Month: February 2016

CROWD JUSTICE FUNDING

Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) Uncategorized

CROWD JUSTICE FUNDING

ABOUT

PLEASE:
Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves

18-Feb-2016
CROWD JUSTICE FUNDING

.

GoTo:

CrowdJustice

Just CLICK the lettering above

£5,000
raising
£5
raised
1
backers
0%
funded
28
days left

The Appeal: Save the Severn Estuary from the developers

I am raising funds to protect the Severn Estuary in the Forest of Dean from plans to develop a series of Single Wind Turbines.

To Help

GoTo:

CrowdJustice

Just CLICK the lettering above

The latest update

  • Our first round of crowdfunding raised over £10,000, enabling us to apply to the High Court for a judicial review.
  • As of the 7th January, we have won the right to a formal judicial review, with a High Court hearing due to take place on 21st April 2016.
  • New crowdfunding target of £5000 is now needed to help me cover the costs of the now agreed judicial review to protect the Severn Estuary.

What this case is about

I am one of some 100 local residents living near the Severn Estuary in the Forest of Dean, who are concerned about the proliferation of single wind turbines being installed in the Severn Estuary, damaging the lovely rural landscape. Whilst I, and many others, accept the benefits of wind turbines in the right place, a series of single turbines, backed by the same developer, all within the same rural setting, is totally unjustified. It is creating a wind farm landscape by stealth.

We also observe that the Severn Estuary is a sensitive animal and bird breeding area. (See e.g. Wikipedia entry on the Severn Estuary, section on Conservation and SSSI status; and the Severn Estuary Partnership website.) The RSPB has also expressed its concern about the impact of the several wind turbine schemes proposed for the upper Severn area:

Together these have the potential to cause significant disturbance to waterbirds using the Severn Estuary Special Protection (SPA) and Ramsar Site…We are particular concerned about any impacts on curlew, since this is now a globally ‘near threatened species’ under IUCN criteria for which the UK holds special responsibility to maintain its breeding and wintering populations.

Current view

Protecting the Severn Estuary

For over 2000 years, the Severn Estuary has been a rural landscape and natural habitat for wildlife. 2 single wind turbines have been granted planning permission and at least 5 additional single wind turbines are seeking planning permission within a 10 mile stretch of the estuary all supported by the same developer, the Resilience Centre.

 

In the present case, the planning applicant’s wife, Councillor Maria Edwards, was elected to the Council and appointed to the planning committee whilst the planning application was under consideration.

To Help

GoTo:

CrowdJustice

Just CLICK the lettering above

A clear majority of the affected local community are now firmly opposed to this development. In accordance with the Planning Practice Guidance, the community’s valid planning objections should have been taken into account and the Council should have rejected the Severndale application as the developer was not able to address the objections. Instead, the councillors placed undue weight and consideration to unspecified ‘community benefits’ (financed by the proceeds of the turbine).

The Senior Planning Case Officer on two occasions advised the Planning Committee that they should not take into account these ‘community benefits’ and should refuse planning permission, but the Councillors ignored this completely in reaching their decision citing the ‘community benefits’ as one of the main reasons for granting planning permission. Financial considerations which are not linked to the proposed development should be ignored in determining planning applications in accordance with law and government guidelines, as to take them into account would allow applicants to effectively ‘buy’ a planning permission. After applying to the High Court to review this decision and to quash it to prevent further unjustifiable damage being inflicted on the landscape as a result of this decision, I have now won the right to a formal judicial review.

