed generation" technology (wind turbines, microturbines, fuel cells, etc) put the power source in very close proximity to the demand so that transmission losses are not so much an issue. Wind is clean, renewable and currently cheap enough to compete with many fossil fuel generation technologies. We should encourage development wherever possible.

Also, consider the fact that adding generation capacity is MUCH more expensive than reducing demand. Building (or re-starting) a fossil fuel power plant in New Haven is not going to do anything for us in the long run but generate a lot more pollution for city residents to breathe.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 29, 2007 2:32 PM

Bruce I get what your saying and I see by your blog you know what you are talking about. I understand, even a little is better than none (meaning clean energy) but my question is how can that work in a dense area like New Haven. My yard is almost the same footage as my house if I set up solar panels or a wind turbine in it I would have know yard.

My other question ,which maybe you can answer is what about harnessing the water in the harbor?? Is that something worth looking into?? Something that a larger group of people could benefit from. The wind concept may power a building or two but I can not see what kind of a big different it could make in New Haven?? Can you explain how a city can utilize that type of power if we do not have the land or winds for it??

Posted by: charlie | May 29, 2007 3:39 PM

My guess is that this project is a huge distraction away from the fact that our taxes are increasing so much (to pay for things like the fact New Haven has way more than its fair share of subsidized housing). Scientifically speaking, this idea has absolutely no merit. It is an enormous waste of money relative to other potential solutions.

Mark my words, these windmills are going to quickly end up becoming rusting hulks, and the energy used to produce them and eventually remove them to a landfill far exceeds their energy output.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | May 29, 2007 4:08 PM

Well....here we go again. We don't need wind turbines on the water front, we need a way to harness all the hot air blowing out of City Hall. There's no telling what we could power with all that bluster.

The mayor is getting green all of a sudden to make up ground for ignoring New Haveners for three years as he ran for governor, and to deflect attention from the fact that he hasn't attended a school board meeting in god knows how long, and that tonight he will try to score one of the largest property tax and spending heists in city history while blaming it as he does every year on "the state."

I'm disheartened to hear the Clean Energy Fund is going to waste my utility bill payments on this pilot project. What home in New Haven is going to put a 80 - 100 foot tower in their backyard? NOBODY! What homeowner wants his neighbor to visually blight his property with such a contraption even if it does work? NOBODY! If Mayor DeStefano thinks this is such a good program...put one in his own backyard first. I'm sure his good neighbor and Alder Sergio Rodriguez (who never disagrees with a DeStefano vision) will be most appreciative of the view as he lays in his hammock and stares at the blue sky and listens to the whoop whoop whoop of the turbine blades turning in the breeze.

Anytime the city talks about "being an incentive" to do anything, it makes me want to put both hands on my wallet and hang on for dear life. From the Super Tool at the BOE, to Beecher School(you really should drive by this school off Fitch Street so you too can have a whiff of pride in what all your educational dollars can do) to wind power, more city employees and more new programs -- the motto at City Hall -- "If we can dream it -- they'll have to pay for it."

When the city fixes the potholes on my street, collects my recycling on time so it doesn't sit at the curb for two days, and plows my whole street instead of just the center after a snowstorm -- AND quits launching new programs, projects and hiring new employees which they can't afford without raiding my family budget -- THEN and ONLY THEN does City Hall need to worry about NATURAL wind power.

Posted by: dwightstreetrenter | May 29, 2007 4:30 PM

If wind comes to New Haven, it will be a CLEAN alternative to the oil/gas fired plant already here in New Haven. The quote that a wind turbine will power 1-3 homes is referencing the MODEL that will be erected for study, NOT the actual turbines installed for generation!

The New Haven Harbor Generating Station is located on Long Island Sound on the east shore of New Haven Harbor, CT. The station consists of one unit, a 455 MW oil-fired plant that also has the capability to burn natural gas at up to 40% of capacity. It was originally built in 1975 and upgraded with the addition of the natural gas fuel capability in the 1980s.

