Published: April 23, 2006 11:02 pm         

The wind farm state?

LEWISBURG — West Virginia is well regarded as the “mountain state,” but could it become known as the “wind farm state” in the near future?

That possibility exists as more developers look to harness wind power for electricity high atop the ridges of the Appalachian Mountains.

On top of the mountains, wind energy companies are seeking the coveted Class 4 low wind speeds — classified as 13 mph at 33 feet — to propel their giant turbines. The highest winds are Class 7 — up to 25 mph at 33 feet.

The state Public Service Commission has already approved three applications for wind energy projects and several more are in planning stages.

The Mountaineer Wind Energy Center project in Tucker County, consisting of 44 turbines along Backbone Mountain, produces 66 megawatts of electricity and came online in 2002 as the state’s first wind farm. Electricity there is shipped to the Washington, D.C., area.

Two Grant County projects have been approved by the PSC for up to 300 turbines, and an 80-turbine project in Pendleton County is awaiting approval. Yet another 80-turbine wind farm is in the mix for Mineral County. Prior to 2003, three other companies filed with the PSC, but withdrew their applications.

“Class 4 areas are considered good areas,” Frank Miasano, a spokesman for wind developers in the Mid-Atlantic region, said last week. “This will make West Virginia a leader in wind power generation.”

American Wind Energy Association spokeswoman Kathy Belyeu said wind in West Virginia is “like finding a seam of coal.”

Generous tax incentives granted by state lawmakers also encourage wind farm development. Real property owned by businesses is normally taxed at 60 percent of its fair market value, but the turbines and towers of wind farms are taxed at a rate 12 times less — only 5 percent.

Greenbrier County legislators failed in their attempt to repeal the law in February, with Delegate Tom Campbell citing “a lot of support for wind power in the state” as the reason.

Even minor league baseball in West Virginia has jumped on the wind farm bandwagon. A mascot for the Class A West Virginia Power in Charleston is a costumed figure with a hat shaped like a wind turbine. He’s named “Gusty.”

When Dave Groberg, director of business development for Invenergy, announced the 124-turbine, $300 million Beech Ridge Energy wind farm last summer, he never anticipated the ensuing windstorm which would follow.

In stark contrast to Tucker County’s wind farm, where residents voiced little opposition and their convention and visitors bureau now promotes tours on the front covers of its magazine, some Greenbrier County residents quickly coalesced against Invenergy and formed Mountain Communities for Responsible Energy.

Thus began a war of words where no common ground is found in this highly emotionally charged debate.

“If wind turbines were as great as the developers claim, what possible motive would we have to oppose them?” Dave Buhrman, head of media relations for MCRE, asked.

“My community decided to do a little research and we discovered a multitude of problems associated with erecting 400-foot wind turbines on forested ridges. We then felt a certain obligation to educate our neighbors to our findings and we have done so at our expense, sacrificing hundreds of hours that we certainly would have preferred to spend with our families.”

The Greenbrier CVB, bolstered by board member and Lewisburg Mayor John Manchester, does not support the project.

Nearly 2,140 letters or “protestants” against the wind farm have been filed with the PSC. While Beech Ridge touts clean energy for 50,000 homes, 200 temporary and 20 permanent jobs and over $400,000 per year paid in county taxes, critics cite a drove of reasons to deny the application, such as lowered property values, negative impacts on tourism, bat and bird kills and spoiling the scenic views of mountains.

Chief among the protesters is former U.S. Congressman and Greenbrier County resident Cleve Benedict, who has filed as an “intervenor” in the case. He will give sworn testimony during PSC evidentiary hearings mid-May.

Benedict, who is not affiliated with MCRE, questions the financial viability of the project in his correspondence with the PSC and Beech Ridge attorneys, and asserts current state utility regulations do not apply to this new industry. He also states turbines will be seen from his property.

“... the commission should deny the Beech Ridge Energy application pending the adoption by the commission of siting regulations specific to wind generation projects. The current regulations have clearly been written for siting coal-fired generating capacity,” he wrote.

“These regulations ask for information not pertinent to wind generation and fail to require information that is clearly pertinent, e.g., wind speed observations, potential icing conditions and the effects for interruptible/unpredictable supplies to the larger grid.”

Beech Ridge plans to sell the electricity on the open market, which in turn competes with coal-produced electricity. Beech Ridge officials say because the wind doesn’t always blow, electricity will be produced on average only 34 percent of the time.

By receiving tax credits of 1.9 cents per kilowatt and being able to sell the electricity back to utilities at a higher rate via “green credits,” Benedict claims this unfair advantage will hurt the coal industry in West Virginia.

“The secret to this project is being able to package and sell operating losses to profitable enterprises,” Benedict told The Register-Herald. “It’s not in our best interest to reduce the amount of electricity produced by coal.”

Groberg claims critics of the wind project have used “false and misleading statements” to sway public opinion.

“Throughout this entire process, a group of hardcore anti-wind farm critics, including MCRE, have used any argument they can get their hands on, no matter how ridiculous, exaggerated or false,” he said. “When we cut through all the exaggerations and rhetoric, the real reason there is opposition is because our critics simply don’t like the way wind turbines look, even when they are located on someone else’s property.

“We hope the PSC will agree that this is not a valid reason on which to base important decisions concerning national energy security and the right to use privately owned property in legal ways in a county without zoning.”

The majority of the turbines will be located on property leased by paper giant MeadWestvaco, in addition to 10 private land owners, on a total of 500 acres of ridgelines in northern Greenbrier County.

Buhrman would not say whether MCRE plans legal action against Beech Ridge should the PSC grant the application.

A Grant County judge recently dismissed a nuisance suit filed against NedPower/Shell Wind Energy by wind critics earlier this month.

“While it may be criminal to mislead Americans into thinking wind power in the East is a genuine solution to the energy problems we all face, no attempt has been made to investigate any illegal activities,” Buhrman said. “We do not anticipate the application will be granted and we have several alternatives available should we choose.”

Tuesday’s installment will look at Beech Ridge’s potential environmental impact on bats and birds in Greenbrier County.

— E-mail:

cgiggenbach@register-herald.com