A short timeline of my case

  • Planning application submitted in March 2015.
  • Local residents were notified of the planning application in late April 2015 with response required by end of May. The applicant submitted additional information in June 2015 following receipt of objections from statutory consultees, the Council’s officers, the Parish Council and local residents who opposed the scheme for a wide variety of reasons including harm to wildlife, the landscape and the setting of a number of heritage assets.
  • The application was due to be considered by the planning committee in July 2015, but due to last minute submissions by the applicant following receipt of the planning officer’s report which recommended refusing planning permission, consideration of the application was postponed to September.
  • The applicant then realised that they might miss the deadline to guarantee the higher rate Feed in Tariff and for this reason alone asked for the application to be heard in August. Despite protests from Peter Wright and others, the FODDC Planning Manager agreed to this expedition. Critically the Planning Officer who had recommended it be refused was then on holiday so could not attend this meeting.
  • On 11th August, contrary to the advice of the Planning Officer and contrary to the objections of the Parish Council and the majority of local residents, the councillors decided to grant planning permission to the proposal.
  • The local residents then asked the Secretary of State to “call in” the application and make a decision himself in mid-August. After some 5 weeks, on 29th September 2015 the Secretary of State decided not to call in the application for his own determination and the application was formally granted planning permission by the Council on 30th September 2015 – the very last date on which a developer could apply to secure the current higher Feed in tariffs.
  • The application for judicial review was filed on 11 November 2015, and was granted on the 7th January 2016.
  • Hearing date is set for 21st April 2016.

Why should people help?

The Planning Application was approved in clear conflict with the law regarding financial considerations being taken into account when considering planning applications, contrary to the recently implemented amendments to the Planning Practice Guidance on wind turbines which give the local community the ‘final say’ and contrary to Government Guidance regarding the weight to be attached to purported community benefits.

The Councillors in this case appear to have allowed themselves, in making their decision, to be unduly influenced by the developer’s promise to finance community benefits and may do so again in other cases unless I act now. They have effectively allowed the developer to buy this planning permission and they must not be allowed to buy further developments.

If successful, this challenge will ensure that no other Council can act with such impunity in the face of the overwhelming views of the local community and in breach of planning guidelines regarding alleged community benefits. In the Forest of Dean, there are at least 5 similar planning applications pending consideration and no doubt potentially hundreds across the UK. If I am successful, clear guidance will be available for other local communities to ensure that their Councils act fairly, with due regard to their constituents’ views.

What am I raising and what is it for?

Now that a formal judicial review has been granted, I am fundraising to cover the costs. Specifically, I am raising £5000 to match my own funds in order to cover £10,000 in additional costs. This will ensure that I have sufficient funding to enable me to proceed.

Pledge now!

 

Every contribution is valuable – thank you!

To Help

GoTo:

CrowdJustice

Just CLICK the lettering above

We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines (WT) to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.

We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD) as administered by The Forest of Dean District Council (FoDDC), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB), sites of special scientific interest (SSI) & wildlife habitats.

Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies of the ‘Warmists’ & self proclaimed ‘Greens’, which are presented as ‘fact’, regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Chance.

Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.

Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins (site owner)

If you would like more information about Stroat see: http://Stroat-Gloucestershire.com/

If you would like more information about Greg_L-W see: http://GregLanceWatkins.com/

E&OE

IF you note ANY errors of fact in this or any other web site or blog I own please bring it to my attention for correction @ Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com – Thank you.

JR, Your MP Mark Harper & General Update 20-Feb-2016 From Molly Mayo

Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) Uncategorized , , , , , , , ,

JR, Your MP Mark Harper & General Update 20-Feb-2016 From Molly Mayo

PLEASE:
Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves

.

20-Feb-2916
JR, Your MP Mark Harper & General Update 20-Feb-2016 From Molly Mayo

.

Dear Everyone
Apologies for the late arrival of this email after our meeting on the 10th, amongst other things I have had phone and internet problems so hopefully all is now back on track.
Thanks to those who came to Little Wibdon and to those of you who were in touch by email or have enquired about the topics under discussion. As I hope everyone knows, we have our Judicial Review hearing for April 21st (as long as the courts keep to their timetable) and some of us are intending to attend this event.  There was a suggestion to investigate a minibus, since Buxton’s commented that some support for the event demonstrates commitment from those who have asked for the JR, and I will look into the cost of hiring a minibus and let you know.
We all felt the need to continue to be proactive and it was suggested we send Mark Harper our concerns and thoughts just to let him and ‘others’ know we are not going away and will continue this fight no matter what.  I have checked his email address and found it different from last time I used it  –
I haven’t used it yet and would be grateful if anyone has difficulty using it- please would you let me know. Last time several of us tried to contact him we had problems so it’s helpful to know if the same happens again.
Some suggested areas which you might wish to make him aware of could include
                  We have been granted JR
                  
                  The affected community has not been defined for this application and he should put pressure on the FODDC to identify this.
                  The Parish Council continue to be opposed and deserve his support – after all they should be considered part of the affected community.
                  The Crowd Justice site helps identify the local concern about the Severndale Wind Turbine.
 