A typical municipal wind turbine is different from a homeowner's wind turbine. The main difference is a municipal turbine is sited for the maximum possible wind exposure for the maximum power generation. A homeowners' turbine sits on their property, and limited siting means wind is impractical for all but those on mountaintops or seaside areas.

Solar, on the other hand, is limited only by shade, and installing solar on existing rooftops not only doesn't interfere with precious yard-space, but also lowers the surface temperature of the roof, keeping your cooling costs low.

The exciting news of wind power in New Haven is welcome; New Haven's 4x the national rate of asthma is not. We need clean energy NOW, and I'm happy New Haven has FINALLY joined the 20% by 2010 pledge!

Something you can do today is sign up for Sterling Planet's 100% renewable energy on your electric bill. It costs $8 more per month (because your electric is coming from another company who must pay a transmission fee) but it's CLEAN energy! Sign up at: SterlingPlanet.com

All my electricity comes from renewable sources; but local wind is definately best.

For more information, check out Treehugger.com and http://www.awea.org/utility/

Posted by: not feasible | May 29, 2007 5:57 PM

I was in a position where I had to discuss various options for energy generation for New Haven about a year and a half ago. Wind turbines are not feasible, both Charlie and Gary have covered the points very clearly. Most importantly the points Gary makes. The Mayor is suing every angle to make it look like he cares. I'll tell what...he only cares about himself. I know we need a new Mayor, and I sure will voye against the current administration. Maybe we don't have the best of options, but this is a corrupt administration, the BOA is owned and department heads can best be described as scared to confront for fear of losing their jobs. remember most have been at the city for years and have no other skills. This is not to speak harshly of the individuals, but New Havener's need to know that city hall is run as a monarchy. I know...I was there and I left due to pressure from the second floor to do what they wanted not what was right and required by law. You would be amazed at how many times emails or phone calls were placed trying to influence favorable treatment. Why is the treasurer gone? The head of Information Technology gone? Traffic and Parking gone, but Mike is a good replacement, if he can hold up against the pressure he didn't have while at City Planning.

Posted by: Bruce | May 29, 2007 8:34 PM

(I think it's best we ignore political comments and accusations and focus on energy here.)

Not Feasible & Gary: wind energy project are often cost competitive with traditional generation sources without government incentives. My guess is that they have to do a study to see if there are locations in New Haven where the wind is sufficient to support a decent sized turbine. At $1500 per Kilowatt installed cost, wind installations are certainly a much better use of our CCEF money than all these $4500-5000/KW fuel cell projects they love to fund. Solar is on the order of $5000-1000/KW.

Ceder Hill & others: I think our expectations for renewables are often out of scope with what we should really expect them to do. We cannot simply replace all of our current energy usage with renewable alternatives. We will eventually drastically reduce our energy demand and what we use will be supplied by alternative sources. Of course not every home will have a wind turbine. A typical 1MW turbine out in the sound (if wind is sufficient) could power somewhere on the order of 200 homes. Chances are the best wind is out on the breakers (or even better further out in the sound) or possibly on top of East or West rock. Rather than an "eyesore", I think these turbines would be beautiful works of art -- tributes to the fine engineering accomplishments of our generation.

Lastly: These are wind turbines we're talking about, not windmills. Windmills are for milling grain and pumping water, wind turbines are for generating electricity.

Posted by: Tom Gray | May 29, 2007 9:41 PM

I think Bruce has it pretty much right. The general wisdom is that Connecticut is not blessed with particularly good wind resources, but this may change (the same was once thought about Indiana and Missouri, and both are now getting wind farms). Small turbines may also be successful, depending (always) on location and wind speed. Meanwhile, you may want to check out the latest bright idea in anti-clean energy legislation in the U.S. Congress: Subtitle D of H.R. 2337. This legislation would make it a crime, punishable by a $50,000 fine or a year in jail, to build a new wind power plant without a certificate from the federal government.