                  The Allocation Plan which includes suitable sites for renewables does not identify wind turbines specifically and these are industrial structures – re Alvington.
                  The Allocation Plan now being considered by an inspector was considered by the FODDC last summer and Government policy has significantly changed.
                  We were dealt with unfairly by our councillors since their reason for passing the application is now for Judicial Review.
                  A significant number of the people in the locality do not want this turbine.
                  Government cannot afford the subsidies originally offered for wind turbines and in these times of austerity these grants and subsidies should be stopped.
If you wish to have further information about the Allocation Plan the following reference from Peter Williams, the Head of FODDC planning may be  useful – note the page reference
The portfolio group at the time discounted a bespoke policy on wind turbines. Ultimately a new policy on renewable energy was formulated and has been included in the Council’s Allocations Plan Submission Draft August 2015 Please see Policy AP.2 on page 22 of the document.
Also thanks to the folks at Woolaston this reference is worth looking at
from this document go to the Examination pages and then Examination Process.
Should we be contacting the Inspector with our comments about wind turbines? Thoughts on this would be useful. 
So – please would you find the time to write to Mark Harper using any of the suggested areas plus your own ideas.  It doesn’t matter how short but if he could receive them between now and March 11th (3 weeks) it would make a significant impact before Easter and before JR in April. 
The new Crowd Funding site went live on Friday (19th) so if you can make people aware of it, or forego an Easter egg in the name of the cause, it would be appreciated – it’s numbers we are after to show we really are here.
And finally, as always, thanks for your support we will continue to keep in touch
Keep safe and take care
Molly

We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines (WT) to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.

We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD) as administered by The Forest of Dean District Council (FoDDC), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB), sites of special scientific interest (SSI) & wildlife habitats.

Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies of the ‘Warmists’ & self proclaimed ‘Greens’, which are presented as ‘fact’, regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Chance.

Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.

Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins (site owner)

If you would like more information about Stroat see: http://Stroat-Gloucestershire.com/

If you would like more information about Greg_L-W see: http://GregLanceWatkins.com/

E&OE

PLEASE NOTE: We do not accept responsibility for material on links and other sources

IF you note ANY errors of fact in this or any other web site or blog I own or manage please bring it to my attention for correction @ Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com – Thank you.

PS-103: The Great Wind Farm Tax ‘Con’

Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) Uncategorized , , , , , ,

PS-103: The Great Wind Farm Tax ‘Con’

PLEASE:
Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves

.

PS – 103:

14-Feb-2016
(PS-103: The Great Wind Farm Tax ‘Con’)

Hi,

 

Revealed: the great wind farm tax ‘con’

Ministers may break pledge to stop funding onshore turbines with consumer subsidies

Under the plan, households would still be forced to pay millions of pounds on their energy bills to fund new wind farms Photo: ALAMY
 
Emily Gosden

By , Energy Editor

10:00PM GMT 13 Feb 2016

Ministers have been accused of planning a U-turn that would see consumers fund new onshore wind farms through green levies.

The Government confirmed it was “looking carefully” at a wind industry proposal to continue public financial support for new turbines, despite a manifesto pledge to halt expansion.

Critics described the proposal as a con, and said the Conservatives’ policy had been “crystal clear” that the subsidies would stop.

Under the plan, households would still be forced to pay millions of pounds on their energy bills to fund new wind farms – but the payments would no longer be defined as subsidies.

Opponents called the plan ?outrageous?

The wind industry’s plan hinges on the fact that no new power plants are commercially viable to build at the moment without extra financial support from bill-payers.

If wind farms can be built at lower cost to consumers than alternatives, such as new gas plants, then payments to fund them should no longer be classed as “subsidy”, the industry argues.

“Hard-working energy consumers will not be conned by a change in name. The Conservative manifesto was crystal clear that public subsidies for onshore wind will stop”
Owen Paterson, Tory MP and former environment secretary

Andrea Leadsom, the energy minister, admitted that the proposal for so-called “subsidy-free” contracts would not in fact be “cost free” for bill-payers, but said the Government was “listening carefully to industry on how it can be delivered”.

Opponents called the plan “outrageous” and said that the proposals under consideration would still constitute subsidies.

Owen Paterson, the Tory MP and former environment secretary, said: “Hard-working energy consumers will not be conned by a change in name. The Conservative manifesto was crystal clear that public subsidies for onshore wind will stop.

Owen Paterson   Photo: GEOFF PUGH

“There is absolutely no place for subsidising wind – a failed medieval technology which during the coldest day of the year so far produced only 0.75 per cent of the electricity load.”

The Conservatives pledged in their 2015 manifesto to “halt the spread of onshore wind farms” and vowed to “end any new public subsidy” for the turbines.

More than 5,000 wind turbines have so far been built onshore in the UK under efforts to hit renewable energy and climate change targets.

Consumers are already estimated to pay in excess of £800 million a year in subsidies for the turbines, adding about £10 to an annual household energy bill.

David Cameron has said that Britain does not “need to have more of these subsidised onshore”.

But the proposal being considered by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) would see onshore wind farms continue to qualify for an existing subsidy scheme that guarantees developers a fixed price for electricity generated.

David Cameron must articulate a vision for Britain's role in a challenging worldDavid Cameron vowed to end wind farm subsidies.  Photo: Reuters

The most recent onshore wind farm contracts awarded under the scheme, early last year, were at prices of about £80 per megawatt hour (MWh) – more than double current market prices of about £35/MWh. Consumers will fund the difference through green levies on their energy bills.

Under the proposals being looked at by DECC, prices of between £60/MWh and £80/MWh would be regarded as “subsidy-free” by 2020.

• Church urges Christians to switch to green energy deals

John Constable, of the Renewable Energy Foundation, a group critical of renewable energy costs, said it would be “outrageous” to regard the proposal DECC was considering as “subsidy free”. “It is just spin doctor stuff, it’s playing with words,” he said.

Glyn Davies, the Tory MP, a member of the energy select committee, said: “I don’t think we should be introducing mechanisms that continue with subsidy – just to say there’s no subsidy when there actually is.”

He said he would be “very concerned” if ministers continued payouts to new onshore wind farms.

Wind turbines near the village of Bothel in Cumbria. Onshore wind farms have split the Coalition and ToriesCritics say onshore wind farms blight the landscape.  Photo: Alamy

Fellow Tory Peter Lilley said the wind industry’s proposal “wouldn’t be subsidy-free” and that wind farms should not receive the same support as gas plants, because the power they produced was not reliable and was therefore worth less.

Mr Paterson added: “If we must support energy, we should help develop combined heat and power which increases efficiency from 50 per cent to 80 per cent or we should develop new technologies which actually work.”

A DECC source insisted energy secretary Amber Rudd was “crystal clear that the manifesto commitment to end new public subsidies for onshore wind and give local people the final say is delivered to the letter”.

“Any idea that doesn’t do this is simply not going to get the green light,” the source said.

The influential think-tank Policy Exchange has said that “subsidy-free” contracts should be offered to support the construction of new onshore wind farms in Scotland and Wales, as well as replacing old turbines with new, far bigger ones.

Maf Smith, deputy chief executive of Renewable UK, said it would be “anti-competitive” to bar any technology from competing for the financial support being offered for new power plants.

A DECC spokesman said: “There is no change to our commitment to end new onshore wind subsidies. Our actions have shown that we will be tough on subsidies, in order to keep bills down for our families and businesses.”

• British Gas and EDF Energy cut gas prices by £31 a year

At a glance

Green subsidies

Solar panels being installed on a roof

Owners of wind turbines, solar panels and biomass power plants are paid subsidies for the electricity they generate. The subsidies are funded by levies on consumer energy bills. The total cost of subsidies was supposed to be limited to £7.6 billion in 2020 but is now on track to hit £9.1 billion.