More background information, including our written testimony on the bill (we asked to testify on it in person, but were turned down) and a list of state wind siting regulations already in place, here. To take action to oppose this misguided legislation, go here.

Regards,
Thomas O. Gray
American Wind Energy Association
www.awea.org
risingwind.blogspot.com

Posted by: Bruce | May 30, 2007 7:45 AM

Cedarhill, you asked about harnessing the tidal power of the water in the harbor. There is currently a project underway off Manhattan to produce about 10,000 KW of electricity using tidal power (click here). This will be the largest installation in the US, though there are much larger ones elsewhere in the world. Our tidal currents are not as strong as those on the East River, but I suppose it's worth looking into. For scale, it would take about 13,000 underwater turbines (5 meter blade diameter) to replace the Harbor Station power plant.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 30, 2007 8:43 AM

Thank you bruce that was what I was asking about. I am for clean energy but we are an inner city and there has to be time and engery (pun intended) put into things that would work in our area. And I did not realize one turbine could power 200 homes. That is alot more than I thought.

But I do have to say political comments and accusations are here in this for a reason. Although people like you want this for all the right reasons...there are people using this to improve there image. It is like hmmmm ....kissing baby's in the 1950's. Now they are kissing the earth. "not feasible", Charie and gary are right. And I guess it makes us mad because we are tired of the games and the money being spent to keep this man in office.

But on the other side I am happy that the 1970's movment is finaly coming to light and in general the world is making changes (30 years later).

Posted by: dwightstreetrenter | May 30, 2007 3:10 PM

another thing...to those with the "not in my backyard" attitude:

Do you still have a television antenna on your roof? Remember when every house and building had these, some mounted high up on poles? Maybe it's time to replace these relics of the past for small wind turbines (roughly double the size of a box fan) in the few windy neighborhoods, and solar panels on roofs in other neighborhoods?

I have a friend who lives in Milford, and he generates more energy than he needs; and SELLS the electricity BACK to United Illuminating, getting a CHECK IN THE MAIL every month from UI!

The key here, no matter which course New Haven embarks upon is CONSERVATION. Open your windows at night for the cool air, instead of turning on the A/C. Close your shades during the day, to block out direct sun. Close windows to keep out hot air. Put bushes or shrubs around your air conditioning unit to keep the compressor cool (and keep it from being overworked). Plant shade trees in your yard to lower ground temperature. Unplug chargers and devices when not in use (google "phantom loads" for more information). Use daylighting whenever possible, and replace the air filter in your climate control systems, including the furnace. Change out bulbs as they burn out with Compact Fluorescent or Light Emitting Diode (LED) bulbs, which save up to 10x the electricity, emitting more light than heat. Put a brick in your toilet tank to reduce the amount of clean water you flush.

The list goes on...

The thing here is, if we continue to use more and more energy, the question that the utilities will be asking is, do we want to breathe MORE soot, or enjoy the relative cleanness of the air we have now, and admire the CLEAN harnessing of nature's power for our use (wind)?

As one with asthma, I prefer wind...and clean air in my lungs!

Conserve the energy you use, look towards the future, and breathe deeply...the fresh salt air is out there, waiting to be harnessed!

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 30, 2007 4:27 PM

dwightstreetrenter
This is why I love this site I do learn things. First they make the turbines that small?? hmmm I wonder if there are any programs to help with the cost of one of those? Solar Panles are very costly I looked into them not to long ago and my roof is to steap. But the small turbine sounds doable for my rooftop. Any of our energy guru's know more about these?? Maybe the city can help with that?

Posted by: charlie | May 30, 2007 10:24 PM

Please stop trying to justify what is a completely ridiculous solution to energy problems. These mini turbines consume a lot more energy to create, install and maintain than they do to produce. Also, the idea of covering East Rock, one of the most beautiful natural features on the East Coast, with windmills is absolutely horrible. A better idea is to demolish a section of Cheshire and create a giant wind farm with turbines that actually work in terms of energy output. The settlement patterns in Cheshire are unsustainable anyways, given the rising price of oil.