The costs on your bill:

£45Estimated cost per household of key green subsidy schemes in 2014
£92 Supposed cost per household of subsidies in 2020 under spending cap 
£110Forecast actual cost per household of subsidies in 2020 due to overspend

To view the original of this article CLICK HERE

Unfortunately The Sunday Telegraph hides its articles behind limitation & a pay wall – thus limiting advertisements for travel on which its income is based!

The original article presented a wide range of TWITTER quotes from Government & political sources + many others!

We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines (WT) to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.

We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD) as administered by The Forest of Dean District Council (FoDDC), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB), sites of special scientific interest (SSI) & wildlife habitats.

Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies of the ‘Warmists’ & self proclaimed ‘Greens’, which are presented as ‘fact’, regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Change.

Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.

Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins (site owner)

If you would like more information about Stroat see: http://Stroat-Gloucestershire.com/

If you would like more information about Greg_L-W see: http://GregLanceWatkins.com/

E&OE

IF you note ANY errors of fact in this or any other web site or blog I own please bring it to my attention for correction @ Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com – Thank you.

Wind Turbine Sleep Deprivation A Medical View

Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) Uncategorized , , , , ,

Wind Turbine Sleep Deprivation A Medical View

PLEASE:
Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves

.

14-Feb-2916
Wind Turbine Sleep Deprivation A Medical View

.

Zoning Board of Appeals –
Wind Turbine Sleep Deprivation
A Medical View

William Hallstein, MD : Subject: Wind turbine permitting

Falmouth, MA

By FRANK HAGGERTY (Open Post) – February 14, 2016 10:41 am ET
ShareTweetGoogle PlusRedditEmailComments2
Zoning Board of Appeals – Wind Turbine Sleep Deprivation A Medical View
To: Zoning Board of Appeals,

Falmouth, MA
14 January 2016
From: William Hallstein, MD

Subject: Wind turbine permitting

WT PRESSURE WAVES 01
Dear members of the Zoning Board of Appeals,

I am submitting this letter for your consideration as you contemplate the matter of whether or not to issue a permit for the wind turbines. In way of introduction I am a psychiatric physician and Falmouth resident since 1970. This year I will have been practicing medical psychiatry for 49(forty nine) years. Consultation/liaison psychiatry has been my focus. This means sorting out diagnostic questions about intertwined medical/psychiatric illnesses, the most difficult diagnostic questions in medicine, whether in a general hospital, locked psychiatric unit or maximum security prison. I will be brief and to the point as I explain why I urge you to deny a permit for the Falmouth wind turbines.

1. The human nervous system is the most sensitive instrument available to date for evaluating the impact of the Falmouth wind turbines on residents who live close to them. The ONLY experts in the discussion are the people who are sensing the sound, vibrations, pressure waves, etc emitted by the turbines. There is no one more “expert” than these people. No so called expert has either equipment nor information more accurate and sensitive than the affected residents’ nervous systems. NO instruments more sensitive than people have been invented! Others who claim to be experts are peddling smoke and mirrors in an effort to invalidate and discredit the affected residents. Also, other turbines in other places are not the issue, since local topography must be considered. The impact of the Falmouth wind turbines on Falmouth residents who live nearby is all that is relevant. I believe they are definitely hurting people living near them and encourage you to NOT permit the turbines, now, long after they were constructed illegally.

Over the past few years I have spent significant amounts of time in the vicinity of the turbines in an effort to understand what the affected residents are describing. My findings were unanticipated and surprised me. I was not prepared for the intensity and intrusiveness of both sound and vibration felt consistently and repeatedly throughout the years of my studying the phenomena on location. I recall my introduction to the sound of “low flying jet airplanes” overhead loud enough to interrupt conversation; and, of course, the “planes” kept coming one after another in endless sequence with each rotation of a turbine blade!!! I was searching the sky looking for the aircraft when my eye caught the turbine blades , and then it all made sense, of course; no aircraft in sight, only Wind I blades. Later on, as I leaned against one of the houses in the neighborhood, I felt an unusual sensation best described as compression, coupled with a rhythmic vibration felt through my feet. Anyone who discredits, demeans and calls the affected turbine neighbors “crazy” hasn’t done his or her homework, in addition to being mean spirited. The homework is not difficult: stand in the turbine neighborhood for as long as I have and feel what happens to you. The sensations are real and disturbing. It is totally clear to me that I could not live within the radius of influence of the turbines, and I have no idea how the neighbors who are in the turbine area can sustain a healthy quality of life. Against the backdrop of what I have learned from personal experience with the effect of the turbines I see the Town of Falmouth trying to crush the residents impacted by the turbines.

2. Let’s move on to sleep disturbance and sleep deprivation which is the bedrock of the area of medicine in which I have worked for 49 years! Sleep disturbance is not a trivial matter, even though it has been trivialized by the Falmouth Board of Health. Children with inadequate sleep perform poorly academically, emotionally and physically(they present a higher than normal incidence of physical illnesses). For ANYONE (athletes, truck drivers, ship operators, aircraft pilots, lawyers and physicians, et al) sleep deprived and fatigued, errors in judgement increase, accident rates increase, in addition to physical and emotional symptoms and cognitive impairment. In the world of medical observation all varieties of illnesses are destabilized secondary to inadequate sleep: diabetic blood sugars become labile and erratic, cardiac rhythms become irregular, migraines erupt and increase in intensity, tissue healing is retarded, to list a few across the entire range of physical illnesses. Psychiatric problems intensify as the sleep deprived brain decompensates; mood disorders become more extreme and psychotic signs and symptoms more severe.

More from Falmouth Patch
Rain to Melt Remaining Snow in Falmouth
Fatal Falmouth Crash: 90-Year-Old Man Killed
50 Degrees in Falmouth This Weekend; 30 Days Until Spring

People with no previously identified psychiatric illness are destabilized by sleep deprivation. Sleep deprivation experiments have repeatedly been terminated because test subjects become psychotic; they begin to hallucinate auditory and visual phenomena. They develop paranoid delusions. This all happens in the “normal” brain. Sleep deprivation has been used as an effective means of torture and a technique for extracting confessions.

I could work my way through 49 years of observing sleep disturbances and deprivation, but that is more than the scope of this letter. I am writing because I have witnessed Town of Falmouth officials and members of other boards trivialize symptom reports from people who are stalwart residents of the Town of Falmouth. I have witnessed attempts by town officials and other board members to discredit people whom I believe the wind turbines are hurting. Furthermore, all the Wind I neighbors I have examined are passionate about the need for sustainable energy in an effort to reduce fossil fuel dependence.

I see no honest way for the ZBA to issue a permit for the Falmouth wind turbines. Basically, as I see it, the town installed commercial wind generating power plants in a residential neighborhood. Inappropriately permitting the illegally sited turbines will continue to impair the development of well designed and properly sited wind turbines which are vitally needed.

Sincerely, William Hallstein, MD

36 South Road

Falmouth, MA 02540

To view the original of this document CLICK HERE

We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines (WT) to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.

We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD) as administered by The Forest of Dean District Council (FoDDC), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB), sites of special scientific interest (SSI) & wildlife habitats.

Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies of the ‘Warmists’ & self proclaimed ‘Greens’, which are presented as ‘fact’, regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Chance.

Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.

Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins (site owner)

If you would like more information about Stroat see: http://Stroat-Gloucestershire.com/

If you would like more information about Greg_L-W see: http://GregLanceWatkins.com/

E&OE

PLEASE NOTE: We do not accept responsibility for material on links and other sources

IF you note ANY errors of fact in this or any other web site or blog I own or manage please bring it to my attention for correction @ Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com – Thank you.

Siemens adds checks after nacelle drop & Turbine Test Data

Greg Lance - Watkins (Greg_L-W) Uncategorized , , , , , ,

Siemens adds checks after nacelle drop & Turbine Test Data

PLEASE:
Help To Arm People
With The Truth & Facts
To Make Their Case & Defend Themselves

.

12-Feb-2916
Siemens adds checks after nacelle drop & Turbine Test Data

.