Posted by: Bruce | May 31, 2007 12:49 AM

Charlie, Did you do the energy balance calculations yourself? If so, please share the data. If wind energy was a "completely ridiculous" solution then it wouldn't be the world's fastest growing energy source. It is cost effective in many places -- why not check to see if it is feasible here? I think you're letting your political biases influence your opinions here.

Posted by: Ned | May 31, 2007 11:08 AM

Let's see, if I had the extra money that I'm going to pay in property taxes, I could afford to add insulation to the walls of my uninsulated house, but if I do that, then, because of the "improvement" my property tax bill will just go higher still (unless I do the work without a permit...). I could also afford to replace my 30 year old, vintage 1970's, missing one handle, harvest gold, refrigerator. But, it's cheaper for me to just run the window air conditioner - healthier for me too (but not for the planet) as it cuts down on the exhaust fumes, brake lining dust, particulates and noise pollution that enters my house from the street. Planting trees can really reduce energy usage associated with cooling buildings and the urban "heat sink" effect, and I bet for the money spent, on these wind turbines, that the same amount of money invested in street trees would produce a greater amount of electricity saved (at least for cooling) than would be generated by these turbines. On the other hand planting trees isn't as glamorous as a wind turbine - and it's not going to glam up Ms. Byrne's resume either - (where are the lobbyists from the nursery trade?), although I think that a pilot project for wind power, in a region that doesn't have, consistent wind is sort of like "tilting at windmills" - DeStefano as the Man of La Mancha, Emily Byrne as Dulcinea or Sancho Panza? Also, what kind of "home" are we talking about? A 675'/sq. apartment, or a 4,000'/sq. "home"? How about subsidies and real (big)tax breaks, or tradeable energy efficiency/ carbon credits, for energy efficient appliances, condensing gas furnaces, LED lightbulbs, home insulation and rooftop solar electric panels? Cash back, prizes from UI for reducing one's electric usage? How about revising the local building codes to require a minimum (high) level of energy efficiency?

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 31, 2007 4:31 PM

For those that care.. Bruce you really got me interested in the small turbines. I finally was able to find some info for those that may be interested. It seems to be alot more affordable for the avage joe compared to solar.

http://www.awea.org/smallwind/toolbox2/drawer_1_installation.html

Posted by: PaulaP= | June 1, 2007 6:26 PM

I think wind power is a great experiment, and I welcome it. I get phone calls for Fight the Hike (grassroots New-Haven based group that started last Dec. around the UI and CL&P hikes that the DPUC approved), I have received calls from people in CT who specifically have asked me how to help them set up windmills. Seems in the Shelton area there are a number of former dairy farmers who are anxious to find out how to set up windmills and get into the electricity generation business. They have the land, there's a lot of strong wind there, and they see windpower as the way of the future. So, I am very happy to know we may be able to get a foothold in windmill electricity generation.

Other things we need is to make the state legislature pass re-regulation legislation, provide rate relief for the UI and CL&P customers, fire the DPUC, and have a state power authority with real public ownership. And then get the state to invest large-scale in clean energy generation.

Posted by: robn | June 3, 2007 6:44 PM

BIG UPS to all the NHI readers in this discussion....cept Charlie who hasn't included in his equations the hidden costs of fossil fuels. i.e. coal=dirt and sulpher in the air and high asthma rates and acid rain and global warming....oil=all of the above plus high price of fossil fuels plus the cost of the war to guard oil resources.

but hey, don't take my word for it, check out NHI's good reporting on the subject. New Haveners alone have paid TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for the invasion of Iraq.

http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2007/06/homelessness_up.php

By the way, you can install shingles on your sun facing roof eaves that are electricity generating (photovoltaic).

http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/07/04/solar-shingles-finally-look-like-regular-shingles/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.energyrefuge.com%2Farchives%2Fsolar_shingles.htm&frame=true