Analysis: Siemens adds checks after nacelle drop

12 February 2016 by Sara Knight , 1 comment

EUROPE: Questions remain over who pays for the additional inspections required following the failure of a Bonus turbine at the Danish Paludan Flaks offshore project in November.
PALUDAN FLAKS WTs 01
The 14-year-old Paludan Flaks offshore project comprised ten Bonus 2.3MW turbine
On 28 November 2015, one of ten Bonus Energy 2.3MW turbines at the 14-year-old Paludan Flaks offshore wind project near the Danish island of Samso suffered a catastrophic failure; the nacelle and blades broke off and fell into the sea.

Catastrophic failure is widely defined as the complete, sudden, often unexpected breakdown in a machine or other system. This winter, there have been four such events reported across the wind industry.

With regular wind turbine service and maintenance and the possibility of sophisticated condition monitoring, how is such an embarrassing failure — appearing as it seems out of the blue — still possible?

At Paludan Flaks, the answer is still not clear.

The project owners — a group of municipalites and investors — are still negotiating over the consequences with German industry giant Siemens, which has the service contract for the Paludan Flak wind farm.

PALUDAN FLAKS WTs 02 TEST DATA
Siemens acquired Danish turbine manufacturer Bonus Energy in 2004, and the service contracts came with it.

A spokesman for Paludan Flaks told Windpower Monthly in early February: “I cannot comment on the situation because Siemens insisted on a non-disclosure agreement before it would begin negotiations with us on how the problems at the wind farm will be solved.”

For its part, Siemens declined to comment on who will pay for the lost electricity output of the destroyed turbine.

Whether the machine will be replaced, and whether the tower can be re-used “is currently under clarification together with the customer”, the German manufacturer said.

The remaining nine Bonus 2.3MW turbines at Paludan Flaks were inspected shortly after the incident, found to have no defects, and have been producing power since, Siemens added.

Siemens and the Secretariat for the Danish Wind Turbine Certification Scheme agreed that regular checks on the remaining turbines will be performed once a month until further notice, in line with the technical certification scheme for design, manufacture, installation, maintenance and service of wind turbines. But who pays for the extra inspections is also not clear.

Investigations ongoing

Technical investigations are still under way into the root cause of the failure at Paludan Flak.

“Investigations so far have concluded that the tower top flange welding-geometry is not optimal, but it cannot be ruled out that the turbine was affected by abnormal load conditions, causing the crack in the tower to occur,” Siemens said in early February.

An issue with the top flange on Bonus machines was first identified in 2003 at an undislosed site with extremely high and turbulent wind conditions.

This led, “after a thorough technical assessment”, to a general update of the design of the top-flange configuration for new installations, as well as a retrofit programme for already installed turbines, depending on site-specific assessments.

In this respect, the Paludan Flaks wind farm was assessed as not being affected, Siemens said.

But after a crack in the tower top flange weld of a 1.3MW Bonus turbine was identified in January 2016, Siemens re-assessed the 2003 retrofit criteria using a more advanced calculation model. This assessment is still on going, the company added.

Under the review, Siemens launched an inspection campaign of about 750 Bonus turbines to ensure the potential risk is controlled, the company continued, without divulging the locations of these turbines.

The tower top flange is inspected visually by the local service staff operating the turbines, the company said. “It is not a major task and can be done quickly,” said a spokeswoman for Siemens, declining to comment on the cost involved.

Similar problems

Why the company did not react earlier — considering the small outlay in time and effort for inspection, and experience with issues of the tower top flange retrofit dating back as far as 2003 — to amend other turbines with the same problem and prevent such potentially image-damaging catastrophic failure is not clear.

An incident at the Smola wind farm in Norway also gave the company some experience in the issues.

In October 2011, Statkraft technicians who carried out operations and maintenance work at the project noted a noise problem at Smola phase 1, comprising 20 2MW Bonus machines commissioned in 2002.

During additional inspections they discovered a crack in the tower top of one turbine and closed it down. Five of the other turbines were also found to be badly damaged and had to be repaired.

The repairs were carried out by Statkraft in cooperation with Siemens, Statkraft’s vice president of communications for wind power and technologies, Torbjorn Steen, said in February.

Why the Smola incident did not trigger wider action by Siemens at that time is not clear.

Also in November 2015, the rotor fell off a Repower MD77-1500kW turbine in France. And in December, a Vestas V112-3MW turbine collapsed in Sweden, and a Suzlon S95-2.1MW turbine tower collapsed in Brazil.

None of the incidents resulted in injury.

To view the original of this article CLICK HERE

WIND TURBINE TEST DOCUMENT

Danmarks Tekniske Universitet
Departments and Centers Shortcuts Contact Dansk
WINDTURBINE TESTING
Tender for rental of test stand no. 2 at the Test Station at Høvsøre

Date Activity
4th of February 2016

Date for the publication of the material for tender at http://www.windturbinetest.com
9th of March 2016

Tender information meeting at Høvsøre
24th of March 2016 at 16:00
(Danish time)

Final deadline for submitting questions
Latest the 31st of March 2016 at 13:00
(Danish time)
Answers will be published continuously on http://www.windturbinetest.com
7th of April 2016 at 12:00
(Danish time)

Final deadline for submitting of tenders
21st of April 2016

DTU´s evaluation of tenders
Udbudsdokumenter – dansk version:
Information til tilbudsgivere
Information til tilbudsgivere

Bilag B
Beskrivelse og tekniske specifikationer for Prøvestationen ved Høvsøre

Bilag C
Lejeaftale

Bilag C1,C2,C3,C4,C6,C8,C9
Bilag til lejekontrakten

Bilag 1a
Tilbudsskema Høvsøre

Bilag 2
Skema vedr. generelle virksomhedsoplysninger

Bilag 2a
Tro og love

Bilag 3
Skema vedr. økonomisk og finansiel formåen

Bilag E
Overordnet evalueringsmodel

Alle dokumenter
ZIP-file

Tender documents – unofficial English version:
Information to Tender
Information to tender
Appendix C
Rental contract concerning rental of test stand for the Test Station at Høvsøre

Appendix C6
Lessor’s safety regulations for work at the Høvsøre Test Centre

Appendix C9
“Agreement on Grid Connection Facility” concluded on 29 April 2002 between NOE Energi A/S, the Lessor and the other manufacturers who are lessees of the test stands at the Test Centre
• (please note the rest of the appendixes to the rental agreement are in Danish – use the link provided in the Danish version above)

Appendix 1a
Tender form for rental of test stand at the Test Station at Høvsøre

Appendix 2
Form concerning general company information

Appendix 2a
Solemn declaration concerning unpaid due public depth

Appendix 3
Form concerning economical and financial capability

Appendix E
General description of evaluation model for the received tenders

All documents
ZIP-file

To view the original of this document CLICK HERE

 

We believe the information gathered on this site can act to bring the truth, regarding the dishonesty of the claimed benefits of Wind Turbines (WT) to the front of people’s minds as they are regularly taxed, in a hidden tax, on their energy bills to fund these politically correct and fundamentally all but useless monstrosities.

We have gathered a great deal of information in our efforts to prevent the industrialisation of Stroat and the banks of the Severn Estuary and across the wider area including the Forest of Dean (FoD) as administered by The Forest of Dean District Council (FoDDC), areas of outstanding natural beauty (AoONB), sites of special scientific interest (SSI) & wildlife habitats.

Please help to spread the truth about the Wind Turbine scam and the fundamental flaws and lies of the ‘Warmists’ & self proclaimed ‘Greens’, which are presented as ‘fact’, regarding the anthropogenic influence of mankind on Global Warming and Climate Chance.

Arm yourself with facts to defeat the biggest con of the late 20th and early 21st Century, and do please spread the truth and the URL of this site as widely as you can.

Posted by: Greg Lance – Watkins (site owner)

If you would like more information about Stroat see: http://Stroat-Gloucestershire.com/

If you would like more information about Greg_L-W see: http://GregLanceWatkins.com/

E&OE

PLEASE NOTE: We do not accept responsibility for material on links and other sources

IF you note ANY errors of fact in this or any other web site or blog I own or manage please bring it to my attention for correction @ Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com – Thank you.